

David Simon on Baltimore’s Anguish - ekianjo
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/29/david-simon-on-baltimore-s-anguish

======
humanrebar
I don't see the political monoculture mentioned in any analysis about
Baltimore, New York, St. Louis, Detroit, etc. These cities have been basically
one party rule for fifty years (or more). If the police become too brutal or
incentives become perverse, the party is not thrown out of office. If the
mayor or council members are shown to be corrupt, the party is not thrown out
of office. There's no real accountability.

To be clear, I don't think the problem is unique to big cities. Political
monoculture certainly happens in rural areas, but the tragedies out there
(even more extreme poverty, lack of opportunity, population decline, meth
epidemic) aren't seen as acute for whatever reason. I do think the problem is
that, at some level, you can't credibly say "You messed up -- the other party
gets a shot at running things" in much (most?) of the country.

To some degree, the problem is the two-party system. If the district is
liberal (as is the case in Baltimore), there needs to be at least two credible
liberal alternatives. Maybe it's time to consider making room for more
parties, for the benefit of local communities if nothing else.

~~~
mkempe
If we are going to have this debate, I'd like to hear about large American
cities that have been run exclusively by Republicans --not Democrats-- for the
last 50-90 years, and then we can compare corruption levels, crime rates,
institutional racism, etc. (It could be a bit like comparing East and West
Germany before the fall of the Wall. Or North vs South Korea today. Or not.)

edit: for instance, an article in National Review [1] claims the root of the
problem is one particular party's domination of these large cities.

[1] [http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417601/riot-plagued-
ba...](http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417601/riot-plagued-baltimore-
catastrophe-entirely-democratic-partys-own-making-kevin-d)

~~~
humanrebar
> I'd like to hear about large American cities that have been run exclusively
> by Republicans

They don't really exist; the political split in the U.S. is more urban/rural
than red state blue state. The big cities in otherwise red Southern states
like Texas, Louisiana, and Georgia are thoroughly Democratic (though perhaps
in a different flavor than northern Democrats). People that have lived in
those states know that's true. People that haven't lived in those states need
to travel around the country more.

You can find Republican cities in the U.S., but you'd be looking at medium-to-
small cities, depending on where you care to draw the line. And those cities
are either fast-growing (newly sizable) or competitive politically.
[http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/red-
stat...](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/red-state-blue-
city-how-the-urban-rural-divide-is-splitting-america/265686/)

Like I said above, there are bad symptoms in any political monoculture. But
the problems seem to present differently in urban and rural areas for whatever
reason. There are huge problems in rural areas to be sure, like I listed
above. In especially poor rural areas, drug abuse and the poverty trap is on
par with any inner city, if not worse, like I mentioned above.

------
bobwaycott
In which you could learn a thing or two about how "policing" works in
Baltimore. Or, in which you could learn who the other "thugs" are.

Way too many people across the internet think they can accurately and
justifiably levy blame on parents, kids, criminals, communities, rioters,
etc., all the while granting massive, unquestioning benefit-of-the-doubt to
the police. Decades of brutal and unconstitutional policing in Baltimore is
just as much a part of the equation here.

I'd run, too, if I lived in this shit show. I'd riot when the anger, fear,
rage, and hate boiled to the surface after yet another man met his _last day
on earth_ at the hands of the authorities. I wouldn't tell my kids they have
nothing to fear if they just obey the law. I wouldn't tell my spouse they have
nothing to fear if they just comply with the police. I wouldn't feel safe and
secure when I saw a cop. I wouldn't feel comfortable knowing I "have nothing
to hide". I wouldn't judge the guy I see with a rap sheet when I know that rap
sheet was built from arrests by cops who get paid overtime for arrests, who
aren't subjected to any rigorous accountability, who get to invent "probable
cause". I wouldn't sit around smugly thinking those who are victimized by
abuses of power "must have deserved it". I certainly wouldn't dare judge with
ignorant superiority people who live in a shit-hole where drugs and crime are
how one _survives_. I would know the cops can't be trusted--I'd see it every
day of my whole life.

