Starting here, at least in this platform, begins firstly that often times between micro lines, its more often difficult to encapsulate politics so simply that these words fit compactly in merely 125 token characters (give or take), but that any lengthier assessment means that analysis yields something if it is of a more comprehensive nature not only well considered but also considered well to any abundance of information. That is, not so easily given to reductions especially which are misleading, or anything else which has done any dis service to truth.
Often times, if it is that there are notions to the assembly of peoples, on the other hand, in recent times, a social sabotage, for instance, is drawn to the notion of movements and peoples as a whole when it is that the actions of any minority of individuals somehow reflects a social mass, never mind, firstly, that a general group of people assembled peacefully, never mind that any assembly of peoples called in peaceful orchestrations for change, having brought notice to a particular cause, that supposedly inferences divined of a movement were necessarily so patently given to violent assembly. Occupy movements, for instance, could be given to any number of descriptions, 'rapists' , 'looting and property destroying' anarchists set upon imposing views on the better more 'reasonable' informed half of society, and those that apparently were likely drawn to such a view should be relegated to any number of urban centers that were disconnected from the centers of good 'common sense' that one could describe elsewhere in a country. The problem more likely here, however, may not be that 'common sense' were given with any more education, or any smarter, but likely one should imagine, more ignorant with respect to the social conditions of others in this country. At least a first beginnings 'common sense' explanation of this might be given to the simple question as has been suggested, for instance, by Comedy Central comedian John Stewart in paraphrasing, 'Do you relate, talk to, live in marginalized areas to see or sense what life is like for people in such areas in understanding racial issues from another perspective?' The defensive response on the part of 'common sense' is given more likely 'Should I?' And herein the problem, to the social disconnect and culture/race wars that abound. If our sense of view is given likely to the image, reporting, and video given on any nightly basis, more often of an incidental nature, but inferring a social continuity from one day to the next, incidental ism teaches that crime resides where it does, between the threading of a social narrative, here the narrative takes a more often racial composite, something to the degree of a society given to a self imposed causation and likely given in this particular racial view something which were transformed from an 'innate inferiority' view historically. Guns, Germs, and Steel is, for instance, a popular and comprehensive undertaking dispelling much given historical race myth making, or in a nutshell why seemingly civilization would differ so much apparently on the basis of geography and to this degree according to supposedly the issue of race. More often, this view born that a social segment of people who raised themselves into the condition and re perpetuating such conditions, or in other words, where is the 'common sense' of people in lifting themselves out of their condition, resisting crime, resisting drugs, resisting so much that leaves such people in a down trodden state should be asked? For those listening to such argument, there must be in the absence of fair rhetoric/debate, of course, this must seem appealing, but often times, neglecting other views. At least in so far as sociological considerations and anything else which left something of an appalling legacy into a social history neglected, all too easy that there another view should exist on concession, or as if one were to imagine in such, if to examine these narratives from afar, it is 'tough love' when it is not our own child, and that is often times right when issues abound and when it is not in 'my backyard', and the 'common sense' narrative is often drawn upon by the approach of relating what people don't really live to experience on a daily basis, that for all practical purposes could often seem another world in its own right far removed from those given to 'common sense'.
