I guess this is a follow-up to my Ending the
War on Dogs post. I had a bit of discussion on Facebook about the
post. One argument was that drug laws convey important societal disapproval of
drug consumption. I guess I wasn't clear enough about the many harms I
see coming from the drug war that swamp the benefits it may provide.
One harm I see is the growing rift between civil society and the
police force. In many ways I think the worst consequence of the Drug
war in the US has been its effect on the police force. Despite being
basically a Law-and-order conservative on issues of crime and
punishment, I feel ambivalent at best about the current concept of
Policing. To know why that is so you could read Radley Balko (or Photography is Not a Crime for
that matter). More philosophically though - I think it is because
policing in this country has gone badly astray.
Consider Robert Peel. He is the father of the modern police force
(and the derivation of the nickname "Bobbies" for English
policeman). Wikipedia lists a set of
"Peelian Principles" that I think are worth quoting in full:
The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent
crime and disorder.
The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent
upon the public approval of police actions.
Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in
voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain
the respect of the public.
The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured
diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical
force.
Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to
public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial
service to the law.
Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure
observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of
persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the
public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police
are the public and the public are the police; the police being only
members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to
duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of
community welfare and existence.
Police should always direct their action strictly towards
their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the
judiciary.
The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and
disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with
it.
The application to (or conflict between) the drug war and these
principles which founded modern policing seems obvious to me - with
sometimes tragic results. The destruction of point seven in particular
seems to me to be a direct consequence of the war on drugs. Discuss
among yourselves.
Well, Sarah Palin has come and presumably gone. As a Modestoan and
a CSU Stanislaus Grad I feel compelled to render my opinion on the
accompanying Senatorial disapproval, protesters, and media
coverage.
I've been quite amused by the furor - the publicity seeking
statements by State Senator Yee and Jerry Brown, the constant stream
of letters to the editor appearing in the Bee. The news accounts of
the event described approximately 75 protestors who showed up to chant
their disapproval of Palin's appearance.
I don't think there has been enough discussion about the reasons
for the opposition to Palin's appearance. Most of the public
statements of opposition don't really make sense - CA State Senator
Yee said: (All quotes from the Saturday, June 26th, 2010 paper edition
of the Modesto Bee.)
It is quite unfortunate that while the university has
eliminated scholarships for students and raised fees, they feel
compelled to line the pockets of Sarah Palin
But of course The CSU Foundation is not the University - and "the
gala was the most lucrative single fund-raiser in the university's
history, netting more than $200,000" - this is not exactly lining
Palin's pockets at the expense of students.
CSU Stanislaus Alumni Alexandra Hoffmann explained her
disapproval. "I think it should have been someone esteemed in the
academic world, on the left or the right."
This is a frequently expressed observation - the story noted
earlier that "liberal groups call[ed] her a poor choice for the
university's 50th anniversary gala because she had no tie to academia
or the area."
As a member of the graduating class of '99 I find this criticism
funny - we had noted academic philosopher Bill Cosby (Why is there
air?) as a graduation speaker and banquet headliner. He was great, of
course! And as the University
website notes - other featured speakers at CSU Stanislaus events
include "Former First Lady Barbara Bush, historian Carlos Cortés,
former U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley, and former
Secretaries of State Colin Powell and James A. Baker III. Performers
Willie Nelson, Ray Charles, B.B. King, Vince Gill, Van Cliburn, the
cast from Beach Blanket Babylon, and Gary Sinise’s Lt. Dan Band." Gary
Sinise's band was the previously most successful fundraiser - and of
course this is not exactly a roster of academic bigwigs.
I thought some of the protesters were more honest - one popular
sign said "We'd rather have Tina Fey!" Tina Fey is of course also not an
academic - but she is beloved by the left for making fun of Sarah
Palin! Another protester, Fred Herman (fair disclosure - I've met
Fred socially a time or two), said
"We're not here to bad-mouth one more gun-loving,
woman-hating, anti-tax politician. We protest a political stunt, using
a foe of university values to raise funds for educations that
disprove most of (Palin's) notions."
This seems to me to be the most honest and clear description of the
reason for all the hubbub. Simply put, the Academy is regarded by the
left (and some on the right) as the exclusive province of the
left. Sarah Palin is pugnaciously not of the left and therefore the
legitimization by a part of the Academy (even in the trivial role of
entertainer at a small-time CSU) must be resisted. Sarah Palin
speaking at a University challenges the leftist assertion that
education and academic values are automatically the values and ideas
of the left.
