I've been reading cops on cop forums about the protests and the more I read.

It's not even the super evil stuff.

They just seriously don't get it and don't want to. Like the Buffalo incident. When people question them (other cops, not BPD ones) about it, it's normal to them.
They go, "Well, that was a riot line. The officers were moving in a line to push a perimeter. That's how you take control of space. You can't let somebody get behind you, so if they get in your way, you have to push them."
And it's like, oh, it's a "riot line"? Was there a riot? No, that's what they call it when they feel the need to control space. Why did they need to control that space? Because they wanted.
There was a series of choices - choices in their training, choices in the tactics they applied that day, choices individual officers made - that resulted in them ALMOST KILLING AN OLD MAN WHO WAS IN THEIR WAY AND NO THREAT.

"Damn civilians don't even know what a riot line is."
That's how they talk about it - it's our fault for not knowing and agreeing with their priorities and tactics. The old man should have known better than to get in the way of cops forming a riot line, because doing that means they can't stop and they can't let him get in the way.
It's where the banality of evil meets inside baseball. There's a legitimate culture gulf between police and "civilians". Which is BAD because they're supposed to be public servants.

I think about the culture gulf between evangelist sub-cultures (both literal Christian evangeilcals and other groups that combine an us-vs-them mentality with a drive to recruit) and the world outside, where on the inside you learn one way the world is supposed to work...
...and then you're sent out into the world with a bunch of training and lessons and approaches that don't actually hold up, don't net the response that you were told to expect, and how this deepens the divide between the sub-culture and the outside, hastens the indoctrination.
And then I read these cops talking like, oh, it's the most natural thing in the world to them in a way they feel should be obvious to everyone that when cops are walking in this particular way, they will absolutely not let you approach them, walk through them, or get behind them.
And since it's obvious to them, they don't communicate what they're doing, they don't stop when they encounter someone who doesn't get it, and they don't feel an ounce of remorse or regret for destroying someone who gets in their way, because "obviously" he knew better.
And I wonder - not to excuse cops attacking protesters and bystanders and journalists, and some of them are very clearly just going off to go off - but I wonder how much of the police turning protests violent stems from cops being trained *not* to communicate their intentions.
And from being trained to read basically everything as a prelude to violence. I mean, how many times have cops arrested or attacked protesters because of "attitudes" or "behaviors" that were seen as being "similar to" a riot or violence or whatever? I've seen that a lot.
Cops ARE trained to see threats everywhere, basically. That's part of their indoctrination, and it gets ramped up to 11 when the institution is threatened. ("Be careful out there." doesn't mean "Make sure you do everything by the book, people are watching.")
If you take that and add it to an insular culture where basically you only ever talk to other cops about this stuff so whatever the police formation signals to you just reads as "It's obvious what we're doing, so if people aren't responding appropriately that's non-compliance"...
...then basically you've got a perfect recipe for turning every protest you actually want to stop into a violent one, because these "misunderstandings" will abound.

And again, I say this not to excuse the police, but to consider the institutional rot behind the violence.
Hundreds of police from all over the country, probably thousands, are watching that video out of Buffalo and going, "Yeah, what was that old guy doing? Everything the cops are doing is perfectly reasonable." That's not just dishonesty and cop solidarity. It's how they see it.
This is why we need vastly different approaches. The police as an institution is creating and exacerbating these situations.
Absolutely, they can and do. They see the cops' proper priority in that scenario to be to hold the line together and keep moving forward. Because they're doing a riot line.

Saw more than one cop saying "He got medical attention, didn't he?" and

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Alexandra Erin (she/her)

Alexandra Erin (she/her) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexandraErin

Feb 21
Along the lines of the sentiment in this tweet: one thing about the Critical Role cartoon is it illustrates how much more interesting magic tends to be in the stories that inspired or were inspired by D&D than in actual D&D.
Like, a lot of the magic use in Legend of Vox Machina has a direct line of inspiration from spells that exist in the D&D rules, and a general trope of being able to exhaust one's magic if overused correlates in a vague way with the game's expendable spell slots.
But the magic does not behave like D&D magic, even D&D magic with an inventive player and generously flexible DM. Because D&D's magic obeys rules designed with specific gameplay purposes in mind, and LoVM's magic obeys rules designed with storytelling purposes in mind.
Read 11 tweets
Feb 20
Counterpoint: You will never have a "full understanding" of anything, much less something as broad, amorphous, and multifaceted as a genre.

Prioritizing what aspects of what parts of the genre you will seek to understand is also your finite coin to spend however you like.
Also, classics are classics for several reasons, only one of which is, sometimes, "This is pretty good."

A far more prevalent reason that classics are classics is generations of dingdongs going, "You gotta to read this. You just gotta."

And several of the reasons are racism.
Read 14 tweets
Feb 20
A thing about "D&D is mainly good for combat, you can tell because of what it has rules for" is that if you released an indie game that had all the non-combat parts of D&D it would be more rules-heavy than a lot of non-combat indie games are.
Anyway, D&D rules aren't 90% combat. They're 90% character options. The PHB is about 300 pages and about 30 of those pages deal with rules for gameplay. The rest are "Here is a thing your character might do/be."
And by and large, the reason I'm into D&D and the reason I like to get new people into D&D is that I vibe with "Here are a bunch of modular, prefab character options you can snap together like interlocking plastic building blocks" more than more abstract character creation stuff.
Read 31 tweets
Feb 18
Literally eating berries and cream like a little lad for breakfast today.
We're paring down frozen stuff from the freezer for a much-needed defrost and there were some ancient frozen mixed berries in there.

I started making panna cotta as my new pandemic skill and I had planned on topping some with jam for a Valentine's dessert...
...but panna cotta isn't terribly firm and the likely difficulty of spreading jam across the top of the custard without just wrecking it had me thinking about other alternatives, and I remembered we had frozen berries from Whenever in the deep freeze.
Read 8 tweets
Feb 13
The Ted Talk in the second episode of Inventing Anna is such a perfect parody of a Ted Talk because it sounds exactly like a real Ted Talk. In this tweet, I will
My version of "don't watch dinosaur movies with paleontologists" is "don't watch movies with scenes taking place in Omaha malls or cultural attractions".

I don't know where those zoo exteriors were shot for the Berkshire Hathaway party scene, but I know where it wasn't shot.
As a general rule, I think big-city people who watch a movie and go, "Shyeah, they expect us to believe she took the chartreuse line at KT-tirst street and somehow got off across town at the Spromg Street station in time to catch the zeppelin? As if." are insufferable.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 12
A thing about NFTs is that whenever someone says they can be used to purchase something (event tickets, digital music, in-game assets) in a form that allows the purchaser to re-sell them... the reason you can't do those things already is a policy choice, not a technical limit.
Any company that is willing to use NFTs to sell you things that you own in a way that is transferable could have done so without NFTs.

What NFTs actually add on a technical level isn't the ability to be sold, but the ability to be stolen.
Whatever digital good the NFT represents is still stored in a central location. Access to the digital good is still mediated by a single central authority. But their willingness to equate ownership with a cryptographic token that exists outside their control makes it stealable.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!