Beginning the description of the narrative in its often lengthy complicated viewing of history, however, takes neither the so simplistic approach, that is, that a peoples simply 'reinvent' themselves overnight, or that freedom is so amply given because supposedly passage in constitution makes 'freedom' supposedly so, or that an infliction upon people is readily healed so quickly if literally the epi genetics of depression are born into a social history that self perpetuates, and is only given so quickly to the short lived energy of a few decades to 'affirmative action'. That is, if it is easier for someone of a racial background to transcend any particular boundary, this could be inherent to any number of social conditions that would be over come. In so many words, where chance is born to the degree of assimilation and any destruction of self identity, social conformity leads the man of one race into another world and at that in history, at times likely to the condition of abandoning a previous life and community. To have success is to leave 'the hood', to leave the 'reservation', to abandon a community which remains in chronic economic depression, likely to have less investment opportunities at times, less likely to know those of wealth that provide investment opportunities, and systematically at times marginalized through 'redlining' which would prohibit, for instance, African Americans home mortgage loans, or severely taking advantage of those of 'color' because of policies aimed at maintaining social segregation even if supposedly a civil rights movement were aimed at tackling in so many words the obvious narrative. This not withstanding, that only supposedly in recent decades, so much the critical mass of achievements made by those in surpassing any previous social obstacles, that more insidious forms should remain, that aid in the perpetuated marginalization
of people. Had more insidious forms of assimilation considered the primacy, for instance, of social abandonment? Part of this narrative, may have in a myriad of views taken on the air of conspiracy theory, for instance, while on the other hand given to any ample statistic, whether through the introduction of powerful drugs having addictive characteristics that were much amplified relative to previous generations of illicit drugs, or for that matter that the efficiency, power and distribution of fire arms, collectively should go hand in hand to conspire in aiding violence with greater efficiency in killing, and that these weapons should be made with an increased market availability, or no wonder that typically gang bangers in the 70s, likely having possessed something like a .22 if lucky but more likely a knife, would possess in this day and age a weapon of higher calibre and certainly being more deadly, engage in violence that in part would reflect statistics bearing greater homicide rates in any given population relative the past. Did violence necessarily change by human nature? Or did the outcomes more likely follow suit given the variability of the means in committing violence?
The more complex view of race and socio economics as related to policing, on the other hand, for the marginalized, however, are that irrespective of race, especially given to concentration of population, and any number of factors, which make more likely for higher rates of crime, and more likely in the absence of 'mixed housing' or anything which leads to the likelihood of segregation and loss at times in social communication and outreach which in theory might bridge gaps between social strata of society, is often more neglected, and likely the narrative told in some ways where reach exists not according to the comprehensive of extensive sociological study, or given to some articulate or even often well studied analysis, but merely given to shorter attention spans, or how to describe a complex problem in 120 tokens, a near impossibility at times. Those likely reading and connecting on such points, already may have any experience in higher education statistically speaking, and especially in the case of more exhaustive research, perhaps, given to higher levels of education that would put such person potentially in advisory and minority position, or at least likely given to studying and reading beyond other amply provided materials and more commonly made materials, if this weren't through some direct social contact, or through maintained social contacts which should relate experiences. Those that live in such conditions understand such likely all too well, while those that could be worlds apart living only a mile down the street, might often understand little. Herein something of the 'culture wars' narrative weighs in and offers to another social mass, 'elitism'. At least even in explaining such a condition, being heard, and making impact could be daunting to the challenges of the social politics of 'culture wars', more easily dismissed that one should be labeled a 'left wing' extremist, a 'socialist', a 'communist', social agitator, given to any of the social biases in opinion, that would make one's view supposedly less objective than need be, according to another view that were divergent to the mainstream 'common sense' notion. Again leading back into 'common sense', a notion derived often in continuity to previous generations, often times defined by institutional forms of segregation and racism, however, overt and less overt relatively speaking by the passage of time. This institutional form in some manner subtle enough, so much that once given 'redlining' policies would be transformed in other ways, if it weren't insisted policies be directed at those marginalized, on the other hand, an expected social assimilation in some form, speak of the inherent issues remaining. Could outreach be characteristically less so for most living in segregated ways relative an outer lying community? If not fewer venturing outside, fewer venturing inside communities at times, or at least where an understood social definition of home could be the place that one related best to in so far as travel. Social communication could not be so characteristically simple that all people assume nomadic lifestyles, if given the right social conditions, and that any existing