The Cops Are Culture Warriors
The San Francisco Police Officers’ Association, the city’s police union, had spent more than $700,000—exceeding Boudin’s own fundraising efforts—in
an effort to defeat him, pulling cash from police unions in Los
Angeles, Portland, Seattle, and New York. The San Francisco Deputy
Sheriffs’ Association shared a John Birch Society video calling Boudin a “communist radical” and a son of “terrorists.” Boudin’s
parents were jailed for their role in an armored-car robbery, in which
two police officers and a guard were killed—something even Boudin
supporters thought might be used against him in the race. But San
Franciscans, it turned out, voted him into office despite objections
from the police and far right.
This
sort of counter-campaign has become more common in the Obama and Trump
eras. Police have panicked as calls for criminal justice reform have
moved to the center of American politics, fueled by decades of popular
movements against police brutality and prisons. Just as conservatives,
going back to the Nixon era, have used debates over the lawfulness of
abortion, homosexuality, and pornography to portray themselves as
besieged by a liberal elite, police unions, too, now claim they are on
the losing side in an ideological struggle. It may appear strange to see
police alongside anti-contraception crusaders, transphobic employers, and Evangelical cake-makers on the supposed front lines of a national clash over values. But it also represents a return to the culture war’s origins.
The
very idea of the culture war was born out of policing. Though the
phrase didn’t come into common usage until the 1990s, anxiety over law
and order helped usher Nixon into the White House in 1968. Where today
police unions cast Black Lives Matter activists as their persecutors,
conservatives under Nixon pointed to black power activists and the
anti-war left.
With James Davison Hunter’s 1991 book Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America, the term “culture war” entered the popular lexicon. Hunter says he was inspired
after reading a news story about the arrests of clergy from a range of
sometimes warring faiths at an anti-choice protest. He saw the struggle
emerging out of 1960s social change as a matter less of specific issues than of something much broader: “progressivism” versus “orthodoxy.”
Throughout
the 1990s, many who were at odds with one another when it came to other
issues, such as abortion or gay rights, were largely in agreement on
defending the power of police—whether that meant uniting against Ice T’s
“Cop Killer” song and gangsta rap or more sweeping policy
proposals. While governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton rejected the
clemency petition of Ricky Ray Rector, a black man who shot and killed a
white police officer before shooting himself, leaving him mentally
incapacitated. Clinton took a break from campaigning in New Hampshire in
1992 to return to Arkansas and oversee Rector’s death by lethal
injection. Rector asked for part of his last meal to be set aside for
later—a sign that he did not fully understand how severely he was to be
punished. Yet for backing the execution, Clinton was lauded for being
tough on crime.
As president, Clinton would go on to
be forever linked with his signature 1994 crime bill, putting more than
$9 billion into prisons and adding 100,000 more cops on the streets. The
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 also defined 60
new death penalty offenses. Even as the crime rate declined sharply
during and since those years, the majority of the American public
continued to believe crime was getting worse each year.
The Obama years saw the start of a profound shift. First galvanized by the death of Trayvon
Martin in 2012 and his killer’s acquittal in 2013, activists across the
country returned to the streets in protest after police killed Eric
Garner in New York City and then Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. In
demanding accountability from police who kill, the Black Lives Matter
movement highlighted the ways in which the system of policing makes such
accountability nearly impossible. Police unions, they argued, are
critical in shielding
police from discipline for brutality and violence. When the officers
who killed Brown and Garner were not indicted, activists pointed to the
power held by district attorneys—who rely on police to help them win convictions—in convening and persuading grand juries.
It
was these activists who helped shift the line marking the acceptable
edge of law enforcement critique, and by the 2016 election, Democrats
had noticeably backed off from the Clinton-era consensus. Contenders in 2016 made abolishing the death penalty
part of their platforms. By then, it was more common to hear that
criminal justice reform was a bipartisan issue—albeit in a limited
sense, with centrist overlap on a few modest reforms like creating
alternatives to pre-trial detention.
Meanwhile,
perceptions of crime numbers were falling. Eighty-seven percent of
Americans polled in 1993 believed crime had increased from the prior
year. In 2018, that number was down to 60 percent. In an administration
of “lock her up” chants, accompanied by flagrant and likely illegal
presidential abuses of power, tough-on-crime stances have proven hard
sells in liberal circles. 2020 Democratic candidates have pledged unprecedentedly progressive criminal justice plans.
