Today I had an interesting discussion with an acquaintance of mine on law enforcement and its general effectiveness. Sometimes it is beneficial to move into the use of different citations and studies and other times it is beneficial to talk (record sentiment.) without having to deal with "facts". We know that bigotry, discrimination and racism are big part of people's discussion and much of the nation is gripping with this issue and confused by it. From far right to far left people are lining up on one side or the other and sticking to a party line narrative. Yet linger questions still remain and solutions are not forthcoming (likely because people can't budge on their opinions.)
In this discussion we talked about the nature of law enforcement, its purpose in society and how it is perceived in various communities. Different peoples see different things and they view law enforcement in different ways. Some have positive images and some have negative images. Much of that is based in their experience, how the wider system functions, and the personal narratives of their community (any community. Its not race or religion specific.)
(Before you get all excited, pull your hair out, and start calling names {or worse} my beliefs are fairly simple and I believe for the most part practical. I'm always open to the idea that I don't understand something and new perspective are welcome so I may define my own. I have seen mostly great officers who care about their community and their people. They are like anyone. Some are ignorant, some are smart, some are wise, some are selfish, etc... their personalities are like the many different people we interact with every day. As a society we need police and we need them to be part of the solution. Needing police and supporting them also means supporting the legitimate right of people to share their opinion on policing and demand that there are improvements when obvious deficiencies are present. Good officers do good things and are cherished members of our society. Bad officers and corrupt practices sometimes persist because of social, racial, religious, political and personal perceptions and connections. Mistakes can be trained but willful destructiveness cannot and such officers need to removed/accountable for the integrity/good will of the whole system. The justice system is subject to the good will of the people and thus must have the appropriate feedback loops in place to improve and ensure that it maintains that trust by the "people" {defined by our Constitution and not by extremist members of society}. The Justice System must be a thinking, wise and guided by moral conscious to do the right things so that when mistakes happen they are mistakes in improvement and not mistakes that chip at the foundations of society {Its not really about the technicalities of the law or how it can be manipulated}. I support police and our judicial system 100% and I support reasonable/practical/positive change that ensures it if focuses on the essential truths of American societal living. We have philosophical beliefs as a nation and our institutions should be constantly pushing to move in alignment with those beliefs; not the other way around. When it doesn't change or move to improve where improvement is obvious {depending on which group you talk to} we start seeing societal rifts in part on truth and in part on false narratives. When it comes to schisms truth and falsehood are generally mixed up creating wide partial justifications that fail to grasp the essential similarities among the different sides/arguments. Its not a political argument or even choosing a side but it is an observation that has likely been experienced in many places/countries that were not able to successful navigate change. In case your wondering what my political beliefs are I'm a light right conservative that believes we can push systems to become better, wiser, increasingly effective, more accurate and more effective. Without learning we have stagnation and with stagnation we lose homeostasis as antiquated systems fail to meet the general expectations of all of society; assuming we don't have two different societies forming. To me science, evidence based decision making and good values/conscious can improve most systems. We can write laws, policies & procedures, mission statements, etc... but we must ultimately believe them to enact those values. )
What we sort of came to the conclusion of is that people see different things based on their backgrounds (and interactions and narratives.). Positive change will be increasingly necessary to sew the different perceptions together. Without some level of change and adjustment we will be creating two different societies, different applied laws, different values, and different opportunities with different philosophical outcomes (One where everyone can compete in a free society or one in which only some can compete in a caste-type society.). These societies are defined in part by both individual cases and on a macro level when we add those cases up to determine how such situations are treated throughout the system (Big data and the Digital Era will provide lots of information and lots of new insights into macro behaviors.). It is best to be fair and reasonable and encourage new ideas to help vet and explore potentially fruitful possibilities. We can build on what we currently have to make it better and that will come when/if we decide that the values that are essential to American life/identity are universalized for all our people. What do you believe? Do we have a single conception of our society of Americans or a duel perception of Americans and "Americans"?
No comments:
Post a Comment