My wife and I were just thrilled when we learned that I had won an all expenses paid, two-week trip to the Bahamas in this year's sales contest. This was going to be the best vacation of our lives and a great reward for all those long hours I'd put in. The only down side was that it was only for the two of us. That meant that we couldn't take our two kids along for this one. But, hey it would still be great to have a vacation as "just the two of us", a real second honeymoon. Of course that meant that we would have find someone to stay with our kids; our seven-year-old son Biff, and little sister five-year-old Candy.
Finding a good sitter was very important to us and a big responsibility. Since we had some time to plan Biff and Candy's care, I thought I would consult my old stand-by "life coach"- my dad. My old man has been around a long time and has had great, long-standing relationships with a number of important people through the years. So I went to dad and sought his help in finding just the right person to help with the kids while we were away. Dad immediately said that he couldn't really recommend anyone but said that his old friend Dick Cheney was very well connected and he'd be happy to help us find someone. I contacted Dick and he said he would conduct a very thorough search on our behalf. A couple of weeks later Dick called to say that, after a thorough search, he concluded that he himself would be the best person to do the job. Well, we couldn't argue with that! So all the arrangements were made and we took off for the Bahamas while Dick moved into the house to personally care for Biff and Candy.
The two weeks flew by and we had the time of our lives. We called occasionally to check in with Dick and talk to the kids. We didn't think too much of it at the time, but the kids seemed very odd on the phone and Dick would often take the phone away claiming that the kids didn't seem to want to talk. We chalked it up to the strangeness of being away for so long. But upon our return, I can hardly describe the nightmare we discovered.
It took a long time for the whole truth to come out- but the horror of this experience was finally revealed after piecing together reports from many witnesses and a number of official agencies that looked into our family's tragic experience. Here's what we discovered: Dick Cheney had some very strange notions about how to take care of kids. Dick believed that kids represented some kind of threat to household order because he had lived through a pretty horrific event with some kids once in the past. He insisted they think and behave the way he wanted. Naturally, kids behave like kids and that did not sit well with him. He began to see their behavior as non-compliant and he even began to see Biff and Candy as conspirators who wanted to destroy our household. He made up stories about how they were in contact with other kids from other households who were plotting to destroy all of our homes to foster their radical "kid-like" way of life. He called some of his friends to have Biff and Candy watched to see if they would lead him to the kid leaders. After a while Biff and Candy simply grew to rebel against Dick's unbending authority. They did stuff like refusing to eat the food he made them, or not going to bed when he told them to- or not behaving at bath time. He had their room monitors tapped and cherry-picked the conversations to glean their conspiratorial intentions.
Dick just knew that the kids were plotting big trouble and applied his now famous 1% doctrine. Dick's 1% doctrine holds that if there is even a 1% chance of some bad thing happening you have to take action as if it would actually happen. ( If any of you want to know more about Dick's real way of thinking please read the 2006 book The One Percent Doctrine by Pulitzer Prize winning author Ron Suskind) Dick felt like he had to take action to protect the household from further "attacks" by the kids. It turns out he authorized experts to try to extract the information from Biff and Candy. He made them stand in the corner for days until their little muscles cramped and seized and they were barely able to walk. He either wouldn't let them sleep or kept them in dark cold rooms for days, to "break" them. He told them he would have us (his parents) killed and threatened to kill them. He pretended he was about to kill them- then stop short of really doing it. They were terrified. In the end he had them repeatedly held down in the bathtub and put a washcloth over their faces until they gagged and couldn't breath. He had this done over and over again. When they refused to eat- he had their food blended and inserted into their rectums through a tube- or as he called it, "rectal administration of childhood nutrition".