social boundary between peoples could be inset to all the biases of perception in so far as travel and communication at that. Who we relate to best, and who we don't relate to, and likely who we relate to providing more amply the sorts of potential opportunities if we have succeeded in the over coming a social boundary that would lead one with one less social contact and by extension any furthered social contacts implicit to that social region. Simply put, if it is inherent that social compatibility exists in provisioning relations between one individual and others, certainly barriers such a language and subset forms any part of the obstacles that should exist, beyond language, obviously education and educational opportunity, which at the outset, could suffer should a given community have less resources to raise, for instance, by way of taxation which has made for educational resources which should provide similar statistical advantages to those children raised in affluence. If more often, those in marginalized communities should have poorer educational resources for their children, but also that consumer market places should be lacking at times in opportunities, where dilapidated grocers, might offer sometimes rotting fruits and vegetables, and inherently given to stocking carbohydrate laden foods (in personal honesty not that I myself have been attracted to these things), but illustrating differences, market choices could be more limited by limitation of transportation choices, and limitation of market place opportunities in so far as competitiveness, in places where socio-economic differences abound in reducing the diversity of store fronts. Obviously, higher crime make for inherent difficulty here, and then given to other problems, but also speaks of an expansion of other economic opportunities and resources even if other markets should be limited. Where people are paid to jail and imprison those as a profession means that likely where it is perceived and given that the wheels of justice are given to a well spring, means that the system has made use of, whether ensuring the systematic flow of justice that ensures the 'wheels' are spinning as designed, even if those afforded criminal defense especially in the case of poverty, are less likely to have the resources to defend as fairly against state prosecutions. More likely for the same crimes, such persons are more likely to be put to death, more likely incarcerated, more likely incarcerated for lengthier sentences, more likely to be recidivists in their own communities upon returning to them after having served a sentence, and adding to that all the inherent social frustrations that could be underscored living in such a system where existence is met at times likely with much greater suspicion.
Michael Brown in other world circumstances, might have more likely owned and used more actively a personal car for transportation, may have been more likely to be off the streets in the first place that would be the source of an altercation, and generally a differed world view one should imagine, and less likely in a community that would lead to the often times social discordance between police and individual. If ever such a meeting arose, likely the statistics would prove routine and not so much out of the ordinary. Even if the charge of petty theft were supposedly true, it seems in affluence, there could have been some potential legal confrontation, but likely this neither descriptive to the opportunity and chance given for others later in life, for bad behavior or decision making that often would not cause the results, that incidentally neither contingent in the series of events listed by McColloch (at least their narrative). Inexplicably there really weren't any clear explanation given as to why Michael Brown supposedly started a violent altercation with Wilson while Wilson remained sitting in his squad car, or why Wilson supposedly continued firing, and then Brown supposedly turned around and would apparently fire upon Brown as Brown were charging up on him, or given for an un armed man given the myriad of restraint techniques that might exist in subduing an unarmed man, none should be conceivably be taken. Personally I've heard of cops that were beaten up survived, and eventually those brought to justice for assault charges, or one should imagine, if Wilson carried something like a baton, or any other device such as stun gun, a potentially violent individual could be subdued, and given the apparent spatial arrangement between Wilson and Brown upon Brown's death, which were some meters away, its harder to see or understand the clear and present danger at hand. One might relate to the officers if not having the training or where with all, in reaching for the gun, stand your ground and all, but on the other hand, likely with training at one's disposal, martial forms of self defense, or simple evasion maneuvers would likely have bought the officer time for back up and then taking Brown into custody. Some would say Brown was on drugs, or resorting to some often given stereotypical smear, but in reality it seems questions should remain even given the 'official' narrative of events. If in this present age, loud music could be a provocation, or heaven forbid, a thrown glass of water technically meeting the criteria for shooting some dead in the name of self defense. It seems the latitude given, now, isn't likeliest in the use of batons. It seems what I heard in so many words from the prosecutor, the law no longer cares or really values dealing with an individual in a given incident of this type in this community with any alternative option or recourse in a violent situation, no longer cares about any potential non lethal method for self defense, that would be cherished by other law enforcement agencies elsewhere in the world, even if given the rarity that any other outcome would could ultimately cost Wilson and not Brown. Its not merely malaise in policing, but also similarly that another part of society would seek little to question relative to the even more brutal episodes in policing tactics, or in so many words a supposedly 'populist' consent, if it weren't much to similar derivatives as Three Strikes and You are Out, and so forth.