As
consensus on the power of law enforcement was fracturing, some
political observers declared the more classic culture-war issues
resolved: “Culture War Is Over,” The American Prospect optimistically proclaimed in 2012. “Same-sex marriage is a non-issue in American politics,” one CNN piece announced
in 2014. At the same time, liberals were growing more comfortable with
the prospect of criminal justice reform, pushed from their left by
grassroots activists. In response, the right—and especially police unions—grew more vocal and vehement in denouncing activists and defeating reform-minded candidates.
In
San Francisco this year, police unions opted for a core alt-right
conspiracy theory, depicting Chesa Boudin as a puppet of George Soros,
who has emerged as a leading donor in prosecutor races across the
country. In 2018, San Diego prosecutor Summer Stephan similarly attacked
progressive challenger Geneviéve Jones-Wright by promoting
an attack website juxtaposing images of antifa and Black Lives Matter
activists with a Soros portrait—one of many such attempts to link Soros
with anti-police sentiment. The site went offline in 2018, one week after Soros was mailed a pipe bomb.
In
November, an elected member of the school board in Corvallis, Oregon,
Brandy Fortson, started receiving death threats after two of their
tweets were circulated by the official Twitter accounts of the Fraternal Order of Police (the nation’s largest police organization) and the Oregon state Republican Party. “Hey kids, always remember that all cops are bastards,” read one of the tweets, which Fortson said was in response to Texas police arresting a man for allegedly
stealing a shopping cart to take his groceries home. “Sex work is
work,” read the other tweet Fortson’s critics offered as evidence that
they should be removed from office.
“You should not be involved in the development of our nations [sic] children,” the FOP tweeted,
also attempting to lecture Fortson, who is queer and nonbinary (using
the pronouns they/them) and already a likely target of harassment, on
tolerance: “Mx. Fortson, as a society, we raise our kids to accept, not
hate, people from all walks, regardless of race, sexual orientation,
gender or career choice. Your values clearly do not reflect this.”
As
might be expected when a national group targets a nonbinary school
board member in a town of 55,000, the results were swift and frightening. One caller, Fortson told
a local reporter, said “he was looking forward to shooting my child in
the head at school and watching her brains get strewn about on the
sidewalk while he laughed and I cried.” Even after Fortson resigned, the
threats continued. Andy Ngo, who uses his Twitter account to share the
names and photos of activists he claims are violent, directed his
followers to Fortson. Within 15 minutes of Ngo’s tweets, Fortson said,
they received “10 or 11 death threats.”
Police
unions may engage in such aggressive tactics in part because they
accurately perceive their powerful allies to be slipping away. In 2019,
no realm of politics remains a criticism-free zone for cops. Michael
Bloomberg’s tardy entrance into the Democratic primary came with an
acknowledgment that his tough-on-crime turn as New York City mayor—like
his pride in the unconstitutional police practice of stop-and-frisk—was
perhaps a liability. “I got something important really wrong,” Bloomberg
said from the pulpit of a black megachurch in Brooklyn. “I didn’t
understand back then the full impact that stops were having on the black
and Latino communities.” Even if the apology is insincere—Bloomberg still defended the policy earlier this year—the fact that he feels he has to make this kind of statement illustrates how the lines in the police culture war have shifted.
In her run at the 2020 Democratic nomination, Kamala Harris, a former
San Francisco district attorney and California state attorney general,
struggled to square her prosecutor past with the new political reality
for Democrats. Previously, Harris had portrayed herself as someone who
is neither tough nor soft but “smart” on crime. At times, she tried to depict herself as a reformer,
though that is not how she was regarded as a prosecutor. With her
campaign in disarray, her poll numbers slipping behind the front-running
white candidates, Harris announced her withdrawal from the race on
Tuesday.
Once, cops could count on establishment and even liberal media to back them—to point out, for example, that Michael Brown, as The New York Times printed in 2014, was “no angel.” That, too, has changed: In November, when the Times
editorial board criticized police and prosecutors’ attempts to block
modest bail and discovery reform measures, they were blunt and
prescriptive, calling the efforts “A Sad Last Gasp Against Criminal Justice Reform.”
The
less taboo it has become for anyone with some modicum of power to
critique the police, the more law enforcement and their backers have
moved to police the boundaries of permissible debate about their power.
This Tuesday, Attorney General Bill Barr even suggested
that those who don’t offer “support and respect” to cops could be
deprived of police protection. Despite police and their advocates’ assertions of victimhood,
police are far from marginalized targets, oppressed by reformers,
abolitionists, or even prosecutors: They still have the full force of
the state behind them. And that’s precisely why police are so invested
in this war—to keep the state out of the hands of reform-minded public
officials and those who seek to elect them.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.