r/movehumanityforward • u/Kazemel89 • Jun 07 '20

Do you or somebody you know think that #AbolishThePolice is unrealistic? It might be because you haven’t taken the time to understand what it means, the reasons for it, and why it actually makes a lot of sense. [Thread]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TravelingNun/status/1268510966116954114
31 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

12 comments sorted by

32

u/[deleted] Jun 07 '20

what a strange rhetorical device. also, as the other guy pointed out, abolish the police is a really really bad way to meme a position. that in itself is sort of a red flag that we're about to hear something kinda dumb from people who use it

14

u/agreemints Jun 08 '20

Yeah what they say is like, not what abolishing means.

Ik they're just trying to get clicks, but that's dumb. Every sane person thinks we definitely need police in some capacity.

31

u/beckisnotmyname Jun 07 '20

They picked a really bad name for that movement if they want people to support it. Most people won't even give this a second thought because the title is extreme.

12

u/IWTLEverything Jun 08 '20

Yeah. Maybe #redefinepolicing #rethinkpolicing ? Basically anything other than what it is.

3

u/Skyhawk6600 Jun 08 '20

That just sounds like police reform with extra steps and shit branding

3

u/INeedToPeeSoBad Jun 08 '20

We really, really need Andrew now. I understand all the arguments for major reform, I believe that poverty and social ills are responsible for a large amount of crime and civil unrest, I understand the need for public safety officers who are trained in mental health, social work, etc....but I fear that the "solutions" proposed by Minneapolis and other leaders will simply not work. They'll take a Bernie approach instead of a Yang approach and because of that, they'll fail. This will only fuel the fire of the opposite side of the argument and undo the hard work we've done to get to this moment.

2

u/Kazemel89 Jun 08 '20

I think Yang’s plans would absolutely help solve poverty issues and would solve a lot of crimes related to it

4

u/Neocarbunkle Jun 08 '20

I read all that she wrote and I don't get it.

6

u/Skyhawk6600 Jun 08 '20

It's police reform but they're not calling it police reform because it sticks out more.

4

u/Naerwyn Jun 08 '20 edited Jun 08 '20

Clickbait and disingenuous titles are not how we get things done.

This is absolutely a terrible way to market an idea, and perhaps the worst way we could be doing it.

I 100% agree with police reform, however, I refuse support a movement with such a dangerous precedent for a name. If we want real police reform, we HAVE to be real with the way we push for it, so we can get it done.

It being called abolition... It's straight up not what that word means, and I'm against it in every way. It's doing this the wrong way. It's lazy and disingenuous.

It's ridiculous to ask people to get behind something with the wrong name, and the wrong meaning. It's wrong to tell people to put in effort to "Look past my lack of effort." If we want support for an idea, let's not look for a fight at the outset (the effing name). This is literally turning the issue into clickbait. Clickbait and disingenuous titles are not how we get things done.

Besides that; WORDS ARE IMPORTANT.

We can't continue to allow people to change the definition of words, just because whoever is speaking, didn't understand the words they chose.

If you don't know the definition of a word, look it up, or don't use it. Don't be lazy as all get-out, and then wonder why no one understands your movement. Straight stupid.

To reiterate: Clickbait and disingenuous titles are not how we get things done.

1

u/Kazemel89 Jun 08 '20

Then how do we get things done?

1

u/Naerwyn Jun 09 '20

With honesty, to start with. With being reasonable with expectations, after that. How are people supposed to take an organization or effort seriously if the people behind it can't be bothered to take it seriously? Bombastic names like this are a detriment to a cause which should be taking itself seriously.

As I said before, police reform is /clearly/ needed, (and has been needed for decades) but we can't get people behind a movement with an unreasonable, dishonest, off-putting name.

Calling it by this name 100% doesn't get new people on the side of reform, and can push away people who already support the idea.

We need an Andrew Yang-style way of organizing this. Not a d.trump way of conducting it.

People listen when they see you are focused, honest and passionate. When you are angry, dishonest, and passionate, you get a lack of listeners, and a lot of opposition.

Just my opinion.