I have to confess that I'm not really a fan of Sarah Palin. I'd
describe my politics as Libertarian if pressed. I'm not unsympathetic
to her small-governmet rhetoric. But I find her public persona a touch
grating - so I'm not personally thrilled that she was here. I am
happy, however, that my alma mater asserted in a tiny way the ideal of
the marketplace of ideas in the academy by resisting the statewide
pressure to dis-invite her. And of course to my Profs and fellow
alumni who didn't like the selection of speaker - feel free to
organize an alternate event. I hear the buckwheat blini was good - and
who knows, perhaps Tina Fey is still available!
It's ironic to me that despite all the violations of humans rights, if the Drug War is ever given up it will probably be because of people's soft hearts for their dogs. If the name Radley Balko means nothing to you, you might not realize that it has become incredibly commonplace for SWAT units to raid civilians for non-violent drug related offenses. Such raids involve shooting the dogs as a standard practice
A fairly famous example would be the raid on the mayor of Berwyn Heights in Maryland. A package containing Marijuana was sent to the mayors house and the Sheriff's department followed the package with a "no-knock" raid; among other indignities the underwear clad mayor was handcuffed and dropped on his kitchen floor beside his handcuffed mother-in-law and the family's two labrador retrievers were shot and killed, one while running away.
Mayor Calvo was cleared of any involvement in drugs but the Sheriff's Department continues to claim that the raid was essentially a success since it followed departmental procedures. I suspect most people agree with Mayor Calvo - violent raids on law abiding citizens can't be considered "a success".
Sadly that sort of encounter with Law Enforcement typifies the Drug War - and is the reason that I don't support it. I'm personally conservative, generally sympathetic to Law Enforcement and general law and order concerns. I've never done drugs of any sort, nor am I likely to start if they're legalized. But I support decriminalizing at least marijuana precisely because of this sort of Law Enforcement over-reach. The following videos shows a night raid by a SWAT team on a house. Half a dozen armed and armored officers break a door shoot the family dogs (a pit bull and ... a terrifying corgi!) in front of a seven year old child and cuff the father. They eventually file misdemeanor marijuana possession charges.
As far as I'm concerned SWAT teams should be shooting hostage takers and bank robbers, not retrieving roaches and shooting the pets of otherwise law-abiding citizens, not ... this.
I've been too busy with work to even think about personal blogging lately and I feel like I have quite a backlog of writing built up. However I don't want to let the passing of Michael Spencer (aka The Internet Monk) go completely without notice in this space.
Michael died after a short battle with cancer and over the last few months as his friends have have maintained his blog I've dreaded seeing an unread story from internetmonk.com pop up in my news-reader; knowing and expecting that it would be the announcement of his death.
I didn't always agree with IMonk's articles but his generous spirit, concern for the gospel, desire for a Jesus-shaped life, and willingness to identify bullshit as such made me an avid reader of his over the last few years. The silliness and shallowness rampant in the contemporary Evangelical Church cry out for an adult response (and perhaps occasionally a little adult language). IMonk frequently provided that adult perspective and challenged me to relate to the whole Church through time and across traditions.
InternetMonk.com is re-running classic columns right now and one struck a chord with my recent experiences through the Easter season. At Easter, the oldest Christian Holy-day, it seems appropriate to engage with the traditions of the Church. Even if it's not a usual part of the regular weekly service, Easter Sunday should feature rather more prayer, vigils, reading of Scripture, singing of the many great Easter hymns, proclamation of the Creeds and involvement in the rich liturgical heritage of the Church. Give us depth - one or two Sundays a year, we can handle it!
This classic IMonk column isn't about Easter - but it is about the value found in looking to the traditions of the Church catholic in how we should conduct our worship. I haven't had as much experience with liturgical services - but reading this makes me want to.
Today the Christian year is one of my passions. Advent, Lent, Holy Week, Epiphany, Trinity Sunday, Christ the King, Ascension, Annunciation, Holy Baptism–all of these days teach us the story of Jesus and preach the Gospel to us. Why would we want to neglect this great heritage? Why can’t all Christians see the value in the visual and artistic celebration of the Gospel that is made possible using the Christian year?
Thank you Michael for providing grist for many interesting conversations.
His lord said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.' Matt 25:23