You can image our horror when we came home to our abused and traumatized children. They will never be the same again, and now they hate us because we subjected them to Dick's methods. We wanted something done about this. The truth eventually came out. People investigated and when questioned, Dick didn't even try to deny it. In fact he said he was proud of it. A few people even asked him how he could justify the abuse. He answered that it was NOT "abuse" - it was Enhanced Parenting Techniques (EPT) He said his own lawyer told him it was legally not abusive and the reports of his abusive behavior "were full of crap". He said that even though it was harsh, it was absolutely necessary as he felt that the situation was dire in the household and that these EPTs were absolutely required-AND, he'd do it again!! He said that sometimes parenting isn't so simple- sometimes parental figures have to practice "parenting in the shadows- the dark side, if you will". And even though nobody can trace it now, Dick assured everyone that they got the information and compliance from Biff and Candy, and insisted he prevented other kids from misbehaving -and his EPTs saved families.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Please forgive me for using the analogy of caring for children and this silly story to discuss the very serious issue of our country's behavior towards prisoners in our never-ending war on terror, against no particular country whatsoever. About two weeks ago the Pew Research Institute did a national survey just after the Senate's Committee Study of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was released. I was amazed that 56% of Americans polled favored these techniques! This surprising finding caused me think about how we as a country will promote and claim the most lofty values and the highest forms of integrity- then turn right around and ignore them.
So let's examine those values by using children as the medium for what we believe. All of us who have raised children or are now raising children have come to a point where we teach our children lessons based on our values. In our endeavors as parents we tell our children that it is sometimes very hard to stick to our beliefs and our values- but people with real character stick to what's right even when it's hard. We tell them that doing what's right- even when it's hardest will make them better people and give them the strength do what's right later in life. We also tell them to be honest and straight with people; and above all be to honest with themselves. We teach them that honesty matters - and to use words that really say what we mean. We teach them these lessons not because they are lessons only for children, but because these lessons are the ones that create character in them as adults.
As it turned out none of those lessons were followed by our leaders in government. In the aftermath of the worst terror attack in our history and the loss of three thousand American lives two forces came together: one, was real fear because we had never been attacked on our soil like this before and we didn't know how to react; and two, old Neo-cons in the Bush Administration who knew the value of exploiting that fear to achieve old political ends for domination in the oil rich Middle East. The record is very clear that the Bush/Cheney White House was planning a military venture in Iran well before 9/11 and would have found another reason to go if 9/11 had not happened. This is made clear by the fact that Iran had nothing to do with 9/11- but we invaded them anyway, all the while using the fear from 9/11 to justify it. We had never before used that level of military might against a country that had not attacked us or an ally first. Once we crossed that line, I suppose the rest of this horrible behavior came easier.
As all the truth is now coming out we can remember the speeches and the Sunday morning shows where the Dick Cheney gang convinced us of things that weren't true, and imprisoned and mistreated people they knew were innocent just to cast the widest net, and tell us they were making us safer. But at what cost? I know the terrorists that attacked us weren't children like I portrayed above and I know that terrorist acts are horrific in real life and we must do everything within the law to prevent them. But I would argue that our values mean something too. I would argue that those are the very things we should seek to preserve, instead of the things we give up so readily when we feel threatened.
Do we teach our children that the ends justify the means? No, we never tell our kids that to get what they want, they should do or say anything to make it happen. But in this case that is exactly what our leaders did. If you have a doubt, go back an listen the statements Cheney has made in the last month about torture and his role in it. It is as close to evil as anything I've heard from an American politician. And it is all because he took the position that the ends (his ends) justify the means. United States law and policy prohibit us from torturing. We have signed international treaties agreeing not to torture. The law is clear on this. But to justify these illegal actions the Bush/Cheney administration simply got their attorneys to define torture as something different. But this was torture by anyone else's definition!! Would we teach our children that if they just use other words for misbehavior, it is not misbehavior? If a child stole money from mom's wallet and then said it wasn't stealing, it was "appropriating funds based on a reasonable expectation of future payment"- would we pat him on the head and say "OK- I see now it wasn't stealing at all-because you used another word"; or we would say, "no, that is stealing- taking money from another person without permission IS STEALING."
As a nation we need to admit that our leaders did things that were illegal and immoral. They did them full-well with the knowledge they were doing wrong but weaseled their way to legitimacy and public approval with lawyers and lies. We have prosecuted others for doing the same thing to our troops in WWII, we led the way to prosecuting Germans for war crimes at Nuremberg and we did that to help prevent those barbarous acts from ever happening again. It is shameful that now we (the self-professed) leader of nations who defend human rights has sunken to such a low level. As terrible a criminal as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad is, what did we gain from the waterboarding him 185 times in a month- that we did not gain from the 180th time- or the 100th time? What have we done to our standing in the world as a leader in dispensing justice, when we have held so many for years on end with no trial? And, what damage have we done ourselves in the eyes of our children? What message have we sent to our enemies, should one of our children be tortured by them in the future. Can we object? Can we hold future enemies accountable, and hold our lofty ideals up as the measuring stick? Can we really say, "we're better than that"?