The more complex problem of policing is that where it is given to any level of predominance and articulated by popular public policy making, one should imagine all the air of social frustration that ensues, the marginalized are less likely to have the power or to articulate power in saying, while those empowered and less likely marginalized making the decisions often times effecting more broadly social masses as a whole. Certainly economics may abound that leads to the self perpetuated state of policing that arises unless it is questioned, and all the legacies of institutionalized racism in time continues the mechanism which exists. If this weren't informing that crime elements were dealt with, and proof were given by occupancy found in prisons and jails, and certainly by prosecutors and law enforcement that should labor to ensure that beds are filled (the Innocence Project has demonstrated, for instance, not merely problems given to prosecution mechanisms found throughout the United States at times systemic problems in any number of localities where any number of death row inmates were falsely sent to prison and put on death row for crimes they did not commit, most of these inmates were likely to have come from impoverished areas), but also I imagine in some less than transparent way a given lobby which perpetuates the stereotype of the social margins that need often more attending relative to all other segments of society, and in a given self explanatory simplification, racial margins lived up exactly to the system that were designed for such margins, and likely given all the opportunity to go down such path. The shooting tragedy, is just a small part of a legacy that goes beyond merely an unarmed teenager and a cop that supposedly thought and may have well acted according to the given directions of his training but continue to describe a system afoul that has much broader implications. I would nearly predict in some near future, if at least some future, another civil rights struggle potentially here, so long as social gaps continue in some given division. Eventually if not seeded through the population margins, and given to social education differences found in urban populations, and eventually if not having made headway through academia at varying levels, much broader confrontation could be evident in some near future...if at least where generational resentments/dislikes arise, and the understandings of previous generations and cultures are less well understood. It were a decade obviously before the 50s would pass into the sixties and a number of issues would come round back then. It wasn't just Vietnam, or the pervasive 'white power' spy/snitch on your neighbor culture that arose in that time era , but something born in the children that want change in old institutions that would lead to new civil struggles. Unfortunately Occupy movements lacked so many issues for both social galvanization and cohesion it would appear, but maybe sometime sooner rather than later added change is coming?!
Often times, if it is that there are notions to the assembly of peoples, on the other hand, in recent times, a social sabotage, for instance, is drawn to the notion of movements and peoples as a whole when it is that the actions of any minority of individuals somehow reflects a social mass, never mind, firstly, that a general group of people assembled peacefully, never mind that any assembly of peoples called in peaceful orchestrations for change, having brought notice to a particular cause, that supposedly inferences divined of a movement were necessarily so patently given to violent assembly. Occupy movements, for instance, could be given to any number of descriptions, 'rapists' , 'looting and property destroying' anarchists set upon imposing views on the better more 'reasonable' informed half of society, and those that apparently were likely drawn to such a view should be relegated to any number of urban centers that were disconnected from the centers of good 'common sense' that one could describe elsewhere in a country. The problem more likely here, however, may not be that 'common sense' were given with any more education, or any smarter, but likely one should imagine, more ignorant with respect to the social conditions of others in this country. At least a first beginnings 'common sense' explanation of this might be given to the simple question as has been suggested, for instance, by Comedy Central comedian John Stewart in paraphrasing, 'Do you relate, talk to, live in marginalized areas to see or sense what life is like for people in such areas in understanding racial issues from another perspective?' The defensive response on the part of 'common sense' is given more likely 'Should I?' And herein the problem, to the social disconnect and culture/race wars that abound. If our sense of view is given likely to the image, reporting, and video given on any nightly basis, more often of an incidental nature, but inferring a social continuity from one day to the next, incidental ism teaches that crime resides where it does, between the threading of a social narrative, here the narrative takes a more often racial composite, something to the degree of a society given to a self imposed causation and likely given in this particular racial view something which were transformed from an 'innate inferiority' view historically. Guns, Germs, and Steel is, for instance, a popular and comprehensive undertaking dispelling much given historical race myth making, or in a nutshell why seemingly civilization would differ so much apparently on the basis of geography and to this degree according to supposedly the issue of race. More often, this view born that a social segment of people who raised themselves into the condition and re perpetuating such conditions, or in other words, where is the 'common sense' of people in lifting themselves out of their condition, resisting crime, resisting drugs, resisting so much that leaves such people in a down trodden state should be asked? For those listening to such argument, there must be in the absence of fair rhetoric/debate, of course, this must seem appealing, but often times, neglecting other views. At least in so far as sociological considerations and anything else which left something of an appalling legacy into a social history neglected, all too easy that there another view should exist on concession, or as if one were to imagine in such, if to examine these narratives from afar, it is 'tough love' when it is not our own child, and that is often times right when issues abound and when it is not in 'my backyard', and the 'common sense' narrative is often drawn upon by the approach of relating what people don't really live to experience on a daily basis, that for all practical purposes could often seem another world in its own right far removed from those given to 'common sense'.
