Tactical Protest

When Playtime is Over.

Tactical Protest

 

Welcome to when playtime is over, our goal is to stimulate thought and conversation, not to convert your perspective. Any persuasion is solely at your discretion and deliberation. For your consideration, we would like to offer Tactical Protest and as always for those who are easily offended emotions will not be needed so please before entering check your feelings at the door.

 Objective Campaign

The intent and purpose of protest are to demonstrate the objection, frustration, and dissatisfaction of circumstances that have been denied redress which can no longer persist without adjustment or change. Civilizations have been toppled over disregard for the people’s protest of conditions that will not be tolerated. Protest can be stifled but eventually, it resurfaces and overcomes the suppression of the people’s will. History always repeats itself in this regard and change prevails or extinction occurs. 

The effect and method of protest vary in its impact according to the extent of the outrage or protest and the ramification of its effect to force change. The passage of time has an influence on the efficiency of the protest methods used to reach a settlement of any such grievances. The more widespread the objection, the higher the expectations for change are, and the more likely a revolutionary demand emerges that requires radical adjustments to the system to be implemented according to the people’s will and acceptability. 

The method of the specific changes ultimate purpose and other expressions of frustration should not be confused or used to dilute it by the actions used to achieve that change. Radical responses have erupted during protests where force has been met with force. Peaceful protest has also been met with force. The circumstances under which protest is conducted must be focused and flexible to maximize its effectiveness while minimizing the harm to the protesters being suppressed by this force.

Harmful exposure to protestors should be minimized and is equally as important as the cause. Perhaps with the societal climate changing, a new political administration settling in, and the Covid virus still lurking it may be time to use more strategic, effective, and conciliatory tactics conducive to the desired change then the outcomes can be more attainable. This is not to suggest not to keep the pressure on or lessen the expectations but to just go about achieving objectives differently to more efficiently galvanize resources across a spectrum of solutions and support.

Any protest should consolidate active and passive support to not alienate resources or allies that can be an asset supporting change or at the very least not standing in opposition to it. The total Black population is roughly 48 million or 14.7 percent of the total U. S. population of 328 million leaving approximately 280 million people that are other than black. With 67 percent estimated at some point to support racial equality, it is clear that an additional 52.3 percent (171 million) would be helpful.

Taking it to the streets with bullhorns had its place in the past and may still contain a level of effectiveness. However, today a precise focus combined with efficient use of human resources applying technology can disseminate messaging and informational exchanges beyond physical opposition to gain more of an advantage. More modern tactics can resolve some major concerns and limit the negative impact to protesters, the alienation of allies, and the alternative actions or narratives levied against the protestors. Protest tactics, methods, and ideologies need to be updated; surgical precision not blunt force is needed. It is not the skill of the sword but the skill of the swordsman that directs the blows.

Destruction is an emotional response to frustration that is not equivalent to passion or progress. It undermines the success of legitimate efforts and squanders opportunities for meaningful effort, resolution, and progress. The objective is to facilitate focused disruption and change without random destruction or ill-fated confrontation. A tactical advantage has the purpose of engagement with a minimal footprint or target but maximum effect.

Inflicting disruption and affecting changes without being subject to retribution as well as resisting dispensing collateral damage to innocent parties not involved in the engagement is the goal. Specific tactics can define most responses by manipulative design thereby aligning the response with the purpose of the tactics while working to position the objective for success. Success can often be attainable without conflict when the opposition’s energy is converted or depleted to the benefit of the protest objective. You cannot lose when causing methodical attrition to the opposition unless by surrender.

Conflict is always an option but becomes exhausting and depleting when recklessly deployed as a default reaction. It should be the last resort even when conflict is the first chosen action. This is not a doctrine of non-violence but a perspective of principle to not become or commit the very oppression we are protesting against. It only justifies their response, fear, and treatment of us forming a perspective contrary to change while enforcing resistance. Resistance needs to be weakened and not fortified.

It serves no meaningful purpose to destroy or loot except to indiscriminately inflict pain upon someone who has not harmed us directly or who may be sympathetic to the objective of the protest. Protest awry presents the opportunity to express anger, emotions, or repressed personal vendettas by offering an outlet under the disguise and protection of collective outrage for the cause. The business of protest is not personal it is collective, the collective objective is primary and it will provide some resolution for many of the personal vendettas. 

Destruction for the therapeutic purpose of soothing angry feelings or emotional outburst are not practical or changing any reality is mostly futile without focused goals and achievement. Being under the influence of a mob mentality or raging emotions undermines the collective purpose of tactically maneuvering to accomplish our stated objectives and changes. Avoiding compromise by self-imposed distractions or succumbing to emotions is essential in executing a strategy for change. Our anger turned inward or against us is on us and counter-productive.

Emotional intoxication creates an impairment to clear thinking and promotes regrettable actions alienating allies and support for our cause. Regression into our deferred pain or support from emotional fervor prolongs our condition. As the past has consistently proven anger subsides with time and expression which makes it unsustainable and unreliable motivation to propel protest or change. 

Pent-up emotional frustrations must be controlled, transformed, and refocused for the sustainable strength and intensity of any protest. The mind must be engaged, not the emotions, for logical actions and sustainability of intent. The insanity of our same approach without results is evidence of itself that we have traveled this road many times before to find ourselves on the same road again. It is past due time to change approaches for perhaps a different result other than being angry, stubborn to self-examination, or prone to destructive behavior.  

Confrontation is the lowest level of persuasive negotiation or communication with the greater force usually dictating the terms and conditions over the lesser force. Overcoming a greater force or power does not involve direct altercation but a strategic and analytical negation of their advantage. Primitive expressions of anger acted out from past pain are counter-productive to future gains.  Anger disregards intellectual pursuit and persuasion surrendering to and conceding an inability to reason or debate our objective convincingly. Commitment finds a way to achievement by not succumbing to surrender or outburst when faced with obstacles but engages adaptation.  

The disciplined and foundational principals of our strategy has to remain firm in its conviction but also flexible in its focused execution to sustain the expansion of our influence and support the acceptance of our objective. The education and cultivation of our base require that they be informed of the objective as well as the method of achieving it. Their determination, resources, talents, and skills when efficiently deployed will effectively optimize their contribution to the collective objective. 

The methods used should be surgical and fluid in dissecting the obstacles to the objective’s realization. When the methods and techniques are organized and unified the impact can be certainly predictable and quantified. When we come to do serious business then keep it strictly business. Doing business that has tangible results with measurable outcomes has to be structured by expressed policies and concessions aligned with our agenda.

Appeal to one political party or ideology has historically failed, resulting in bouncing from one extreme to the other never achieving the wholesale changes sought. More realistically, it has led to being conquered by the division of our differences and subjective ambitions instead of unified by our commonality of interest and objective. This division has no viable focus, momentum, or process to make demands much less change.

The insanity of the same old protest tactics has yielded glacier changes considering the last 60 years of progress since the bullhorn and slogans that rhyme has formed the focal point of social justice protest. That is not to discredit the efforts and accomplishments of those who have gotten us to this frontier. It is to suggest that to fully benefit from these unprecedented times by embracing tactics conducive to current times and public consciousness, we can then avoid unnecessarily repeating the same futile cycle where destruction overshadows progress. Perceptions remains tainted (theirs and ours), assurances hollow, and equality still elusive. 

A multidimensional approach must be utilized attacking the systems and perpetrators of injustice as well as those who would align themselves to justify or conceal institutional and societal violations. Political and legislative recourse is the most pervasive and effective way to isolate and identify systemic injustices universally to punitively and economically persuade or penalize transgressions and transgressors alike.