The debates will rage on over this topic. Several countries have already leveled international charges against the Bush/Cheney administration, and last week the New York Times said criminal investigations should begin against President Bush and Vice President Cheney. But it's highly unlikely that will happen. Apparently we've bought the Dick Cheney argument that "we had to do it-and that makes it OK"- because over half of us agree with their methods. I know this isn't the first time a President has violated our values: Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, and FDR interred Japanese Americans. But in the matter of torture it is all the more sinister and wrong- because it is about inflicting suffering for the sake of suffering. I know sticking to our values doesn't make our enemies give up their brutal and inhumane behavior, but even so (and maybe because of that) we must not follow suit. I would like to see the Justice Department investigate this. I would like to see every person involved from the soldier or CIA operative in the field to the Commander-in-Chief be held accountable. The lesson of Nuremberg is that everyone is expected to behave humanely, even if you are just following orders. The chips should fall where they fall. We claimed that this all started because "they" hated our way of life, and we justified these actions to maintain our way of life. I don't think any of that is entirely truly, but if we are going to say that- we should practice our way of life and the values that make it so. Those are the lessons we should pass on to our children.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, December 28, 2014
Sunday, December 7, 2014
Policing and Race
Over the last few weeks we have been confronted with several horrible, tragic, and perplexing situations where the police and the justice system have intersected with the ugliest part of our national character, racism. The situations in New York, Ferguson and Cleveland are forcing us to face our past, the current state of affairs, and a future that cries out for change.
As with most controversial circumstances these days, we find ourselves torn apart as country, almost forced to pick sides- and do it with extreme prejudice towards those who hold a different position. I've argued in the past that our national discourse has been poisoned and perverted so badly that it is nearly impossible to come together even to have the conversation- let alone to seek solutions to these vexing issues. The killing of these young black men referenced above is no different. These killings have exposed the deep divide and drawn us further apart. The tragedy of these events have two common threads; policing and race. I have been sadly captivated as I watched these events unfold, such that I began to think very hard about these issues and decided to share a few thoughts. I admit my thoughts have been influenced by emotions conjured from the sights and sounds of recent weeks. The emotions are sadness and (at times) anger at the inhumanity so instantly on display. But I will try to express myself free from those emotions because productive conversation and change can only come from discussion based in thoughtfulness, reason, and logic.
I've thought a great deal about policing. The actions of police are the integral part and common thread in all three communities now dealing with these violent, deadly events. In Ferguson, a police office shot and killed an unarmed black young man. Some details of the case conflicted with others and a grand jury did not indict the officer. In Cleveland a patrol car responded to a call, found a twelve year old boy and opened fire in less than 2 seconds believing his toy gun was real. And, In New York last summer police in Staten Island subdued a non-violent, unarmed black man using a choke hold-causing his death. The case went before a Grand Jury and the officer was not indicted. In Ferguson there was no video evidence of the incident and the there was conflicting testimony. In both Cleveland and New York there was clear video evidence. We don't know the final disposition in Cleveland yet, but in both of the other incidents all of us can clearly see what happened- and so far no charges have been brought in any of these deaths.
I could write another entire essay on the particulars of each of these incidents. Even though the events in Ferguson contains a litany of problems with the prosecution and the Grand Jury process; while the New York result is simply logically unexplainable, as was the shooting in Cleveland; that is not the point I want to focus on. These events should cause us to question the relationship Americans (including minority Americans) have with our police. Clearly, I am not a police officer, and hold no particular expertise in policing- but that just might be the reason both you and I should be discussing the nature of policing in this country. One of the founding principals of our democracy is the caution against tyranny that could eliminate our freedoms. That's why we never entrust control of the military to the military. We have civilian control of the military to insure that those with such overwhelming power never control it themselves. On the local, civilian level the same principle applies to our police. We should not allow our police to decide how policing should be done. Because the police have tremendous power, that power should only be exercised by the consent and oversight of another authority- a civil authority that derives its power from the citizens.