Beginning the description of the narrative in its often lengthy complicated viewing of history, however, takes neither the so simplistic approach, that is, that a peoples simply 'reinvent' themselves overnight, or that freedom is so amply given because supposedly passage in constitution makes 'freedom' supposedly so, or that an infliction upon people is readily healed so quickly if literally the epi genetics of depression are born into a social history that self perpetuates, and is only given so quickly to the short lived energy of a few decades to 'affirmative action'. That is, if it is easier for someone of a racial background to transcend any particular boundary, this could be inherent to any number of social conditions that would be over come. In so many words, where chance is born to the degree of assimilation and any destruction of self identity, social conformity leads the man of one race into another world and at that in history, at times likely to the condition of abandoning a previous life and community. To have success is to leave 'the hood', to leave the 'reservation', to abandon a community which remains in chronic economic depression, likely to have less investment opportunities at times, less likely to know those of wealth that provide investment opportunities, and systematically at times marginalized through 'redlining' which would prohibit, for instance, African Americans home mortgage loans, or severely taking advantage of those of 'color' because of policies aimed at maintaining social segregation even if supposedly a civil rights movement were aimed at tackling in so many words the obvious narrative. This not withstanding, that only supposedly in recent decades, so much the critical mass of achievements made by those in surpassing any previous social obstacles, that more insidious forms should remain, that aid in the perpetuated marginalization
of people. Had more insidious forms of assimilation considered the primacy, for instance, of social abandonment? Part of this narrative, may have in a myriad of views taken on the air of conspiracy theory, for instance, while on the other hand given to any ample statistic, whether through the introduction of powerful drugs having addictive characteristics that were much amplified relative to previous generations of illicit drugs, or for that matter that the efficiency, power and distribution of fire arms, collectively should go hand in hand to conspire in aiding violence with greater efficiency in killing, and that these weapons should be made with an increased market availability, or no wonder that typically gang bangers in the 70s, likely having possessed something like a .22 if lucky but more likely a knife, would possess in this day and age a weapon of higher calibre and certainly being more deadly, engage in violence that in part would reflect statistics bearing greater homicide rates in any given population relative the past. Did violence necessarily change by human nature? Or did the outcomes more likely follow suit given the variability of the means in committing violence?