It is imperative to use all those who would align themselves with our objective of equality and fairness to address both major political parties to propose, pledge, and produce programs, legislation, and penalties. The precise agreed upon procedural implementation and application should be transparent and obvious. Changes to existing structures in violation must be urgently undertaken and remedied. Given the opportunity to honor any assurances, visibly effective actions would be the only acceptable verification.

Our courtship must be accompanied by this bouquet as well as by any other suitors who would seek favor with us. Since beggars have never been choosers, for us to have a choice we must develop other options to empower our interest without others permission or compliance. Make it necessary and in their best interest to create a coalition with us essential to their own success demonstrated by their actions seeking and validating our trust.

Political and economic prowess is fundamental to being respected as a force to be reckoned with and afforded the same first-class citizenship considerations as any other group. A major cohesive political initiative is needed to consolidate a coalition of grievances to remedy historical and systematic discriminations. A redress inclusive of our grievances and interest as well as those who have been marginalized within the diversity of our ranks. 

While political influence and legislative reform are the most pervasive and effective methods, economic protest is the most immediate and convincing consideration to facilitate change. Mutual goals, shared results, cultural awareness, and systematic bias can all be altered by the bottom line. Maximum strength can be derived from the imposing of strategies that impact and weaken the financial interests of those in opposition. Let our spending do the heavy lifting against immovable obstacles and damaging objectives.  Money penetrates many adverse resolves.

Preparing, educating, and directing our base in our preferred way of resistance or persuasion is the most impactful initiative. Financial withdrawal puts us at no physical risk, allows us to remain lawfully blameless, and is an exercise in our spending discretion that can be heard without ever being seen but felt. It is called discretionary spending and it is our prerogative.

The tactical concentration of resources and the creative application of proven techniques reversed engineered which have been effectively used against us can be effective for use by us. Hostage negotiators seek to humanize hostages to captors by deflecting their ideology making them reluctant to do harm to the hostages. The most prevalent of which is self-identifying with the hostages and reflecting their similarities to elicit empathy from the captors. They must be made to see themselves in you or see the similarities of you in themselves.

Lima syndrome techniques can be used effectively towards those who are not hopelessly entrenched in their ideology and position to encourage sympathy for those whom they have wronged or are being wronged. Their injustice is their shame which they feel compelled to resolve along civilized impulses of compassion. The same technique can be used for reverse social engineering to reject superiority and to instill a more socially compassionate affinity for equality.

Conversion of the ideologies and perspectives of people must hold a greater enticement to change old thoughts rather than to adhere to them. First disproving those antiquated beliefs then embracing the voluntary integration to their identity a genuine acceptance of change. Their hurtful actions becoming vile, distasteful, and regrettable to themselves.

Protest not aligned with core beliefs results in resistance as a survival mechanism as if they were personally attacked. This personal attack is then internally adapted to reconcile those core beliefs to be justification for resistant thoughts and actions. Any require change has to be a self-revelation where an acceptance or realization transforms those actions and attitudes to a different set of core beliefs aligned with a new perspective.

The concept of addition by subtraction seems counter-intuitive, but much can be gained by what is taken away. It is far more difficult to remove a thought and replace it than it is to place it there in the beginning. In this regard, the supply chain must be disrupted or broken on both sides of the indoctrination of inferiority and superiority complexes. The spread of either must be affected by the prevention of the ratio of people who learn, are taught, display, or are made to feel either.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Repetition and reinforcement of these concepts lead to their prevalence and when reversed can lead to these concepts being rejected. Time and patience utilizing reverse-engineering of the propagation of these concepts where there then becomes an overwhelming presence of the desired one and the absence of the unwanted one leads to the extinction of the unwanted behavior. Like potty training of sorts, it instills a level of conditioning that is socially acceptable, compelling, and enduring. 

Aside from the many psychological and behavioral modification techniques available, procedural adjustments can be similarly effective on institutional and structural entities. The adjustments can be implemented when an understanding of their protocols, mandates, and operations are utilized. The entities are entirely comprised of people who operate those systems and are either governed by, restricted by, or compelled by some parameter of conduct or procedural mandate.

Intimate knowledge and understanding of these parameters can nullify, neutralize, restrain, or mobilize their resources. Conflict is short-sighted when the heavy lifting can be done by others for our purpose. For example, resources can be utilized for our protection or against us depending on how we maneuver their interpretation of our intent. Let their muscle be in support of our intent and against any known antagonist intent. Like the national guard for school desegregation in the sixties.

To lessen the possibility of conflict and be equally effective a massive crowd assembled in one place without a specific agenda for their collective assembly is not tactical or practical when our assembly results in their assembly as a stronger more fortified consolidated force. Peaceful assembly locations should be carefully chosen and agendas precisely directed and fully understood with contingency plans against conduct that clearly undermines our purpose. There have to be no tolerances for egos, flexing, insults, emotions, or agent provocateurs just our objectives and goals. 

Any conduct while assembled under our flag reveals whether you are with us or for yourself in which case this unwanted activity damages our purpose. Our protest must occupy the high ground morally, intellectually, and geographically to move separately but in coordination while converging collectively into a specific purpose and method to achieve that purpose. Disbursement into smaller crowds that spread resources and divide commands demonstrating clear peaceful intentions minimizes herd mentality on both sides and our communication can become more sustainable and direct.

If a breakdown should then occur it would be isolated to that one location and not into collective chaos as when there is one massive assembly. At peaceful assemblies, law enforcement has to be present in response to our presence as a paid captive audience so instead of yelling, insulting, or confronting them why not try to convert them or at least salvage the ones who may find themselves marginalized within their own ranks as well as sympathetic to our protest and objective. 

It is a marketing opportunity since they cannot leave and exposure to our ideology cannot be avoided. This time and opportunity can be used for them to hear or see our message and possibly promote it in places where we cannot. By the same measure, the key is not conflict but expense. The more they stand there the larger the expenditure becomes until it becomes too much on the city budget and city officials will want to negotiate a resolution because law enforcement will also complain and protest about their own conditions and attrition. It will then become a matter of wasted resources and weakened morale. 

Law enforcement, city officials, and city council can be required to meet with the public at any number of safe environments where we can put a name and face with a promise or proposed action. The police department is always open to receive complaints and must investigate them and give a disposition to the submitting complainants. Churches, schools, community centers, and government facilities can all be utilized for community events and meetings. If they can’t come to us then we can always peacefully assemble and go to them. Systems and resources are always susceptible to being overwhelmed.

Law enforcement reform starts with the hiring practices of who they put into the uniform, their interaction and familiarity with the culture of the community they serve, avoidance of bias deployment of selective enforcement throughout the community, a better system of internal and public accountability, and assurances that reflect departments and specialized units ratios align with the community demographics. Discretion encouraged where minor offenses are used to build goodwill and correction instead of revenue and criminal intent. 

Removing the overseer, occupying force, and adversarial culture and mentality of law enforcement to be above the people they serve is crucial to better policing. Changing the officer’s expectations within the department to be less numerically driven as the basis for the court system, jails, and general fund revenue. Additionally, training needs to be more directed at mental and psychological options for compliance, de-escalation, and control under fearful or stressful situations that simulate reality. Certainly, a different type of training and increased training is in order.

Engaging the political and legal process at the municipal, county, and state level to change the city charters, county enforcement, and state laws mandating more accountability and transparency removes many abuses. The other component to remove abuses is to remove those who obstruct or violate the intent or equal application of the law. City Charters can make the Police Chief accountable to the public and not the mayor.  The law is full of remedies that are not currently aligned with the will of the people.

