There has been a lot of discussion in America recently on police brutality. Much of the rhetoric has centered around “structural racism” versus a “few bad apples.” As portrayed in political circles, the constructs behind these seem irresolvably opposed to each other. Structural racism contends that problems need to be solved through reforms in the system while others say that police officers should be filtered through means of enhancing personal responsibility.
I do not have ultimate answers for these questions, but I do have some thoughts to contribute. Books are great to consult in these political debates because they are more focused on the long-term than newspapers. Newspapers are first drafts of history; books are research projects that often require in-depth reflection. Many recent attempts to understand racism exist and are being trumpeted by book outlets. (I’d suggest Amazon’s best-selling books on discrimination and racism as a starting point.) I will not attempt to dissect those here. Instead, I will attempt to bring four overlooked but important points to the discussion, points that I have not heard much in our current debate in America.
First, political passions need to be cooled by both-and logic instead of either-or. Either-or logic tends to demonize the other side’s proposals. Both-and logic (sorely needed in American politics) says, why not do both proposals? Why not both personal responsibility and structural reform? Why not try both approaches and measure which efforts are working best through studies? Alas, such level-headed discussions are avoided as we would rather lambast the other side as being wrong. Thoughtful reflection needs to win instead of fanning the flames of partisanship. This, of course, has broader applications outside of racism. We all must learn to listen better to others’ perspectives.
Second, the best book I have recently read on police actions is Verbal Judo, which has been previously reviewed on this blog. I must admit that as an academic, I did not find this book profoundly compelling, but then again, I’m used to a culture where words are considered. I’m not on the streets. This book’s central idea is that the right words can solve conflicts better than force. Amen and amen. This book was written by someone with a PhD in rhetoric who also became a police officer. Therefore, he spanned two very different cultures which can frankly learn from each other. This book should be a part of the national discussion on this issue. A focus on better communication could have solved many of these tragic conflicts in healthier ways.
Third, if we want to place officers in more of a peacemaking role and less of an aggressive role, we need to cultivate a police culture that involves reading and reflection, not just law and order. Why? This is not to “soften up” officers but to allow them to make quicker and better decisions. Words slow down a situation. Words allow us to analyze evidence better. Words allow us to make split-second decisions that will stand critical review. We need those words, and we need better words. Words humanize both police and citizens. Both police and citizens can benefit from good reading and good discussion. Unfortunately, as social space has faded away and social media has ascended, American society has devolved into unruly arguments instead of growing by reasoned discussion. We need more spaces to encounter people who are different than us.
Fourth and finally, slowing down reflection about implicit racism is necessary. Regardless of the color of our skin, we must admit that we’re more comfortable with people who look and think like us. This is called implicit (or unconscious) racism – regardless of our skin-color – and can be addressed with conscious and deliberate effort. This free, online test from Harvard wonderfully shows how this affects our reasoning – especially in split-second decisions like those that police face. Especially those that think that structural racism is just some kind of double-talk by the left should take these test. They convinced me years ago of my own racial (and other) tendencies, and I now consciously try to address those in social situations.