|
Dear All :
The campaigning by so many candidates in last year's Democratic mayoral primary in New York City acted as a mechanism for activists to increase political pressure for reforms across many issues. But the outcome of the election acted as a relief valve, releasing the pressure that advocates for reform had been deliberately escalating. Since there is no municipal election this year, there should be no relief valve to dissipate political pressure. But there actually is a some dissipation, we have learned. It comes in the form of some of our very own community groups, as described by the "veal pen" phenomenon.
In the week following the Veal Pen Workshop, some police reform activists challenged some community groups, asking the groups to step up their demands for reforms of the New York Police Department. Predictably, some groups tried to deflect criticism. Jennifer Flynn Walker, a leader of one community group, VOCAL-NY, reacted by trashing some activists. Because activists questioned her loyalties to the cause of police reform, Ms. Walker accused activists of being police officers or police informants, quite possibly the worst accusation that could be made against activists. Here is my video response to her :
 | |
Jennifer Flynn Walker, VOCAL-NY, CPR, Trashing,
and MAP Model for NYPD Reform
|
|
|
ONE CONSEQUENCE OF community groups voluntarily de-escalating political pressure for reforms is that the broken political system begins to propagate the false notion that the public no longer needs to fight for reforms. When voters dial-back their civic engagement, voters unwittingly add to this dynamic by giving up their freedom to make a difference. Voters give up all their power to demand reforms. This can be seen in today's article in The New York Daily News, in which the police commissioner erroneously proclaims that no problems exist with the NYPD, a fabrication that predictably went unchallenged by some reporters.
This deception, and the duplicity of some community leaders, act to each of de-escalate political pressure for reform and obstruct actions to fulfill on the mayor's campaign promises for police reform. But it doesn't have to be this way.
Politicians and other powerholders want voters, activists, and community groups to de-escalate the political pressure for reform. This broken political system gives voters few opportunities to shape bold government policy, besides the right to vote, and that is precisely why it is important for voters not to decrease their civic engagement. The system doesn't know what to do when people demand reforms during a non-election year. For, if voters kept organizing, then that would mean that politicians would actually have to be held accountable to their campaign promises. Since we know that politicians don't like to be held accountable, if sufficient political pressure could be created, then powerholders would have no choice but to deliver on demands for reform.
Lost in the efforts by the mayor's supporters to de-escalate political pressure for police reform is the impact that over-policing has on people of color, the poor, and other minority groups. Reforms that we were promised that would end the NYPD's use of former police commissioner Ray Kelly's racially-discriminatory policing policies were set back when Mayor Bill de Blasio appointed police commissioner William Bratton, who has promised to continue the use of discriminatory tactics under his broken windows theory of policing.
Does the mayor's support for broken windows policing reveal a "broken" campaign promise ?
How can the mayor and his supporters rationalize their support for broken windows policing, when this approach leads to the military-style invasions of Harlem housing projects, raids on homeless shelters, and the brutal arrests of innocent, fare-paying passengers on city buses ? These policing actions, which have racial overtones, are not consistent with the stated intention to reform the police department. Since the mayor supports this policing effort, he is counting on nobody to call out his hypocrisy. Assisting the mayor to deflect criticism are his supporters, who hold positions of influence in community groups and nonprofit organizations. The only way to overcome these obstacles is for voters to remain committed to the unfinished police reforms that united us going into last year's mayoral election.
|
Some police reform activists believe that we are on the cusp of making some gains in the police reform movement. If you did not get a chance to look at the overview document from the Veal Pen Workshop, it includes a simple outline of what the police reform movement in New York City looks like when charted against the MAP Model for organizing social movements. If only more community groups would renew their calls for police reforms, we would succeed in putting this issue back on the social agenda.
As I have reflected on Ms. Walker's treatment of reform activists, I've been focusing on two meditative messages : You have to be true to the best of what you know, and life gives you exactly what you need to wake up. The struggle to bring about unfinished reforms promised during last year's mayoral election is not just something that exists in the imaginations of rebellious activists. The columnist Ginia Bellafante of The New York Times just last Sunday wrote about many examples, where voters have yet to see reforms that they have long been demanding. Other newspapers, like amNewYork, have written about the sense of political betrayal in the closing of Long Island College Hospital. This is the actual, physical sensed experience that some of our newspapers are finding the courage to factually write about today.
As activists continue to press for reforms, I hope that you will create opportunities or look for cues to participate. The reforms we all seek will come about if and only if you help to increase the political pressure on the administration to finally make good on the reforms we all demand.
Best,
-- Louis Flores
|
|