The more complex view of race and socio economics as related to policing, on the other hand, for the marginalized, however, are that irrespective of race, especially given to concentration of population, and any number of factors, which make more likely for higher rates of crime, and more likely in the absence of 'mixed housing' or anything which leads to the likelihood of segregation and loss at times in social communication and outreach which in theory might bridge gaps between social strata of society, is often more neglected, and likely the narrative told in some ways where reach exists not according to the comprehensive of extensive sociological study, or given to some articulate or even often well studied analysis, but merely given to shorter attention spans, or how to describe a complex problem in 120 tokens, a near impossibility at times. Those likely reading and connecting on such points, already may have any experience in higher education statistically speaking, and especially in the case of more exhaustive research, perhaps, given to higher levels of education that would put such person potentially in advisory and minority position, or at least likely given to studying and reading beyond other amply provided materials and more commonly made materials, if this weren't through some direct social contact, or through maintained social contacts which should relate experiences. Those that live in such conditions understand such likely all too well, while those that could be worlds apart living only a mile down the street, might often understand little. Herein something of the 'culture wars' narrative weighs in and offers to another social mass, 'elitism'. At least even in explaining such a condition, being heard, and making impact could be daunting to the challenges of the social politics of 'culture wars', more easily dismissed that one should be labeled a 'left wing' extremist, a 'socialist', a 'communist', social agitator, given to any of the social biases in opinion, that would make one's view supposedly less objective than need be, according to another view that were divergent to the mainstream 'common sense' notion. Again leading back into 'common sense', a notion derived often in continuity to previous generations, often times defined by institutional forms of segregation and racism, however, overt and less overt relatively speaking by the passage of time. This institutional form in some manner subtle enough, so much that once given 'redlining' policies would be transformed in other ways, if it weren't insisted policies be directed at those marginalized, on the other hand, an expected social assimilation in some form, speak of the inherent issues remaining. Could outreach be characteristically less so for most living in segregated ways relative an outer lying community? If not fewer venturing outside, fewer venturing inside communities at times, or at least where an understood social definition of home could be the place that one related best to in so far as travel. Social communication could not be so characteristically simple that all people assume nomadic lifestyles, if given the right social conditions, and that any existing social boundary between peoples could be inset to all the biases of perception in so far as travel and communication at that. Who we relate to best, and who we don't relate to, and likely who we relate to providing more amply the sorts of potential opportunities if we have succeeded in the over coming a social boundary that would lead one with one less social contact and by extension any furthered social contacts implicit to that social region. Simply put, if it is inherent that social compatibility exists in provisioning relations between one individual and others, certainly barriers such a language and subset forms any part of the obstacles that should exist, beyond language, obviously education and educational opportunity, which at the outset, could suffer should a given community have less resources to raise, for instance, by way of taxation which has made for educational resources which should provide similar statistical advantages to those children raised in affluence. If more often, those in marginalized communities should have poorer educational resources for their children, but also that consumer market places should be lacking at times in opportunities, where dilapidated grocers, might offer sometimes rotting fruits and vegetables, and inherently given to stocking carbohydrate laden foods (in personal honesty not that I myself have been attracted to these things), but illustrating differences, market choices could be more limited by limitation of transportation choices, and limitation of market place opportunities in so far as competitiveness, in places where socio-economic differences abound in reducing the diversity of store fronts. Obviously, higher crime make for inherent difficulty here, and then given to other problems, but also speaks of an expansion of other economic opportunities and resources even if other markets should be limited. Where people are paid to jail and imprison those as a profession means that likely where it is perceived and given that the wheels of justice are given to a well spring, means that the system has made use of, whether ensuring the systematic flow of justice that ensures the 'wheels' are spinning as designed, even if those afforded criminal defense especially in the case of poverty, are less likely to have the resources to defend as fairly against state prosecutions. More likely for the same crimes, such persons are more likely to be put to death, more likely incarcerated, more likely incarcerated for lengthier sentences, more likely to be recidivists in their own communities upon returning to them after having served a sentence, and adding to that all the inherent social frustrations that could be underscored living in such a system where existence is met at times likely with much greater suspicion.