And yet few try to understand having to live like that. They judge from white
skin on comfortable suburban couches and fancy phones in nice neighborhoods
that have not been brutalized by badges for decades.

Understand the way you see and experience life and the world around you has
nothing at all to do with the way life is or even _can be_ for anybody else.
Understand that your experiences in life do not in any way translate to being
_actual, persistent properties of reality everywhere_. Understand life in
middle-class white America, and all the privilege that comes with it and
protects you, doesn't in any way translate to the existence experienced by
others elsewhere. Hell, it might not even translate to the existence of those
in your own neighborhood.

Or, you know, don't bother to understand it. That's your choice. But do the
nation and the victims of these horrid conditions a solid, and just don't
speak about what people who live in areas infested by unaccountable and
tyrannical brutal cops should do when another person they know is arrested
with a high probability of bogus "probable cause". Or charged with fabricated
crimes to serve a political and social agenda. Or beaten and otherwise abused
unnecessarily--but, of course, after the officer has yelled the appropriate
ass-covering phrases that make all the white people think they couldn't
possibly be bullshitting or abusing their power. Or killed. Or all of the
above.

Remember the 60s, when white people saw horrific violence on their TVs, and it
shocked them out of their decades-long stupor and prompted them to get off
their asses, and get into the streets with those who were being brutalized by
badges? They didn't sit back and tell themselves the people on the bridge in
Selma were asking for it. They didn't say the victims must have deserved it.
They didn't excuse the police brutality. It sucks to say it, but that was a
turning point moment that legitimized the civil rights struggle in the
national consciousness in a way that had not been so before. The brutality was
televised, and the people woke up.

In a nation built on and for privilege, shit doesn't change much until those
with privilege stand up.

Another man died at the hands of the police. His life was extinguished by
something they did. He's never going to draw another breath, while those
responsible for his death still breathe. There are people who love him who
will never see him again. Never hold him again. Never hug him. Never kiss him.
Never pat him on the back. Never hear his thoughts.

Our moral compasses are completely fucked when meaningless, inanimate,
material shit being damaged and destroyed ranks as a higher concern more
worthy of conversation and cameras than yet another man's life being taken
with impunity by those with a badge.

~~~
Kaizyn
America was founded on the rule of law and respect for authority. Rioting and
any other violent means are simply inexcusable under any circumstances. We
have non-violent means to redress problems with the political and civil
leadership. These people in Baltimore should be met with overwhelming (and
lethal if necessary) force by the government. If the city is incapable of
restoring order, then the national guard needs to be called in to do the job.

~~~
Singletoned
Surely if America was founded on the rule of law and respect for authority,
they wouldn't have committed treason and overthrown the King?

It would seem to me that America was very much founded on the opposite. A lot
of the constitution seems to be focussed on limiting the power of law, not
limiting the power of the people (the right to bear arms being the clearest
example).

~~~
Kaizyn
One of America's great strengths has always been its respect for authority and
commitment to law and order. The founders of America were also realists and
they knew that governments tend to accrue power when left the opportunity to
do so. Having an armed citizenry serves as a protective measure of last resort
and was based on the model of Switzerland. The intent is not to allow people
to run around shooting people up as a form of protest against lawful
government action; but as a means to protect against unlawful government
tyranny.

~~~
meandthebean
> Having an armed citizenry serves as a protective measure of last resort and
> was based on the model of Switzerland. The intent is not to allow people to
> run around shooting people up as a form of protest against lawful government
> action; but as a means to protect against unlawful government tyranny.

From the article:

> It used to be said — correctly — that the patrolman on the beat on any
> American police force was the last perfect tyranny. Absent a herd of
> reliable witnesses, there were things he could do to deny you your freedom
> or kick your ass that were between him, you, and the street. The smartphone
> with its small, digital camera, is a revolution in civil liberties.

Unlawful government tyranny, in the form of cops doing whatever they want, is
exactly what the riots are about.

