Defund the Police meets the crime wave
bariweiss.substack.com
Defund the Police meets the crime wave
1–10 of 365 posts
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#2The Democrats run the cities where this is happening. What are they going to do about it? Quoting the article:
'I recently finished reading “San Fransicko,” by Michael Shellenberger. I recommend it. The subtitle is provocative: “Why Progressives Ruin Cities.” But, as Shellenberger explains, he does not mean to imply that progressives always ruin the cities they govern. He’s just interested in the specific phenomenon of when progressives do ruin cities, and explaining why that happens.
And progressives—I count myself as one of them—do ruin cities. Or, at least, they put in place policies that cause profound harm to the people living in them.'
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#3The Democrats run the cities where this is happening. What are they going to do about it? Quoting the article: 'I recently finished reading “San Fransicko,” by Michael Shellenberger. I recommend it. The subtitle is provocative: “Why Progressives Ruin Cities.” But, as Shellenberger explains, he does not mean to imply that progressives always ruin the cities they govern. He’s just interested in the specific phenomenon…
I think we should start differentiating between Democrats and progressives. At least here in Portland, the differentiation is already complete. Basically everyone is a Democrat and most residents would like to have our police force back and see people prosecuted for property crimes. The city leadership is beholden to a radical fringe who aren't really even liberals so much as anarcho-communists.
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#4The Democrats run the cities where this is happening. What are they going to do about it? Quoting the article: 'I recently finished reading “San Fransicko,” by Michael Shellenberger. I recommend it. The subtitle is provocative: “Why Progressives Ruin Cities.” But, as Shellenberger explains, he does not mean to imply that progressives always ruin the cities they govern. He’s just interested in the specific phenomenon…
[flagged]
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#5The Democrats run the cities where this is happening. What are they going to do about it? Quoting the article: 'I recently finished reading “San Fransicko,” by Michael Shellenberger. I recommend it. The subtitle is provocative: “Why Progressives Ruin Cities.” But, as Shellenberger explains, he does not mean to imply that progressives always ruin the cities they govern. He’s just interested in the specific phenomenon…
Please don't take HN threads straight into partisan flamewar. This is a site for intellectually curious conversation. Those are opposite things.
This is especially important when a thread is fresh, because threads are so sensitive to initial conditions. If someone shows up with a low-information provocation like this one, that's extremely likely to leave a negative imprint. Please don't do that.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#6The Democrats run the cities where this is happening. What are they going to do about it? Quoting the article: 'I recently finished reading “San Fransicko,” by Michael Shellenberger. I recommend it. The subtitle is provocative: “Why Progressives Ruin Cities.” But, as Shellenberger explains, he does not mean to imply that progressives always ruin the cities they govern. He’s just interested in the specific phenomenon…
I think we should start differentiating between Democrats and progressives. At least here in Portland, the differentiation is already complete. Basically everyone is a Democrat and most residents would like to have our police force back and see people prosecuted for property crimes. The city leadership is beholden to a radical fringe who aren't really even liberals so much as anarcho-communists.
> differentiating between Democrats and progressives...a radical fringe
Well, I don't see the moderate democrat leadership denouncing the radical fringe, either.
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#7I took the less baity title from the author's site: https://leightonwoodhouse.substack.com/p/defund-the-police-m.... I didn't change the URL because this appears to be a more recent article on the same topic.
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#8The Democrats run the cities where this is happening. What are they going to do about it? Quoting the article: 'I recently finished reading “San Fransicko,” by Michael Shellenberger. I recommend it. The subtitle is provocative: “Why Progressives Ruin Cities.” But, as Shellenberger explains, he does not mean to imply that progressives always ruin the cities they govern. He’s just interested in the specific phenomenon…
I think we should start differentiating between Democrats and progressives. At least here in Portland, the differentiation is already complete. Basically everyone is a Democrat and most residents would like to have our police force back and see people prosecuted for property crimes. The city leadership is beholden to a radical fringe who aren't really even liberals so much as anarcho-communists.
[dead]
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#9Bari Weiss is hardly a neutral (or reasonable) voice. Flagged.
Re: Defund the Police meets the crime wave
#10> Defund advocates often claim that police don’t actually prevent crimes, that they only bust the perpetrators after the fact. But that’s untrue. Police presence deters crime[citation provided]. Arresting career criminals takes them out of circulation. And, most important, effective policing bolsters a community’s faith in government-administered justice.
Regardless of whether defunding is good/bad for crime, this is the core justification for existing funding in this article and it is quite thin.
Edit: I am unclear on why this is getting downvoted. Almost nothing in that paragraph is adequately substantiated anywhere in the article. I am not married to any particular perspective on this topic, but remain unconvinced of the author's conclusion.