The political structure of this country is established upon majority rule even if that majority is by one. The path forward seems clear to keep that which has served us well in the past, embrace that which is revealing itself to be effective moving forward, and discard that which has not produced the desired results. The use of technology, emails, social media, and the like that can be consolidated at the push of send is a powerful tool to disseminate protocols, actions, and objectives. Information is the new currency and shared education is the manner of transport to expose the iniquities of histories and the needed corrections now and in the future for advancement. 

The objective must be exalted above the method of objection, the message superseding the messenger, and the change sustained beyond the sacrifices made. All those concerned are welcome to be agents of change under a new directive that lessens harm to the integrity of our concerns. We must practice policy-driven professional protest, not random emotional exhibitions of extortion. Some of the methods and techniques available are time-sensitive and subject to subversion as there are forces actively attempting to legislate and criminalize certain actions to abolish or lessen their use and effectiveness making it more difficult to protest without retribution and retaliation.

These laws designed as countermeasures to suppress voting and protest have been announced or can be anticipated which development and implementation of effective alternative methods must be employed which are impervious to being undermined. Force is used for revolution which is not reasonable since our goal is change and not the overthrow of the government which an attempt was made on January 6, 2021 on the Capitol by anarchist hell-bent on suppression of our objectives and the incoming administration.

Force in the form of civil unrest and civil disobedience as it is termed has minimal effect being localized at best and a squander of human resources at worst. Using revolution employing force and confrontation, the tools of the butcher, generates casualties and opposition with the need to maintain coerced compliance. Evolution is the tools of the master akin to chess outmaneuvering the opposition manipulating their move by intellect and persuasion to anticipate their move and checkmate them with their contribution.

We are not equipped for revolution by force and should not be so inclined when the results produced moves us farther away from our goals. The times are ideally suited for evolution with the circumstances ripe with the proper strategic approach. The surgical attainment of our prime objectives should aspire to minimal exposure and maximum benefit, with that in mind adaptation and progression does not have to be glacier but in the context of history it will take some time and sustained effort.         

To survey the factual landscape and assess the most effective course of action the first thing we must do is control our emotions and remain reasonable about the sequence and scope of our goals. We can not succumb to the emotional compulsion to express our frustrations through destructive methods that yield only a release of anger but limited results. We must then logically analyze the playbook being used against us for vulnerabilities and deficiencies. Many have historically been the same but the support has waned significantly exaggerating the weaknesses exposing new paths to change. Just as their ideological numbers have weakened, ours have been strengthened forging overt empathy and allegiances towards justice for us.

Many voices other than our own cry out in unison with ours as well as a significant number of people who should not be alienated or excluded from their contribution to the objective. For example, there are those who have aged out of protest in the streets who have significant contribution that they could make if an avenue for their participation was available which remained within their capabilities. The same holds true for adolescents who can contribute in their own particular way or those who would need to remain anonymous for their own preservation but would love to contribute if provided a way.      

The racist or conservative value ideology has to be exposed for what it is and the lack of inclusion of some who support it not realizing that they are not included except for achieving a goal which will discard them. Their conservatism is rooted in the past which does not include alternative sexualities, gender roles not male dominated, inter-racial relationships, immigrants who visually do not look white, and the list goes on. These are the divisions and vulnerabilities which need to be exposed. The 2020 election and the strategy utilized by Stacey Abrams and many others are symbolic of the horizontal attack on a vertical establishment. The legs can be taken out to make the head fall.

The divide and conquer tactics which have been so effective against us and social intimidation used to sustain this status of superiority can now be used as never before to topple the system of discrimination cutting off its nutrients cultivating change for its own survival or wither isolated from the acceptability. The implosion of maintaining their discriminator ideology will collapse when starved. The pen being mightier than the sword and the briefcase more effective than muscle can use their momentum against their purposes when redirected for our purposes.     

The prototype is to build a horizontal coalition targeting as many local gatekeepers as possible from the school boards to city council from the infrastructure which govern them by vote, city charters, or other legislation which either changes their policy and functions or promote the compromise needed for our redress. The latest census report does not accurately reflect the shifting demographics of those by their designation whose interest would more closely align with our objectives for their benefit. The number of those who would oppose or actively resist have diminished when put into the context of racial and economic oppression which comparatively suppresses their prosperity as well.

The focus on the horizontal social foundation is where the legal and meat on the bones changes will be more pervasively and intensively affected at the grass root level producing new socio-economic norms not constricted by race, gender, or discrimination. It would be regrettable to not fully benefit from this unprecedented time of dimensional shift of ideologies, theirs and ours, to confront this plague of racism which has persisted for centuries because they long for the past struck in a time long gone and we refuse to update our strategy conducive to meaningful change.      

There was civil unrest under the previous administration as clashes of ideology and practice but that most certainly seems not to be the case with the Biden-Harris administration so why would the method of protest be the same for friend and foe. They deserve a chance to benefit us from the highest levels as they have pledged without being encumbered by behavior which undermines their efforts and strengthen the opposition. By demonstration of their actions and those appointed by them, they have demonstrated more willingness toward fairness then we have been recently accustomed to, so lets do our business while they do their business both unencumbered by the other but also in support and coordination towards a just objective.

We can use all the help we can get and can not afford to squander our allies or resources by our emotional behavior or lack of logical strategy. Many of these protest are in response to the lost of life of individuals whose family gets constantly bombarded with reminders of their lost. They deserve a closure and resolution reflective of the pain they endure and provide the progress that can be the only thing to minimize their lost and provide some degree of comfort.

So first and foremost lets not get too wrapped up in our anger to exacerbate their pain without honoring the progression needed as a result of THEIR lost. We must embrace their wellbeing and make sure they are provided for while we claim our actions are on their behalf without honoring their wishes or embracing their condition. Remember it is about their families as well as protest, collectively, not the us individually releasing anger. United we stand erect consolidated in purpose and with the integrity of our convictions to demonstrate that which we demand.

The teachings of Sun Tzu or the Five Rings present conceptual tactics of principle and the study of Hannibal from Carthage along with Shaka Zulu reveals helpful strategic maneuvering of resources and positioning. These learnings are military tactics which will prove effective when elevated and applied to peaceful thought processes guiding social movements whose ideology is adapted to reflect the logical application of their concepts not to create war but to create evolution and progression. They are designed to minimize conflict and self-inflicted collateral damage while ensuring success and subduing the opposition.                

The question is will we put an end to some of this nonsense or wait for others who have less incentive?

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Christianity Weaponized

When Playtime is Over.

Christianity Weaponized 

 

Welcome to when playtime is over, our goal is to stimulate thought and conversation, not to convert your perspective. Any persuasion is solely at your discretion and deliberation. For your consideration, we would like to offer Christianity Weaponized and as always for those who are easily offended emotions will not be needed so please before entering check your feelings at the door.

 Without Question

In the movie, “The Book of Eli”, starring Denzel Washington, his character was the blind guardian of the Holy Bible. The Holy Bible and its teachings were in danger of extinction and were obsessively sought after by the evil antagonist, Carnegie. Carnegie believed that the power of the book rested in its power to control the hearts and minds of the people.

Ultimately, he believed that the possessor would have great power over the people. The belief of the people in the word of this book, the book’s implied integrity, and the assumed authenticity of the book could be exploited to control them, deceive them, and make them obedient by their dedicated worship. When the people believed then their belief would be susceptible to engineer justifications and accept otherwise unreasonable assumptions or conditions by a mysterious mandate from an invisible deity who required obedience and would be unquestionable.