There are disturbing trends in policing that may have contributed to the tragic deaths. Even as crime rates overall have decreased dramatically in the last twenty years, we have seen police forces ramp up the level of armaments and become vastly more militarized. Our national (misplaced) over-reaction to the 9-11 terrorist attacks created two factors impacting today's events. One, was our willingness to give up some of our personal freedoms to the government in exchange for what we thought would be more personal safety from those who might harm us. The hastily arrived at Patriot Act gave law enforcement unprecedented access to information as well as more leeway in search and seizure procedures; and in my opinion created an environment within the law enforcement community that they have impunity to exercise authority over us. The second factor was the physical militarization of policing agencies. Again, our over-reaction to 9-11 generated unbelievable spending on military equipment through the DHS. A great deal of that equipment was outright intended for law enforcement agencies for "homeland security" or it was simply given away to municipalities as surplus equipment. Notice too, that uniformed police officers now dress and behave more like soldiers than police officers did only a generation ago. They tend to wear jump suits, dress completely in black and often cover their faces. I have personally witnessed this in my community, and I have seen this trend in media reports from across the country. This trend is not reserved for crowd control situations- but is now the standard in everyday policing. I would contend that when our police look and arm themselves like soldiers, they will increasingly behave like soldiers. That makes them an army (of sorts) with the people or certain segments of the people being the enemy. Our local law enforcement agencies now possess and use military troop carriers and armaments, including a military helicopter. The use of SWAT teams across the country is up near 1000% since police started acquiring military equipment. This use (or overuse) of force can only serve to alienate the very people they seek to serve. The images of the Ferguson Police using military equipment against their own people in the first protests after the Brown killing, were absolutely chilling.
When over-militarism and long standing issues of racism mix it will undoubtedly create a deadly situation. In the first paragraph I said that racism is one of our national characteristics. That is a serious thing to say- but I believe it to be the truth and more importantly the evidence tells us it is the truth. But unless we face our past and effectively come to grips with both individual racism and the more insidious institutional racism that plagues us these occurrences will continue. As we look at all of these situations individually I suppose that people can arrive at a rationalization that justifies the police action. The deniers can always rationalize that every one of these situations could have been avoided "if they would just do what the police say" or they reach back for some prior action that justifies the use of deadly force retroactively and go head-long into villian-izing and blaming the victim. That is the process that keeps us from dealing with the greater problem. We rationalize the individual event so we don't have to look at the overall trend. In this case the overall trend is that young black and Hispanic men are far more likely to be killed by police than white people in the same circumstances. Focusing on the event and ignoring the trend, while blaming the victim robs us of ever getting to the truth. In almost every case of the police killing a young black man we eventually hear the term "thug" applied to the victim. Michael Brown was called a thug- Garner is being blamed for his own death because he did not submit to police (thug-ish behavior)- even Tayvon Martin was called a thug when he fought back for his own life with the amateur cop. Our President has literally been called a "thug and a Gangster" by Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen, and been accused of all manor of lawlessness. That is how low the culture has sunk. "Thug" has become the new N-word and is now just as racially charged as any other racial slur- and it is used to justify some pretty horrific and racially inspired behavior.
The plain truth is that police are just as apt to apply the notions of institutional racism as anyone else, and probably more so due to the power differential. The other plain truth is that our white dominant culture has perpetuated the image of the young black male as inherently dangerous. It is then easy to understand that when confronting that stereotype, police are much more prone to react with lethal force more quickly than they would if the subject were white. Study after study proves persons of color (particularly black males) are stopped more, arrested more, convicted more, and serve more prison time as a function of institutional racism. Every empirical study supports that conclusion. The three cases discussed here are bad enough- but they are only the latest. Shootings like these happen regularly across the country and the justice system routinely fails to hold police accountable. It is also true that police have often been used as the instruments of institutional racism. In the sixties we remember the image of southern police officers turning the dogs and the fire hoses on the marchers during the early civil rights movement. In this era the police use their new-found urban tanks and weaponry. I wonder if anything has changed for the better when we see the Ferguson Police in armoured vehicles with a top-mounted gun turret aimed at protesters.
