Dishonest Critics
Dishonest Critics
The dishonest movement to destabilize policing.
Framework
Most books, publications, podcasts, and content creators have a certain framework that they operate within. The framework is like the rules of the game; the basic truths that they assume. It is fine to disagree with the framework that is set by an author yet still enjoy the work. The important part is understanding the framework (rules, norms, terminology) that the content exists within.
For example, in Ibram X. Kendi’s book “How To Be An Antiracist” the framework he constructed is that people are either “racist” or “antiracist”. There are no other options and no gray area. And what determines whether a person is “racist” or “antiracist” is whether or not they agree with Kendi. Those who disagree, even slightly, are “racist”. These are the rules the Kendi’s work operates within.
Now, I disagree strongly with Kendi’s framework. I think it is wrong, dishonest, and very convenient.
But, recognizing the framework that the specific ideas exist within - helped me to not only better understand Kendi’s book but also how to effectively argue against the bad ideas posed.
Dishonest people will either: 1) not inform you of the framework and/or 2) change the rules to comport with their agenda.
Our Framework
Policing is often criticized.
Criticism comes from both Honest and Dishonest Critics.
Honest Critics pose genuine questions and have goals such as: understanding why police do certain things and/or improving policing in the community.
Dishonest Critics are anti-police. They have a goal of demonizing police - no matter the behavior of officers and/or the outcome of specific events. For example, if police officers are pro-active in a minority neighborhood and make a lot of arrests - dishonest critics complain that police are “racist”. If those same police officers then stop the proactive policing, arrest numbers go down, and crime goes up. The Dishonest Critics will complain that police are “racist” because they are ignoring the minority neighborhood. So, no matter what the actions of the police are - the Dishonest Critic will label them as “racist”. As the goal is not to have honest debate and discussion, but to push an agenda by dishonestly labeling any action to align with their predetermined label.
Honest Criticism Should be Encouraged
Policing is one of the most scrutinized and criticized professions. Internal affairs ‘detectives’, body cameras, first-amendment auditors, and anyone with a cell phone and a social media account has the ability to criticize police officers in the moment or years after an incident takes place. And, given the power, authority, privilege, and the lawful ability to take away the liberty of a citizen and/or end a human life on behalf of the government – the criticism and scrutiny of police is well deserved and absolutely necessary.
Criticism is paramount for transparency and transparency is paramount for reasonable citizens to buy into this paradigm. However, not all critics and not all criticism are equal. Therefore, everyone who works in law enforcement - from the leader of large police agency to a county deputy who spends peaceful evenings watching cows cross rivers – should be aware of the motives and agendas of their critics.
Critics of police officers come in two (purposely) overly-broad categories: Honest Critics and Dishonest Critics. The sooner that a police officer figures out which category an individual or group belongs to – the quicker that legitimate concerns can be addressed and illegitimate concerns can be dismissed. And complaints from Dishonest Critics should be dismissed – with extreme prejudice. That is not to say that anyone (including known and convicted criminals) deserves any less police protection or service. Everyone deserves equal protection under the law and our communities should not accept anything less. What should be dismissed by police agencies are the impolite musings of those who wish for and work towards the failure of the police agency and the criminal justice network in whole.
Police leaders should not provide fuel for maniacs to burn down the system.
Evidence
Here is some evidence that the critic is Honest.
Honest Critics have goals that are aligned with the mission statement of a police department. These critics want police officers to serve and protect and expect them to be leaders of the community. Honest Critics want police officers to reduce crime while helping to increase the standard of living in a community. Honest Critics ask inquisitive questions and have a desire to work with police officers to solve community issues. They expect police to live up to all of these ideals – while protecting the Constitutional rights of even the most foul-mouthed and violent maniacs.
Police officers and agency leaders should warmly welcome questions, suggestions, discussion, and debate from these Honest Critics and should make frequent contact with them at “coffee with a cop” or other community events.
Here is some evidence that a critic is Dishonest.
A Dishonest Critic will invoke the race or gender of an officer or citizen – when it is otherwise irrelevant. A Dishonest Critic will call police and report that there are “drug dealers” on the street corner and then lobby their legal services to these same drug dealers and file lawsuits against police officers for responding to the activities that they themselves reported (yes, I know a ‘Civil Rights’ attorney who actually does this).
Dishonest Critics have no interest in improving a police department and believe that the community would be better if there were no police or a severely “defunded” police department. Dishonest Critics often project their one bad experience with a rude police officer from 1989 onto every police officer that has the unfortunate luck to cross their path. Dishonest Critics often stake claim to both sides of an argument and then furiously pounce – taking the side of whichever makes the police look worse. For example, a Dishonest Critic will complain that the police are “too aggressive” and too quick to arrest people. Then when a serious crime occurs – the same Dishonest Critic will complain that the police are “lazy”, “do nothing”, and “ignore” certain sections of town. Essentially, they aim to gas-light police leaders while hiding behind keyboards with greasy fingers.
Oh, and they demand “badge numbers” for no reason.
Final Thoughts
The reason that police officials should ignore Dishonest Critics is because the goal of the criticism is not to have an honest discussion, but instead, to further their predetermined agenda. A police official could waste countless hours trying to satisfy the demands and appease the suggestions of people who have no interest in the success of the police agency or the safety of the community. In fact, the success of a Dishonest Critic is measured by how close they come to destroying the relationship between a police agency and the citizens.
Ignore Dishonest Critics.
Embrace Honest Debate.
I often talk about writing a book titled “How to be an Anti-Pedophile”. And if you disagree with any of my ideas - then you are a pedophile. See how insane that is? But, that is the illogic within the “antiracism” movement’s framework.
Great piece!