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.

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.

More from A.R. Moxon

Pundits: The fact that Ossoff and Warnock are unlikely to both win their elections means Joe Biden needs to court Republican votes rather than push a much-needed progressive agenda

*Ossoff and Warnock win handily*

Pundits: Ah. Nevertheless,


The only way political reporting in this country makes sense is if you understand that the almost universal, almost subconscious default assumption: that conservative white people are the protagonists of any story that's being told, no matter the facts of the story.

Just do the obvious and necessary good things and let the horrid evil people who hate good things squeal and cry about it forever.

I really need Democrats who will state the clear and obvious truth, which is that Republicans are our enemies, because they insist on attacking the very idea of a shared society and are more than happy to use violence to do it, which is the very definition of an enemy.

You can't make people who want to kill you not be your enemies even if you wish they'd be your friend.

They can stop trying to kill you, but until that happens they are your enemy, and acknowledging that fact isn't what makes that fact true.
The reality is very simple: The Republican Party is no longer participating in democracy. They're running a series of ops against every election cycle, predicated on the notion that only their power is legitimate.


This isn't a failed coup. This is a *continuous* coup that stretches back years. It includes Gingrich's scorched earth methods, Bush v Gore, the politicizing of the Bush DoJ, the judicial obstructionism and nullification of the McConnell Senate, and the entire Trump presidency.

It includes decades of tortured racist gerrymandering and disenfranchisement, Citizens United, the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act, PACs, and deliberately colluding with foreign powers.

This isn't a failed coup. This is a *continuous* coup that stretches back years.

The Republican Party is not participating in democracy. They are quite obviously an organization dedicated to the destruction and overthrow of the government of the U.S. as we know it, and should be treated as such.

There are no legitimate Republican office-holders.

I think there's a distinction to be made. Democrats are often weak/ineffective, and many are complicit because they're those things by choice—but institutionally they aren't authoritarian, and they aren't fascist. They're a corporatist conservative party.

More from Book

One can make an analysis of how many right wing groups published books before Modi in power and after Modi in power.

Would Akhilesh Mishra, Abhinav Prakash and many others have got a chance to write in an English daily before?

The VC of JNU, IIAS, Nehru center, RRML are all


Right wingers.

This, while some in our own fold were criticizing and backstabbing an excellent book (disagreeable in places) by Harsh Madhusudhan and Rajeev Mantri.

There have been at least 4 lit fests and think tanks developed by right wing in six years. Pondy and +

Mangalore are the prime of them.

There are more media channels and more anchors in neutral channels backing the government then those against in six years.

We have at least three big lawyers: Harish Salve, Mahesh Jethmalani and Mukul Rahotgi fighting cases. We have won

more legal battles than not and are able to get many things done that would look impossible just two years ago.

Yes, textbooks, deregulation, harrasment and cabalism of the left including tech suppression and killing spree of fascistic governments remain and everything is not

a bed of roses. But what was a bed of roses for the opposition is not a bed of roses for them too.
Udhav would have loved to see Republic closed. It hasn't.. Mamata would love to have killed the whose who in BJP - Not possible.. She would not like big wigs of TMC join BJP - Not

You May Also Like