The devoted religious stipulations would concede complete submission and worship.  It would as a foregone supposition be reinforced by parents, family, culture, community, and sometimes country. It is an indoctrination that integrates with one’s identity and requires the compliance of one’s actions.

I have been conflicted by this topic for quite some time and have tried to avoid it, but it keeps coming back compelling me to ask the questions that I have pondered to further reconcile my indoctrination with my acquired knowledge. Therein lies the dilemma, do I follow my upbringing of what I was conditioned to believe or follow my discoveries that challenge the validity of that acceptance. Can two things be true that are diametrically in conflict on many levels and any attempt to merge them still leaves distance and inconsistencies that only raises more questions? What I was raised to believe from a child was not my choice and maybe not even my people’s choice for them to accept and teach but it was all they knew.

Having studied and researched religion and history, I can’t help but venture into uncomfortable territory in search of the truth. I seek the truth by definitively deciphering religion without any emotional influence or feeling any betrayal of my ancestral conditioning. Deductive reasoning leaves me even more baffled. What I was taught, I was taught in love, the best “knowledge” available to them at the time, and a belief down to their DNA instilling obedience to and worship of the Lord. It is no doubt that perpetuated beliefs in the devil, prayer, and God has kept people in submission acquiescing to enduring hardships as a test of faith. 

This being the will of the Lord even if it is in direct opposition to his very “attributed” words and teachings. The concept keeps you in constant subservient despair for a reward to come after death although no one has verified or bore witness to this “glory” called the afterlife of judgment and salvation. I guess that is why they call it belief in faith. In theory, you would remain in limbo in some dimension until judgment day which by our known knowledge includes every human being ever born or at least since the time of Jesus. That would be an astronomical number of people awaiting judgment day at the same time. Imagine the logistics of processing all those souls at the same time and keeping the records accurate but that is the power of God or your qualifying explanation which I shall not dare question.

In the movie, Eli was blind yet he navigated the world and defended himself without any obvious limitation, seemingly having sight and being guided by the vision of faith. That single purpose vision enabled him to “blindly” commit to the deliverance of the book which was physically lost to him but intricately fused in his mind and psyche through constant exposure and relentless repetition. His existence, adherence to the words of the Bible, and deliverance of that word to the masses consumed him until his death, even having caused his death. So strong was his belief in the word and his determination to deliver the word that he willingly died for it, accepting that complete sacrifice may be required.

That is a possibility when you are a true believer, knowing that no suffering is too great or too long to satisfy the unquestioned wisdom of God, or to submit to the evil of Man by turning the other cheek.  Despite this, even the Lord had a need for warriors such as Joshua but we the meek shall inherit the world through our suffering. Logically and physically turning the other cheek would conceivably end with you having two swollen and sore cheeks while waiting for them to tire of slapping you, but this is what is required by God, for the love of God, and love of your brothers or sisters. Dare not raise up against someone who is harming you, let the Lord handle it; but what about their accountability for the love of you and their obedience to God?

Would not God deal with the one in violation instead of demanding the obedient suffer under his “protection”? The old testament eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth is to be forsaken for the new testament of turn the other cheek and walk the extra mile. When God tires of nonsense then his wrath is felt to smite you but when you tire just suck it up.  That is the disadvantage of not being the Lord our God. Remember vengeance be it the Lord’s.

Since the beginning of mankind or as I prefer humanity, that body of life that demonstrates kindness, mercy, and compassion that is uniquely displayed only by humans there has been questionable behavior towards others and often times decreed by religion in the name of God. Murder, genocide, biblical curses, sufferings, and slavery are prevalent in “Christian” teachings and tolerances while committed for the glory of God?

Not only is it throughout history it is in the book. It continues to be practiced and justified by those in strict obedience and adherence to the Bible and their “Christian” faith of self-declared believers and overseers. If that sounds horrible perhaps this is even worse as the two-edged sword efficiently cuts sharply in both directions, those who are directed by it and those who have it directed against them. Just as practicing “Christianity” allows them to do it, practicing the same “Christianity” demands that you accept it.

It is recommended that you pray on it regarding any injustice and toss it up to the Lord for review and consideration. You can even assemble your warriors, prayer warriors that is, and submit a complaint to heavenly HR for review and a divine sign will be notifying you regarding your submission. Prayer may take time as the system has not been updated in thousands of years and is believed to have quite a backlog. Prayer can be defined as a solemn request for help or expression of gratitude requiring trust and belief in a controlling power greater than yourself to gain favor or to acknowledge favor received but always from a position below best expressed humbly from your knees. A humble servant who remains in no position to demand or even timely expect, only to obediently request.

The Lord is never late but right on time and may not be there when you want him but will be there when you need him. If it weren’t for it being the Lord, these terms of engagement would most likely have to be renegotiated to more reflect the price you pay for the services rendered. We all know that the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was making you think he didn’t exist but what if the greatest trick the Christians pulled was making you think he did exist? This is not to be blasphemous but to explore alternative concepts that may just strengthen our belief and resolve in “Christianity” and I assume we can all stand to have our beliefs be more fully discussed, accepted, and understood without fear that they will be shaken or changed.

If we are true to our beliefs then our beliefs will not be diminished but increased and I have no intent or purpose to change your beliefs lacking the power or will to do so but just request your assistance in clarification of mine. The truth can always stand examination to verify that it is the truth, so fear not but as I said it was uncomfortable for me, so I acknowledge that it may be uncomfortable for you as well. Surely we can move forward to explore not our belief or our right to believe in what we choose but my point about it.

Our beliefs in life cannot be too fragile to forbid discussion even if that discussion is challenging or an opposing viewpoint. My viewpoint is not opposing but our conviction should not be proven to be fleeting or too weak to process additional knowledge or opinions. This is not about opinion and definitely not about mine but a conversation devoid of emotions and sacrilegious safeguards that discourages historical insight. This leaves religious interpretations for our own discretions. Our religious interpretations are our business alone but let us explore some things that we all know and some things that we may not all know to more fully understand the context of my point. Just as our “Christianity “ cannot be contested so is it with my point because it is not my declaration of opinion but the expression of historical fact.

Notwithstanding, the time before the written word, the foundation of Christianity, the veracity or content of its teachings, the existence of its principal players, or the events and accounts therein because it is immaterial to my point. It is immaterial to my point, but my point may bring about our further examination of those very concerns. Etymology is the study of the origins and true meaning of words which are the building blocks of language. Time brings about evolution in the usage and meaning of certain words creating and distorting understanding of these words over time. Before the time of the written word, reliability of word of mouth was subjected to he say she say accuracy and the limitations of descriptions by the available vocabulary. What an ancient might have described as a fire-belching creature we may very well call a UFO today or aircraft.

There was no direct knowledge, consistency of acceptance, or rational accounts of much of the bible including the Garden of Eden, Jesus life, the many books not included in the bible, and God himself for the question of how do we truly know aside from belief alone and acceptance of that which “has been written”.

The accepted depiction of Jesus is blasphemous in its presentation and altered over time to reflect the characteristics of the population of the people it influenced, even the existence of a variety of depictions of Jesus appearance among other non-white nationalities. Furthermore, centuries had passed without a portrayal of Jesus revealing his actual physical characteristics because it was forbidden. Finally, a composite portrait was commissioned and introduced called the Head of Christ by Warner Sallman in 1940 which is widely accepted and a portrait of Jesus. So complete is this heresy that just ask any child the color of Jesus and they will tell you white.