Michael Brown in other world circumstances, might have more likely owned and used more actively a personal car for transportation, may have been more likely to be off the streets in the first place that would be the source of an altercation, and generally a differed world view one should imagine, and less likely in a community that would lead to the often times social discordance between police and individual. If ever such a meeting arose, likely the statistics would prove routine and not so much out of the ordinary. Even if the charge of petty theft were supposedly true, it seems in affluence, there could have been some potential legal confrontation, but likely this neither descriptive to the opportunity and chance given for others later in life, for bad behavior or decision making that often would not cause the results, that incidentally neither contingent in the series of events listed by McColloch (at least their narrative). Inexplicably there really weren't any clear explanation given as to why Michael Brown supposedly started a violent altercation with Wilson while Wilson remained sitting in his squad car, or why Wilson supposedly continued firing, and then Brown supposedly turned around and would apparently fire upon Brown as Brown were charging up on him, or given for an un armed man given the myriad of restraint techniques that might exist in subduing an unarmed man, none should be conceivably be taken. Personally I've heard of cops that were beaten up survived, and eventually those brought to justice for assault charges, or one should imagine, if Wilson carried something like a baton, or any other device such as stun gun, a potentially violent individual could be subdued, and given the apparent spatial arrangement between Wilson and Brown upon Brown's death, which were some meters away, its harder to see or understand the clear and present danger at hand. One might relate to the officers if not having the training or where with all, in reaching for the gun, stand your ground and all, but on the other hand, likely with training at one's disposal, martial forms of self defense, or simple evasion maneuvers would likely have bought the officer time for back up and then taking Brown into custody. Some would say Brown was on drugs, or resorting to some often given stereotypical smear, but in reality it seems questions should remain even given the 'official' narrative of events. If in this present age, loud music could be a provocation, or heaven forbid, a thrown glass of water technically meeting the criteria for shooting some dead in the name of self defense. It seems the latitude given, now, isn't likeliest in the use of batons. It seems what I heard in so many words from the prosecutor, the law no longer cares or really values dealing with an individual in a given incident of this type in this community with any alternative option or recourse in a violent situation, no longer cares about any potential non lethal method for self defense, that would be cherished by other law enforcement agencies elsewhere in the world, even if given the rarity that any other outcome would could ultimately cost Wilson and not Brown. Its not merely malaise in policing, but also similarly that another part of society would seek little to question relative to the even more brutal episodes in policing tactics, or in so many words a supposedly 'populist' consent, if it weren't much to similar derivatives as Three Strikes and You are Out, and so forth.
The more complex problem of policing is that where it is given to any level of predominance and articulated by popular public policy making, one should imagine all the air of social frustration that ensues, the marginalized are less likely to have the power or to articulate power in saying, while those empowered and less likely marginalized making the decisions often times effecting more broadly social masses as a whole. Certainly economics may abound that leads to the self perpetuated state of policing that arises unless it is questioned, and all the legacies of institutionalized racism in time continues the mechanism which exists. If this weren't informing that crime elements were dealt with, and proof were given by occupancy found in prisons and jails, and certainly by prosecutors and law enforcement that should labor to ensure that beds are filled (the Innocence Project has demonstrated, for instance, not merely problems given to prosecution mechanisms found throughout the United States at times systemic problems in any number of localities where any number of death row inmates were falsely sent to prison and put on death row for crimes they did not commit, most of these inmates were likely to have come from impoverished areas), but also I imagine in some less than transparent way a given lobby which perpetuates the stereotype of the social margins that need often more attending relative to all other segments of society, and in a given self explanatory simplification, racial margins lived up exactly to the system that were designed for such margins, and likely given all the opportunity to go down such path. The shooting tragedy, is just a small part of a legacy that goes beyond merely an unarmed teenager and a cop that supposedly thought and may have well acted according to the given directions of his training but continue to describe a system afoul that has much broader implications. I would nearly predict in some near future, if at least some future, another civil rights struggle potentially here, so long as social gaps continue in some given division. Eventually if not seeded through the population margins, and given to social education differences found in urban populations, and eventually if not having made headway through academia at varying levels, much broader confrontation could be evident in some near future...if at least where generational resentments/dislikes arise, and the understandings of previous generations and cultures are less well understood. It were a decade obviously before the 50s would pass into the sixties and a number of issues would come round back then. It wasn't just Vietnam, or the pervasive 'white power' spy/snitch on your neighbor culture that arose in that time era , but something born in the children that want change in old institutions that would lead to new civil struggles. Unfortunately Occupy movements lacked so many issues for both social galvanization and cohesion it would appear, but maybe sometime sooner rather than later added change is coming?!
No comments:
Post a Comment