I'm quite certain some who read this will be moved to great anger at the seeming lack of empathy or appreciation for the police. But that would be missing the point too. I've tried to stay away from discussing the details of individual events in favor of taking a broader view of solutions to this problem. I'm well aware that most police officers do their job bravely and do it well. I'm well aware that not all police officers are outright racists. I'm well aware of the risks they take each day. But there is no denying the overwhelming evidence of institutional racism and its place in our system of justice and policing. So, it is incumbent on all us of raise our voices to define the way we want policing done- that's the way it's done in a free society. I for one would like to see the trend of militarizing the police stop- send the tanks, the assault rifles, and helicopters back. They send the wrong message and create the wrong environment. My version of policing would involve more community policing, more involvement in the neighborhoods, and more relationships between the police and the people they serve. Police must look like, and be like the communities they serve. Police can never be expected to be respected in their communities unless they are part of their communities. And finally, we must admit to ourselves that we have a past steeped in racism and it is still with us. I'm not sure our country can agree to accept that reality and begin honestly discussing it with ourselves and our children- but I'm convinced it must happen. The rising tide of protests are a loud voice telling us we must listen and change the current landscape of both policing and racial inequality.
Thanks for looking in.
As with most controversial circumstances these days, we find ourselves torn apart as country, almost forced to pick sides- and do it with extreme prejudice towards those who hold a different position. I've argued in the past that our national discourse has been poisoned and perverted so badly that it is nearly impossible to come together even to have the conversation- let alone to seek solutions to these vexing issues. The killing of these young black men referenced above is no different. These killings have exposed the deep divide and drawn us further apart. The tragedy of these events have two common threads; policing and race. I have been sadly captivated as I watched these events unfold, such that I began to think very hard about these issues and decided to share a few thoughts. I admit my thoughts have been influenced by emotions conjured from the sights and sounds of recent weeks. The emotions are sadness and (at times) anger at the inhumanity so instantly on display. But I will try to express myself free from those emotions because productive conversation and change can only come from discussion based in thoughtfulness, reason, and logic.
I've thought a great deal about policing. The actions of police are the integral part and common thread in all three communities now dealing with these violent, deadly events. In Ferguson, a police office shot and killed an unarmed black young man. Some details of the case conflicted with others and a grand jury did not indict the officer. In Cleveland a patrol car responded to a call, found a twelve year old boy and opened fire in less than 2 seconds believing his toy gun was real. And, In New York last summer police in Staten Island subdued a non-violent, unarmed black man using a choke hold-causing his death. The case went before a Grand Jury and the officer was not indicted. In Ferguson there was no video evidence of the incident and the there was conflicting testimony. In both Cleveland and New York there was clear video evidence. We don't know the final disposition in Cleveland yet, but in both of the other incidents all of us can clearly see what happened- and so far no charges have been brought in any of these deaths.
I could write another entire essay on the particulars of each of these incidents. Even though the events in Ferguson contains a litany of problems with the prosecution and the Grand Jury process; while the New York result is simply logically unexplainable, as was the shooting in Cleveland; that is not the point I want to focus on. These events should cause us to question the relationship Americans (including minority Americans) have with our police. Clearly, I am not a police officer, and hold no particular expertise in policing- but that just might be the reason both you and I should be discussing the nature of policing in this country. One of the founding principals of our democracy is the caution against tyranny that could eliminate our freedoms. That's why we never entrust control of the military to the military. We have civilian control of the military to insure that those with such overwhelming power never control it themselves. On the local, civilian level the same principle applies to our police. We should not allow our police to decide how policing should be done. Because the police have tremendous power, that power should only be exercised by the consent and oversight of another authority- a civil authority that derives its power from the citizens.
There are disturbing trends in policing that may have contributed to the tragic deaths. Even as crime rates overall have decreased dramatically in the last twenty years, we have seen police forces ramp up the level of armaments and become vastly more militarized. Our national (misplaced) over-reaction to the 9-11 terrorist attacks created two factors impacting today's events. One, was our willingness to give up some of our personal freedoms to the government in exchange for what we thought would be more personal safety from those who might harm us. The hastily arrived at Patriot Act gave law enforcement unprecedented access to information as well as more leeway in search and seizure procedures; and in my opinion created an environment within the law enforcement community that they have impunity to exercise authority over us. The second factor was the physical militarization of policing agencies. Again, our over-reaction to 9-11 generated unbelievable spending on military equipment through the DHS. A great deal of that equipment was outright intended for law enforcement agencies for "homeland security" or it was simply given away to municipalities as surplus equipment. Notice too, that uniformed police officers now dress and behave more like soldiers than police officers did only a generation ago. They tend to wear jump suits, dress completely in black and often cover their faces. I have personally witnessed this in my community, and I have seen this trend in media reports from across the country. This trend is not reserved for crowd control situations- but is now the standard in everyday policing. I would contend that when our police look and arm themselves like soldiers, they will increasingly behave like soldiers. That makes them an army (of sorts) with the people or certain segments of the people being the enemy. Our local law enforcement agencies now possess and use military troop carriers and armaments, including a military helicopter. The use of SWAT teams across the country is up near 1000% since police started acquiring military equipment. This use (or overuse) of force can only serve to alienate the very people they seek to serve. The images of the Ferguson Police using military equipment against their own people in the first protests after the Brown killing, were absolutely chilling.
