[UPDATED] I take very little pleasure in correctly predicting the ignominious defeat of Minneapolis’ “police reform” amendment. A couple weeks ago, when I wrote, “Bold Prediction: Police Reform (i.e. “Question Two”) Will Lose by at Least 10%” all the signs pointed to the same conclusion. Since no one knew — really — what came next after “reforming” the cops, the only safe choice was sticking with what we’ve got.
Were I a Minneapolis resident I would have voted in favor of “Question Two”. But that decision would be based on:
1: Having had (way more than) enough of a clearly diseased cop culture. (And judging by the number of Minneapolis cops willing to slap on an ugly t-shirt and howl approval for Donald Trump, the case is closed on whether “diseased” is fair judgment.)
2: A belief that the city’s generally well-educated activist community would have had impact on the creation and function of … what would come next.
And 3: I’m a white guy in the “safe” quadrant of town. Stories of car jackings and catalytic converter thefts are frequent, but I give next to no thought of getting caught in gang-banger crossfire.
I haven’t yet seen a precinct-by-precinct break down of the vote, but my guess is that Question Two’s 57%-43% thrashing was heavily influenced by northside residents saying, “Hell no.”
[UPDATE: Well, well, well. It seems the area of Minneapolis most heavily opposed to Question Two was my neighboring hood. Comfortably middle to upper class, predominantly white, liberal, safe-as-it-gets southwest Minneapolis. This opens another interesting line for ranting … but not right now.]
That said, Democrats and progressives justifiably horrified by what (again) is fair to describe as constant cop thuggery/racism/sexism/neanderthalism, are going to have to take a painful reality check before the next election.
Fear of crime — heavily and cynically hyped by conservative media and candidates — is Issue #1 for the forseeable future. And it’s the easiest sell imaginable.
The progressive version of law and order doesn’t play on a bumper sticker.
Even comfy, otherwise liberal-minded whites, people who accept that the cop culture is such an entrenched tumor, capable of aggravating (if not generating) so much fear and hysteria through “blue flu” work slowdowns and the shivving of any politician who crosses their union, are here to stay. The slightest attempt to reform or “correct” (as Delbert Grady says to Jack Torrance in “The Shining”) will set off a new, more intense round of fear-stoking by the usual suspects.
Perhaps someone can offer a scenario where the newly powered-up Mayor’s office can end an era of cop impunity (Derek Chauvin and Mohamed Noor withstanding) and restock the department with ethical, composed professionals instead of ex-telemarketers and mall cops waving their fresh-issued police revolvers in the face every black guy with a broken tail light.
But someone else is going to have spin up that scenario, because I sure as hell can’t.
Usually I agree with you. This time, no, and not because I’m fearful of crime.
Amendment #2 was, from the perspective of organizational design, gibberish. The amendment showed all the symptoms of being written by a group whose members aren’t in consensus on either the problems they’re trying to solve not to mention the best ways to solve them.
The result is politely known as “the creative use of ambiguity.” Its hallmarks are vagueness and kicking the design of the details down the road, and kicking creating the actual plan to make it happen even further down the road.
And this was with more than a year to figure it all out. Had the amendment passed, do you really think anything beyond chaos would have been the result of a 30-day deadline?
There’s no question that the current situation needs serious fixing. Sadly, we didn’t get to vote on something that would fix it.
Your electoral forecast was accurate, all right. I’m reminded of the Peanuts cartoon. Linus says, “Life is not all one-way, Charlie Brown. You win some, and you lose some.” To which Charlie Brown replies: “Really? That would be neat!”
Whether curing the MPD civic cancer is “likely” or not, I encourage people to persevere with both protests and proposals.
Doing nothing obviously won’t work!
Giving up, whether from cynicism or despair or exhaustion, is not a choice for persons possessed of a conscience . . . not that I interpret what you’ve written as fitting under that rubric–you’re simply offering an analysis, a quite valid one, as a post-mortem on the referendum.
Nor should energy and emotion be spent on any in-fighting, blame-casting, or factionalism amongst the disappointed partisans of public safety reforms.
This is a Joe Hill moment: “Don’t mourn, organize!”
I think the good news is that Frey appears to be making police reform a priority. I am hoping that the supporters of his opponents, and those that vote in favor of Amendment 2, will support his efforts.
Will that be enough? I don’t know…but maybe he can start by getting rid of all police who refuse the vaccine mandate…….
And now, fear of crime has led us to the era of vigilantism, where we are all allowed to kill any (perceived) threats to our safety/happiness/property…..
And contrast the polling on gun control with polling on repealing Roe v Wade. But which one has the Supreme Court decided to take up under a highly contrived reading of the law?