------
drawkbox
David Simon on why he created The Wire and set it in Baltimore:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYXNdELqCe4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYXNdELqCe4)

------
bshimmin
I love David Simon's writing (and "The Wire" is the best thing ever to be on
TV, in my opinion), but I was unable to read this article because the
secondary navigation ("Popular on Facebook" ... "Q&A", etc) which kept
swooping in every time I scrolled up drove me utterly insane. The fact that
the actual text was overly large and offset strangely to the right also did
not help.

Why do people have to ruin content in this way?!

~~~
Singletoned
I agree with the first bit, but I use a JS blocker and had no problems reading
it as none of those things happened. You should definitely try one if that
really bothers you.

------
nrao123
David Simon is a national treasure. The Wire had lots of scenes on how metrics
& incentives screwed up Baltimore city. Here is a great scene talking about
metrics/stats from The Wire -
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH_6_8NOfwI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH_6_8NOfwI)

Article also refers to Martin Malley's ambition to be Maryland's governor that
really screwed up the incentives and cooking of the books.

 _" How do you reward cops? Two ways: promotion and cash. That's what rewards
a cop. If you want to pay overtime pay for having police fill the jails with
loitering arrests or simple drug possession or failure to yield, if you want
to spend your municipal treasure rewarding that, well the cop who’s going to
court 7 or 8 days a month — and court is always overtime pay — you're going to
damn near double your salary every month. On the other hand, the guy who
actually goes to his post and investigates who's burglarizing the homes, at
the end of the month maybe he’s made one arrest. It may be the right arrest
and one that makes his post safer, but he's going to court one day and he's
out in two hours. So you fail to reward the cop who actually does police work.
But worse, it’s time to make new sergeants or lieutenants, and so you look at
the computer and say: Who's doing the most work? And they say, man, this guy
had 80 arrests last month, and this other guy’s only got one. Who do you think
gets made sergeant? And then who trains the next generation of cops in how not
to do police work? I’ve just described for you the culture of the Baltimore
police department amid the deluge of the drug war, where actual investigation
goes unrewarded and where rounding up bodies for street dealing, drug
possession, loitering such – the easiest and most self-evident arrests a cop
can make – is nonetheless the path to enlightenment and promotion and some
additional pay. That’s what the drug war built, and that’s what Martin
O’Malley affirmed when he sent so much of inner city Baltimore into the police
wagons on a regular basis.

"When you say, end the drug war, you mean basically decriminalize or stop
enforcing?

Medicalize the problem, decriminalize — I don't need drugs to be declared
legal, but if a Baltimore State’s Attorney told all his assistant state’s
attorneys today, from this moment on, we are not signing overtime slips for
court pay for possession, for simple loitering in a drug-free zone, for
loitering, for failure to obey, we’re not signing slips for that: Nobody gets
paid for that bullshit, go out and do real police work. If that were to
happen, then all at once, the standards for what constitutes a worthy arrest
in Baltimore would significantly improve. Take away the actual incentive to do
bad or useless police work, which is what the drug war has become._

~~~
jokoon
Yeah, legalizing heroin is not going to fix the problem, medicalizing it might
cost a lot, and you won't be able to compete with drugs dealers. Users might
buy from dealers anyway.

If you want to remove the dealer's profits, you have to compete with drug
dealers, but it has to be healthy, you have to treat users and remove the
incentive to use drugs, and it's a very tricky thing to do.

I really don't know how to do this, but it boils down to the same problem of
unemployment and crime. How do you integrate people into a healthy social
model ? Poverty and economic opportunity is still at the root of the problem.

~~~
soylentcola
At the very least, I feel like not throwing someone in jail for being a drug
addict or smalltime dealer would be a good start. Too many people resort to
drugs to escape despair (if only temporarily) or poverty (through working the
only business that seems to be "hiring" in your town). Addressing the root
causes of this is indeed difficult, but you exacerbate the problem when those
same people who need solutions are saddled with criminal records for life.