This portrait was an extension of Eugenics to convey Christ with a halo and angelic Caucasian features as an imaged to be worshipped and an implication that God is white, and whites are Jesus like to be elevated above all races. The two-edged sword of superiority and inferiority psychologically and culturally established an engineered justification of systemic racism and a race-based hierarchy in society.

It is a deformed interpretation. The Bible does not remotely give this depiction nor does the geological population of historical accuracy, yet this is still the standard that is accepted as open propaganda. It raises the question that what else might there be that are the psychological and cultural collusions unknowingly and widely tolerated or accepted. Glad you asked.

The emphasis on avoiding confusion starts at points that are not open to interpretation or word of mouth but documented in a time frame that is reliable now and well established in language still in use today. The documentation has put forth its own concentrated rationale and objective to influence and implement philosophies and principles so comprehensively that they still impact society, cultures, and institutions today. Their promotion is so pervasive that it might leave you questioning if your beliefs are chosen or embedded as a matter of survival and manipulation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The insinuations and meanings are not like visions where the totality of sight consists of the voids being filled in by assumptions, these declarations of law and practice left no uncertainty of how they were to be viewed and applied. This creates a context for some to overvalue themselves in a very complimentary and flattering delusional image while forcing others to cling to oppressive obedience. It is misery laden with the nightmarish despair of beliefs still waiting for permission while conforming to a context that devalues our humanity by our own actions and acceptance despite any words of protest. Praying for the burden to be removed instead of psychologically disrobing our self from the burden that consumes us by unconditional acceptance and pure design.

Let the distortions begin steeped into laws based upon biases, mutilated revisionist history of absolution and false achievement, forced faith, and unjustifiable hope disguised as belief. Keep in mind that we do not have time to go back farther or expand beyond that which is sufficient for this contemporary discussion. There are key distinctions in the development of Christianity that popularized it and the manipulations of it which were weaponized for oppressive purposes. Translations that shaped or obscured some essence of the Bible in favor of interpretations consistent with particular objectives of various rulers and nations that furthered the objective of devotion without question.

Constantine The Great Nicea Council, Theodosius Decree, King James I Bible, and The Black Code are a few examples of who was more influential on Roman Flavian Christianity than what the actual teachings were. Consequently, the teachings were more tailored to an agenda than to the core of biblical teachings. It was then forced upon those who would resist these Titus manipulations by either incorporating some of their beliefs or flat out murdering them. Conversion to Christianity was often a life-saving measure, your own life. Historically Christianity is a religion of conquering from a personal level to a national level.

Historically Christianity has been used to persecute the Jews and to create distance from Christianity’s association to Judaism and establish itself as the preeminent religion. Constantine permitted Christianity to be recognized as a legitimate religion changing its believers from being persecuted to protected in Roman society.

Theodosius later made Christianity the only religion of the Roman Empire but incorporated other beliefs to solidify believers where Constantine had solidified what was to be believed in the Nicea Council. Jews who attempted to prevent conversion were sometimes burned alive. Forced baptisms and conversions were commonplace. Burning and destroying knowledge of anything contrary to this time or belief when something else was believed or worshiped occurred.

Christianity was used to justify and establish the racial superiority of white Europeans over all others. It was further expanded to the new world to institute colonialism and slavery as a moral duty to subdue, exploit, and exterminate dark-skinned people on religious grounds.

King James I, furthered his narcissism under royal absolution and slave trade activities by his association with the bible. Christian faith and belief have long been used to oppress targeted populations while simultaneously justifying evil treatment by religious doctrine and often accompanying legislation.

Black Codes rooted in colonialism, patriotism, and Christianity after the civil war were specifically created and imposed in support of slavery validating the despicable treatment of blacks under the cloak of Christian beliefs. The civil war was supposedly in part to abolish slavery but afterward, this code was pervasive to maintain the discount of white supremacy.

It was the predecessor to Jim Crow and an effort to maintain a pseudo system of slavery and indentured servitude. Today’s vigilante armed militias are an extension of black code enforcement. They are many times your most ardent believers of Christianity and also the most passionate demonstrators of racism while genuinely denying being racist by virtue of their Christian faith. They are often one and the same going hand in hand, being a proud Christian and a staunch racist. Not stated to offend anyone but if the shoe fits, if not it is not your shoe.

Revisionist history cannot conceal how the indoctrination of Christianity which is distinct from Christian principles has and is still being used to promote and justify oppression as well as injustices by some oblivious of their tarnished indoctrination’s origin and purpose. Dred Scott by law made it your Christian duty to return slaves and oppose their freedom giving birth to modern-day law enforcement injustices. The population control was two-fold on what should be done and what cannot be done under Christian principles.

Being raised under Christian principles had very different meanings based on race and class, it was not about religion but the manipulation and weaponizing of our beliefs. These beliefs have been so contorted and perverted that the only choice we have is blind faith or a humanity that will not allow us to practice this brand of Christianity. The salvation of our soul was not the goal. The goal was and has been the complete indoctrination of our minds to defy humanity and logic by intrinsically embedding programming so as to be beyond reproach, change, reasoning, or questioning. It becomes fundamental to our existence and identity which otherwise would require us to fully denounce one’s self, which sounds a lot like white privilege denial.

The presumptions of Christianity as practiced today might leave future and more advanced civilizations that may come after this one has destroyed itself to look back on the primitive and pagan worshipping rituals asserted to be in accordance with a belief that was wholly practiced outside the doctrines of that belief.

Failing to grasp a truth beyond our ill-fated conditioned upbringing and refusing to understand that believing does not make it true just as disbelieving does not make it false. Maybe the rituals of Christianity began in the Garden of Eden with the tree of knowledge. It was forbidden to have certain knowledge from the tree which could have been the subconscious mind as the source of that knowledge.

The subconscious mind is the only thing that can be so fundamentally controlled to produce the total belief and obedience required of the conscious mind. To believe without confirmation through repetition and constant reinforcement. The confirmation of Christianity is the worship and belief in it and that God is real and his wisdom absolute but many times baffling.

So, in the end, it is the unquestioned belief that brings salvation and eternal reward, the refusal to stray from that belief, and the rejection of any other belief is how this belief evolved. Otherwise conditioned differently, we would be believing wholeheartedly in a different belief. There are many beliefs and everybody can’t be right somebody has to be wrong but God’s word altered to the whim of man or powers in vogue is the worship of those entities and not God. Maybe that is why faith is required without validation. This not to slam Christianity just the manipulation of it disguised as glory to God, remembering to keep the faith.

Perhaps what is should not have been, what should have been wasn’t, and what could have been will never be was a quote I heard as a young man that sums up a lot. The judgment day for the sins of mankind both individually and collectively cannot be pleasing to God despite repenting on our death bed. The atrocities committed in his name, the adherence to his law mangled, and the complicity of those who knuckled under for their own prosperity and convenience contributed to the perversion of his glory.

God would not dare be associated with some of this nonsense executed in his name and the misleading of those genuinely seeking his knowledge and comfort. Christianity teaches suffering while those who impose it prosper. If you be a child of God imagine your father who vows to protect you then let unconscionable acts be committed against you, what wisdom or benefit would that be? By inquiring and seeking knowledge without restriction but to exhaustion enables us to expose deceptions and illuminate truth. Conflicted by what we are and what we should be or should have been becoming clearer with research and inspection and not by the simple acceptance of that is just how we were conditioned. It is acceptance in the knowledge that is required.

Many wars are predicated on ideology and religious differences where one side adamantly declares their right to practice theirs while denying the other the same freedom to practice the one of their choosing. Death, forced baptisms, and repressive conversions should not be the tools of religion.  Hitler’s Aryan race propaganda came from America’s Jim Crow which was based on religious teachings and eugenics.

