Thread by @JuliusGoat

People have wondered why I have spent 3 days mostly pushing back on this idea that "defund the police" is bad marketing.

The reason is, it's an example of this magic trick, the oldest trick in the book.

It's a competition between what I call compass statements. And it matters.

https://twitter.com/JuliusGoat/status/1097119860834926592

There are a lot of people who think "defund the police" is a bad slogan.

But it's a directional intention. A compass statement.

The real effect of calling it a bad slogan, whether or not intentional (but usually intentional), is to reduce a compass statement down to a slogan.

Whenever there is a real problem and a clear solution, there will be people who benefit from the problem and therefore oppose the solution in a variety of ways.

And this is true of any real problem, not just the problem of lawless militarized white supremacist police.

There are people who oppose it directly using a wide variety of tactics, one of which is misconstruing anything—quite literally anything—said by those who propose solutions—any solutions.

They'd appreciate it if you mistake their deliberate misrepresentation for confusion.

The reason they'd appreciate if if you mistake their deliberate misrepresentation for confusion is, it wastes time that could have been spend on the solution trying to persuade them, with different arguments and metaphors or solutions.

Which they intend to misconstrue.

But then there are those who benefit from the problem, and would like to avoid the solution, but would rather not be perceived as the sort of person who doesn't want to solve a very obvious and present problem—and they have tactics too.

The solution is unpopular.
It's not the right time.
It's unaffordable.
It can't be done.
It's confusing—look at how confused these unpersuaded people are.
Let's persuade them.
Let's propose something else.

These are compass statements for inaction.

Example: in fact, both statements have a precise similarity

"I have a dream" is still misconstrued by people who oppose solutions to the problems of systemic racism. It's even used in defense of systemic racism, as an excuse to not address it.

(also MLK was not a magical being)

There are people who tell me "defund the police" is bad marketing and my focus should be on persuading people who disagree with me.

If you're one of those people, listen: I am. That's what this is. I disagree with YOU. I'm trying to persuade YOU you're playing a rigged game.

When you call "defund the police" bad marketing, you reduce a compass statement to marketing, and you make the game about persuading people who won't be persuaded.

Instead, persuade yourselves. We WILL change this. Compass statement.

Stop playing a rigged game.

And if you insist on continue playing a rigged game, don't be surprised if people come to what Martin Luther King called his "regrettable conclusion," that the reason you persist in playing a rigged game is because you think it's rigged in your favor too.

We WILL reduce the power influence and, yes, funding of a structurally corrupt, racist, violent institution that exists primarily to enforce white supremacy by warring against U.S. citizens—which is what police are.

By how much? As much as needed.

That's our compass statement.

It's good to persuade people to agree to your compass statement, but it's a mistake to wait for their approval as permission to move

We WILL fix this dire problem, not because the solution is popular but because it is necessary

We have a police problem, not a marketing problem.