When over-militarism and long standing issues of racism mix it will undoubtedly create a deadly situation. In the first paragraph I said that racism is one of our national characteristics. That is a serious thing to say- but I believe it to be the truth and more importantly the evidence tells us it is the truth. But unless we face our past and effectively come to grips with both individual racism and the more insidious institutional racism that plagues us these occurrences will continue. As we look at all of these situations individually I suppose that people can arrive at a rationalization that justifies the police action. The deniers can always rationalize that every one of these situations could have been avoided "if they would just do what the police say" or they reach back for some prior action that justifies the use of deadly force retroactively and go head-long into villian-izing and blaming the victim. That is the process that keeps us from dealing with the greater problem. We rationalize the individual event so we don't have to look at the overall trend. In this case the overall trend is that young black and Hispanic men are far more likely to be killed by police than white people in the same circumstances. Focusing on the event and ignoring the trend, while blaming the victim robs us of ever getting to the truth. In almost every case of the police killing a young black man we eventually hear the term "thug" applied to the victim. Michael Brown was called a thug- Garner is being blamed for his own death because he did not submit to police (thug-ish behavior)- even Tayvon Martin was called a thug when he fought back for his own life with the amateur cop. Our President has literally been called a "thug and a Gangster" by Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen, and been accused of all manor of lawlessness. That is how low the culture has sunk. "Thug" has become the new N-word and is now just as racially charged as any other racial slur- and it is used to justify some pretty horrific and racially inspired behavior.
The plain truth is that police are just as apt to apply the notions of institutional racism as anyone else, and probably more so due to the power differential. The other plain truth is that our white dominant culture has perpetuated the image of the young black male as inherently dangerous. It is then easy to understand that when confronting that stereotype, police are much more prone to react with lethal force more quickly than they would if the subject were white. Study after study proves persons of color (particularly black males) are stopped more, arrested more, convicted more, and serve more prison time as a function of institutional racism. Every empirical study supports that conclusion. The three cases discussed here are bad enough- but they are only the latest. Shootings like these happen regularly across the country and the justice system routinely fails to hold police accountable. It is also true that police have often been used as the instruments of institutional racism. In the sixties we remember the image of southern police officers turning the dogs and the fire hoses on the marchers during the early civil rights movement. In this era the police use their new-found urban tanks and weaponry. I wonder if anything has changed for the better when we see the Ferguson Police in armoured vehicles with a top-mounted gun turret aimed at protesters.
I'm quite certain some who read this will be moved to great anger at the seeming lack of empathy or appreciation for the police. But that would be missing the point too. I've tried to stay away from discussing the details of individual events in favor of taking a broader view of solutions to this problem. I'm well aware that most police officers do their job bravely and do it well. I'm well aware that not all police officers are outright racists. I'm well aware of the risks they take each day. But there is no denying the overwhelming evidence of institutional racism and its place in our system of justice and policing. So, it is incumbent on all us of raise our voices to define the way we want policing done- that's the way it's done in a free society. I for one would like to see the trend of militarizing the police stop- send the tanks, the assault rifles, and helicopters back. They send the wrong message and create the wrong environment. My version of policing would involve more community policing, more involvement in the neighborhoods, and more relationships between the police and the people they serve. Police must look like, and be like the communities they serve. Police can never be expected to be respected in their communities unless they are part of their communities. And finally, we must admit to ourselves that we have a past steeped in racism and it is still with us. I'm not sure our country can agree to accept that reality and begin honestly discussing it with ourselves and our children- but I'm convinced it must happen. The rising tide of protests are a loud voice telling us we must listen and change the current landscape of both policing and racial inequality.
Thanks for looking in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)