He was only practicing what America practiced but the hypocritical home of the free and land of the brave must have felt Americans are the only ones who could commit such atrocities and righteous indignation claiming racial superiority. America was somehow compelled to galvanize to stop Hitler even using blacks in the process but was not compelled to discontinue the heinous acts and horrendous treatment of blacks in America or racial superiority declarations.

Religious justification for slavery has survived for over four hundred years in a nation that has been Christian during that same time period. It was right to stand against the holocaust of the Jewish people and not tolerate their condition. It would have been nice if America would have thrown Black folks a bone with some meat on it, letting us wet our beak with the American dream enjoyed by whites, or a heaping helping of some of that privileged brand of Christianity.

There can be no doubt or denial that religion and Christianity, in particular, have been deformed and weaponized for a more sinister purpose more aligned with capturing souls than saving souls. Faith and hope require that you pursue a sign delivering only subjective explanations, but seeking subjective explanations reveals some objectively revealing signs. The correct question brings about the correct answer just as the correct answer discloses the appropriate question. Only then can faith be fortified, not by refusing to ask or refusing to answer the questions or denying the answers. Being forbidden from this tree of knowledge sows confusion, reaping contempt or more shockingly maybe the truth.

Let me ask you a question. If the forced acceptance of something for the benefit of one segment of the population to which others must be coerced into accepting and adhering to, what is the validity of it to not stand alone on its merits and prevail? The so-called conservative Christian values of today are often used to cloak status quo exercises of exclusion and self-aggrandizing judgments of moral superiority based on faith often closely aligned with discriminatory beliefs. In a country that supposedly values freedom above all other virtues, why is other’s freedom the first thing to be trespassed on for your convenience and conformity?

Morality by your determination and standards are required to sustain your authority and dominance to dictate how others should act in a range agreeable to your beliefs without regard for their choice within a range that is socially acceptable but not compliant to your chosen standard. The principles of morality are contrary to your arrogance to oppose someone else’s right to choose outside your confinements leading to you imposing a greater injustice upon them than the lack of morality that you would accuse them of displaying. With that said shouldn’t the example you set is the one to follow not the one to reject. Which do you project by your actions, morality or immorality in compliance with the principles of each virtue?

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Diluted Justice and Pure Morality

When Playtime is Over.

Diluted Justice and Pure Morality

 

Welcome to when playtime is over, our goal is to stimulate thought and conversation, not to convert your perspective. Any persuasion is solely at your discretion and deliberation. For your consideration, we would like to offer Diluted Justice and Pure Morality and as always for those who are easily offended emotions will not be needed so please before entering check your feelings at the door.

Justice and Morality are as old as civilization and communal survival aiding in the coexistence of different norms. They often are confused with each other because both are sometimes present at the same time. They are really just both agreed upon social norms which provide the guidelines of society and govern the restrictions of its members. Justice aspires to punish wrongful acts and distribute fairness ethically. Morality is more concerned with good or bad and right or wrong in principle. The question then becomes who sets the standard and how binding is it for all to follow or submit to as being an arbitrarily accepted social standard.

They are really close in definition but not in practice, application, or agreement. Under some circumstances, it remains the same and in others has an entirely other interpretation based on who is observing or practicing it. It can be virtuous over here while prudish over there. The variations are endless and fluid but some are consistent within a range or scope of understanding and at times baffling. A duality of the same condition diluted is weakened in strength or lessened purity while pure is unadulterated or without dilution or contamination.   

Let’s get to the point without any emotional blinders or folks head jumping time over concepts that their mind or experiences refuse to give allowance for to understand that their adherence to the home team undermines the strength and clarity of their assertions and positions. It is more of a reflection of where your feet are at and the conditioned or adopted perspective that results from a liberal or conservative application of your reality to impose your reality upon others. Liberals generally live and let live while conservatives hold tight to adherence and dissemination of their perspectives upon others. It is many times a cognitive dissonance ignoring the discord between perspective and application.

In actuality neither can be an absolute truth but they both can be a more inclusive comprehensive display of the virtue and veracity of your perspective that separates yours from opposing ones but strangely enough align them on common ground. If we are outraged by attacks on the police then we should be equally outrage by attacks on civilians by the police. If we are outraged by the police killing black and brown then we have to be outraged by black and brown killing each other. The blade cuts both ways with integrity as the dividing denominator.

When your politician or political party has been in lockstep with racist or divisive rhetoric for the last four years and counting and you have fully or partially embraced that then you dilute your hypocritical view that someone else is supporting division by their words or actions. You cannot be silent when it is the home team and criticize the opposition for the same or similar things. You see this is where the justice becomes diluted and the morality less than pure. When you set the table and prepare the meal you lose credibility to complain and deny your transgressions while bemoaning others.

The caterpillar’s knowledge is defined by the confines of its cocoon unable to see beyond its perspective or limitations. The butterfly is transformed by its expansion from and shedding of its limited existence to a sphere of expanded consciousness and possibilities. The human perspective and experience are much the same in a micro or macrocosm of existence as you expand outward from your cocoon of a singular perspective towards a transformative multi-sensory one. It reflects the contemporary evolution of thought and perspective that is the adaptation of survival in a bigger cocoon or radius of understanding.

There is a distinct difference between compromise and being compromised, between concession and surrender. If justice and morality are set by a majority as a social norm then it would stand to reason the same dynamic should be used to change it in the adaption of a different standard. Look at domestic violence and the acceptability of it that traumatized generations of women and children which was once a social norm and by some even encouraged. Its acceptability has run its course and while it is still a reality it is condemned for the despicable act of self-hatred projected outwardly victimizing vulnerable targets masquerading your cowardly inadequacies and lack of self-control as dominance.

The same is true with these moral judgments and racial prejudices on who do not deserve the same considerations as you because in all your righteousness their culture is not yours. Most people’s fortune or misfortune is simply a matter of to whom and where they were born. It was not their choice who, when, where, what culture, what advantages, or what disadvantages they were born into. It was not your choice what education, principles, or demons your parents struggled with or suffered from. There are times when it is not even yours regarding yourself but even if born in the lowlands you can scale the peak.

It is a mix and match but there are plenty that we claim credit for that was pure luck of the draw, a sort of social genetics. So it is important to be careful about the judgments and values that we place on others because of our lack of gratitude for our blessings or despair for our challenges. The pandemic should have taught us all something about how our circumstances can change overnight through no fault of our own to find ourselves in a food line, business or career obliterated, or the shoes tight and the purse-string light. Comparisons are always dangerous and usually an exercise in subjective status in a derogatory manner.

It gets really real when the we become the them and these are the shoes we now walk in or we ride in the struggle buggy for the first time. It is all the same application to a different situation, when we judge by a certain measure then we must make sure we do not fall short of being judged by the same measure. So when your words condemn others make sure your actions don’t condemn yourself. It would only stand to reason that to protest for social justice, against systemic racism, and denounce racial inequality are absolute legit demands but we must also flip the coin and hold ourselves to a level of accountability that does not dilute the integrity of our demands or promote the impurity of others morality.

The dreaded talk that black and brown parents have with our children needs to expand beyond the usual topics to include not only their behavior but ours. We can only hope that white families have a dreaded talk with their children beyond the sphere of their cocoon or privilege. The same criteria that have been applied to Chauvin and many of the other cases of excessive use of force by police must be applied to the senseless excessive use of force by us against us in our communities which is equally terrifying and on a larger scale.

