“Militarization of Police” Not the Issue—Racial Difference Is
Conservatism, Inc., the libertarians, the liberals, the entire MSM and the Black Complaint Machine—basically, everyone in America bearing respectable opinions—have largely decided the following: 1) Michael Brown was an innocent, college-bound black kid 2) shot by a trigger-happy police officer named Darren Wilson for 3) absolutely no reason whatsoever, except racism, that 4) the protestors are completely justified for whatever they’re doing, 5) the police are violently overreacting to the protestors, 6) the Ferguson police are “too white”, and, finally, 7) the police in America are “overmilitarized.”
Jubilant left-right collaboration on that last point has become the centerpiece of the media debate.
Something to it? Sure. Healthy societies don’t have domestic police forces that look like invading armies.
But then again, America is not a healthy society.
We are an increasingly multiracial, white-minority society. The black populations in the cities have lower intelligence and are quicker to violence, which explains why they’re poor and why they riot. Billions in social welfare spending, affirmative action, and even a black president have not changed this situation.
Contra conservatives, it’s not “welfare.” Contra liberals, it’s not “racism”. And contra libertarians, it’s not “militarized police.”
Even if all three of these issues play some small role.
And depressingly, I predict this fact never gets the hearing it deserves, much less general acknowledgment.
But we can’t be permanently stuck in this Groundhog Day of shootings, black rage and white silence, can we? Doesn’t something have to give?
In the short run, whites will get no satisfaction. If they decide to un-police black areas, the cry will go out that “racist white society” has abandoned them. If they decide to continue policing in black areas, the cry will go out that “racist white police” are abusing them.