Let's completely sidestep and ignore the issue of news release accuracy or completeness by police departments.
Let's talk about money... I think it's a open question as to whether or not it's necessary for so much money and time be spent on informing the public. It seems to me that it should not be so expensive or time consuming to release facts to the public in a timely fashion.
Who would be the target if that was the case? The stereo-typical right-winger is anti-government and pro-cop. The stereo-typical left-winger is pro-government and anti-cop. So neither would be a good target for anti-gov anti-cop literature.
It'd be awesome if the target was the non-stereo-typical people.
Both newer audiences were blinded in several spots and are prevented by group speech to acknowledge some realities. I'm not from the USA, so I see things from a vantage point. I'm not inside the mess.
The book preaches for the identitary leftist movement, historically associated with being oppressed. It capitalizes on the popular notion that police is the cause of their oppression.
The domestication effect narrative induces this audience to think less of the class struggle and more similarly to the right rethoric (less police, less police bureaucracy, less government). They've been long-term blinded. It's so obvious.
Eh, it has its purpose. One of the strongest arguments for keeping the 21-year drinking age is it teaches every generation of youth that the law is neither infallible nor uncircumventible. Learning to suss out submarines is basic media literacy. The form of the pedagogy is almost beside the point.
The book seems to be a cheap cash grab designed to monetize on the "cops are mean and corrupt" rethoric.
It's the modern equivalent of a wallet with the silk screened face of Che Guevara on it. It only serves to boost a domesticated leftist rethoric that is very much under control of the media itself (media does their anti-cop pieces once in a while to appease the pseudo-revolutionary youth).
Although police brutality and it's relation to sensationalist media are totally related, the book does nothing to solve it. It capitalizes on it. If anyone solves it, then the author has no next book to publish.
> the modern equivalent of a wallet with the silk screened face of Che Guevara on it
Sure. And I'd argue someone with that wallet is more likely to be knowledgeable about various elements of American and Latin American sociopolitical history than someone who doesn't. Even if just from reactions they get to it.
> It only serves to boost a domesticated leftist rethoric
In the short run. In the long run it breeds healthy scepticism among the intelligent. (It probably also radicalises some idiots. But I don't really have a systemic solution to stupid people.)
The separation of the left into an intellectual elite and a mass following is largely part of the domestication effect I was talking about.
The mere suggestion of a caste of "the intelligent leftist" is a cultural grenade designed to separate worker unions and create intrigue. I don't buy it. I believe intelligence does not come in a caste system and anyone can achieve it. The left _as a whole_ was domesticated.
I consider myself more of an ombudsman of the left rethoric than an "intelligent". My observations are very simple and very direct. I could explain it without the wallet metaphor (dude, you totally hand-picked that! It's hilarious).