We cannot allow ourselves to be numb to the conditions in our midst that are claiming so many of our people, especially our young people. It reminds me of the saying that even if you have old tattered clothes they should still be clean clothes. If this is where we start and is all we got, then we have to make the best of it and it will bear crop in the harvest season with cultivation, patience, and time. The struggle is real out there but also within here. If we suffer the most, then we need to find solutions for our generational provisions and safety.  

We need change, theirs and ours by each taking their own transgressions out of the equation or conversation whoever you are. Let’s give them something else to talk about whoever they are. Peace, prosperity, and wisdom to the people that justice and morality will become less subjective to emotions and perspectives but aligned with unwavering integrity, progress, and resolve.

With that said let me ask a question, if the prevailing racial strife and circumstance had different parties inserted then would it change the perception or would the same hold true. If black, gang bangers, or opps were inserted instead of the police and the situations mentioned were ones playing out in the inner cities across too much of this country would that not be just as unacceptable and disgraceful. Maybe even more so because it would be us doing it to us. Injustice or murder should not change according to who and where it is done.

The expectations has to be condemnation even when committed by us if the anticipation is for accountability for the actions themselves because it should not be judge by who is doing it but that it is being done. Then it would stand to reason that our outrage has to be focused on the act as well as the perpetrator or at some point our validity and impact diminishes of demanding better. It is the parable of the goose and the gander; it should be the same with different players and with the same standard applied. Consider how many black lives would be saved if the two scenarios met in the middle and were lessened, but we control our communities.

17Protest is cool against the system but let’s play our position on the opposite end to display the love, patience, and change for ourselves that we demand from others and reframe from that which alibis police use of force and irregularities. It will not eliminate their behavior but it will lessen our contribution to it making it obvious and irrefutable to any misconduct. The change we seek without must be the change we are willing to make within giving no concession to inequality keeping our knees straight, our back unbent, our character intact, and our perseverance soaring in pursuit of our humanity and pure justice from a diluted morality.

We are not victims or survivors we are warriors in pursuit of our humanity armed with intellect and integrity that does not require anyone’s permission. The resolution resides in time and commitment now, so the following generations can shed the disparaging and condescending cloaks of racial biases and economic gloom. A strong ten-year commitment followed by another ten-year cultivation period will make tremendous permanent strides like the mighty oak which grows into its strength over time. The seeds are the children raised to know no other way, feel no other way, or accept no other way because inferiority can only be felt by you if it resides in you.     

Racism’s historical ramifications must be exposed, adjudicated, and conquered but being a resilient people it is not preventive of our ascension and perseverance. It can only be if we allow it to be, it is the victim mindset of despair and submission every time we must ask for permission. Just as we band together to protest against these evils let us also band together for ourselves to establish our humanity adhering to our own social norms which embrace each other, so if freedom is free then we are free to frame our destiny. Enforcing justice and morality in our communities creating social norms more in line with our integrity, desires, and prosperity can be done by us to better police ourselves.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

We must handle our end of the table which we have control over. We control our spoon while we must cajole others into controlling theirs. That which is in our power we must grab holt of and correct while continuing to demand our humanity from others but let’s also demand of and demonstrate that ourselves. They are two different things but closely related and I believe interdependent upon each other. I believe the better we treat ourselves and each other then the more our internal communal dynamics will improve with or without external help.

      

 

    

 

Resisting Arrest Gone Wrong

When Playtime is Over.

Resisting Arrest Gone Wrong

 

Welcome to when playtime is over, our goal is to stimulate thought and conversation, not to convert your perspective. Any persuasion is solely at your discretion and deliberation. For your consideration, we would like to offer Resisting Arrest Gone Wrong and as always for those who are easily offended emotions will not be needed so please before entering check your feelings at the door.

Let me state that this is not to bash the police and I support Police Officers and their safety when confronting dangerous and violent criminals who endanger lives. However, I will not honor these rogue policemen who act from being afraid or even worst being callous and reckless with their use of force. Fresh off of the Chauvin verdict there are those who would say do not resist arrest, simply comply with lawful or unlawful police commands, do not attempt to flee or escape, or force the police to use force against you to gain control. For them, we need to redefine resisting arrest and non-compliance that necessitate the use of force being used against someone.

There is the legitimate reality where force is needed to affect an arrest or prevent death or serious bodily harm. During these times it must be distinguished whether the arrestee is resistant or combative. The difference being resistant is not wanting to comply attempting to get away and combative is actively attacking the police person to inflict damage. Either way, the level of force must reflect the level of threat posed and the totality of the circumstances including the crime committed.

For example, let’s examine a real-life situation and determine for yourself from the police person’s perspective the degree of fear for their safety or how the combative noncompliance of the suspect contributed to the use of force against them. Afterward, you can determine for yourself if the suspect posed a sufficient danger and warranted the use of force being used against them. Keep in mind that there are laws as well as police policy and procedures that govern the use of force and noncompliance alone may not be the only criteria for force but there may be some mitigating circumstances to take into account.

This involves a suspect who the responding policeman believed was fleeing the crime scene after an attempted theft offense and being confronted by the store personnel. When the policeman confronted the thief, he was met with disregard for his command and an attempt to escape the scene. He immediately for his own safety and the protection of the public physically engaged the thief with physical force to subdue and prevent their escape. The policeman then believes he was met with a monumental struggle which clearly left him out of breath and presumably exhausted eventually needing backup to control the suspect.

Thank goodness backup arrived to lend assistance as the suspect appeared to be a handful for both police persons. There would have been a tremendous outcry from the public for another non-compliant criminal if deadly force would have been used. Once even handcuffed on the ground face down, subdued, and reasonably under control from the previous struggle the thief still was insistent on making it home. Due to the struggle, the suspect did suffer some injuries but deadly force was avoided displaying the police person’s restraint under difficult circumstances.

The history of the suspect was unknown at the time and I am still unaware of their criminal history if any or their propensity to assault police personnel. We cannot allow that, as the policeman to first encounter the suspect repeatedly advised the suspect that he was having none of it. He further went on to explain to the suspect why force was needed and the folly of not complying with his commands. The suspect still did not seem to grasp the gravity of the situation or comply.

To further clarify the danger the suspect posed, the suspect was a 73-year-old white lady for those who it may make a difference. She is approximately 4’ 10’ tall and eighty pounds suffering from dementia. Her name was reported by The Young Turks to be Karen Garner living in Loveland, Colorado. The video captioned “Cops assault elderly woman with dementia” can be seen on TYT and the incident occurred on June 26, 2020 and has come to light because of a federal lawsuit against the police for excessive force. It was captured on police body cam.

The merchandise attempted to be stolen from Walmart amounted to $13.88 which was recovered by Walmart personnel.  When confronted she produced a card to pay and had the ability along with the willingness to pay but was refused by store personnel and sent on her way. The police were still called for this scenario and caught her down the road walking where he confronted her ordering her to stop. She did stop repeatedly stating that she was going home and proceeded to do so. It was shortly after this point that the policeman physically engaged her wrangling her to the ground in rodeo fashion.

Before we go on to be clear let’s sum up the crime and the policeman’s recourse or authority to respond in the manner in which he did. The store refused payment and let her go. The store retrieved their merchandise which amounted to a petty theft. The store most likely and by all indications would decline to prosecute for the attempted theft. Folks this is Walmart we are talking about and an elderly lady with dementia. Furthermore, these stores might want to reconsider always calling the police on these very petty crimes which they most likely will not waste their time prosecuting. The claim was she pulled down an associate’s mask however all charges were dropped.

Think about if she should have even been arrested or given a citation not to even mention physically manhandled for such a petty crime. She suffered injuries to her shoulder (dislocated), arm (broken), and wrist (sprained) not to mention assorted bruises and cuts with blood drawn as a result of this forceful encounter. What was he arresting her for if Walmart had washed their hands? More importantly he never advised her she was under arrest which he must do, never tried to deescalate or reason with her, or impede her path. He just simply attacked her for daring to not heed to his command without regard for any prevailing circumstances except arrogant indignation for what he told her to do. It would appear her greatest crime was not obeying his orders notwithstanding her diminished mental capacity to understand him or her frail condition both mentally and physically.

The policewoman who responded as backup you would have thought was more compassionate or observant than him but she assisted him and mimicked his demeanor against the little old lady. The policewoman essentially was an accomplice in the assault of an elderly lady with a seemingly clear mental condition. Imagine the confusion and pain she must have experienced. It should be noted that oftentimes individuals with these disorders have a higher threshold for pain and thus do not exhibit pain as you would expect or the ability to communicate it. It is a huge difference between holding her or grabbing and twisting which can be seen to have occurred indicating intentional infliction of pain.

There were much better options available which no one can deny and the usual justifications I am sure will be offered and quite possibly accepted and supported. The normal protocol after the tussle, she should have been taken for medical evaluation and treatment after being finally advised that she was under arrest and then taken to jail. The jail personnel should have refused to accept her if she had any injuries. It was reported that the police persons stated that she was uninjured and she was booked into jail. She suffered from four to six hours before she was sent for medical evaluation and her injuries treated.

One would wonder if the situation would have been handled better if a supervisor was notified to respond on scene and made aware of the totality of the circumstances. A higher ranking official, a sergeant, did respond and reprimanded a brave civilian for interfering with police business. He joked and condoned the treatment of this elderly woman, did not order that she receive medical treatment, or display the judgment one would expect from a supervisor.

Furthermore, separate use of force documentation would have revealed the sergeant’s investigation into the justification for the use of force. The police department and the city dubious claim that they had no knowledge of the incident until the federal lawsuit was filed seems disingenuous. The footage was police bodycam and a request had to be made to receive it and then reviewed prior to release. The delay in filing the lawsuit may be directly attributed to a delay in receiving the incriminating video.

Nevertheless, think of all the resources and personnel; police, medical, booking officers, clerk’s office, prosecutor, and judge with some other incidental personnel sprinkled in who would have had some kind of dealings with this case. Now we can add federal investigators, attorneys, more judges, and most definitely lump sum tax-payers money again.

We can only imagine from a humanistic standpoint and concern for her health how she suffered and has been impacted. We can only wonder what fate the two police people and their supervisor have faced or if medals and a parade were in order for taking down such a danger to society. All three need to be fired, arrested, and charged with felony offenses. Desk duty and suspensions are not sufficient. Damn the cancel culture nonsense, they do not deserve a second chance to display such horrendous judgment again. The lack of compassion is stunning and the visual use of force unjustifiable.

This video turned my stomach but is an illustration of what is wrong with policing. She wasn’t black, young, thuggish, armed, a threat on her best day, or any of the other worn-out identifying cliche which are usually thrown out there for excuses. She is our mother or grandmother, that is who she is! This is in full display for all to see the arbitrary authoritative gutless resort to excessive force that was used against her. Imagine how anyone else would have fared, deadly force maybe? This cannot be blamed on training or lack of training it is directly attributable to the individuals’ involved detachment from the public they should serve while intoxicated with power and control. In case you were wondering all parties involved were white.

It is the arrogant authority deranged mentality that absolute control and obedience must be imposed. I would hope they have better patience and compassion with their family and loved ones who may not understand or comply with their every word. This is guerrilla and gorilla policing at its worst which can easily be mistaken for racism if a person of color would have been the victim. It is not always training, racism, or fear for life and limb that elicit these kinds of responses. It is a propensity for control and authority with no tolerance for anything other than immediate and total compliance under any circumstances. It is not even bad judgment but total disregard for self-restraint or policy and procedures.

This would appear to be an extreme isolated incident that could not repeat itself. By contrast, another equally fine set of police persons handled a suspected burglary in Port Allen near Baton Rouge Louisiana in exemplary fashion. They responded to a burglary in progress and caught the suspect red-handed calmly sitting in a chair on the porch when they arrived. The suspect seeming dangerous and highly suspicious attempted an explanation but to no avail, it was no fooling the keen senses of these police persons due to their training and experience.

The one policeman preemptively had his taser trained on the suspect who was slow to respond while offering a lame excuse. Luckily, force was averted and he was able to be handcuffed and placed in the zone car. No harm, no foul and all is well. The menacing suspect then began to yell for help of all things after stating that he did not need to be roughhoused. The policeman who had convinced the suspect earlier to surrender without incident or he would light him up with the taser then encouraged the suspect not to remain silent.

After the suspect continues to yell for help the policeman then did what he had advised the suspect he would do when his threats and intimidation had failed. He repeatedly tasered the suspect while the suspect was seated in the zone car and handcuffed. Further invest revealed that the suspect lived in the house and had misplaced his key and broke his window to gain entrance into his home as he had advised them while calmly seated on his porch. This was confirmed by the police persons who then decided that his yelling for help was disturbing the peace and warranted his arrest after having the hell tasered out of him. 

 

The man is Izell Richardson Jr. a 67-year-old man with a bad back and black for those who it may make a difference. He was cooperative and secured in the zone car when the policeman entered the rear of the zone car to taser him at close range. Charges were trumped up, no pun intended, on him and he was arrested and taken to jail. An Officer at the jail then called for medical attention for him to be taken to the hospital for treatment. He was not charged with any crime.

Port Allen can start ponying up his settlement as well. To be tasered for verbal disobedience not directed at the police or inciteful while secured and handcuffed in the zone car is not criteria for the use of force to this magnitude. Maybe it would have been better to just ignore him or listen to him explain. Mr. Richardson Jr who is black is the victim of the systemic police abuses which many complain about except racism probably was not the case since the brave policeman who assaulted him was black also. He was also representative of the fear for their lives and terror some civilians have in police encounters.

Now both of these incidents have striking similarities if you examine them closely and the symptoms are the same as the Chauvin case. The symptoms are the visual or noticeable manifestations of the illness, disease, or dysfunction. It is the indication of disease, not the disease. We have seen the indications whether we want to recognize them or not but to continue to ignore the symptoms allows the disease to progress and become terminal.

Claims of support and protection for the police are actually protection of the system. Improving the system to ensure it is healthy and at optimal operation should be the middle ground consensus for all concerned. Democrat or Republican, black or white, fund or defund, pro-law enforcement or otherwise must be able to come to a truce for opposing opinions to agree that some of this nonsense and hypocrisy can be dispensed with as distasteful to all concerned. Strong arm assault will not be tolerated.

Perhaps it is time for the police to protect and support the police by not committing these senseless acts of outrage that cause the collective condemnation of their profession. The above two scenarios clearly demonstrate the abuses and lack of oversight from the overseers to police themselves. So, let’s agree to universally police them on this type of nonsense to make it clear that this shit won’t be tolerated especially with our seniors.

At least we should be able to agree on that unless we were raised by wolves, hell even if we were raised by wolves. These are two separate cases of felonious assault on seniors without sufficient justification or cause while the police persons involve get a due process which they did not allow their senior victims. We cannot contest every aspect of a broken system unconditionally supporting obvious criminal assaults especially captured by the very police bodycam itself. Come on now, what could possibly be the delay in arrest and charges prima facie to the video evidence?

These actions forfeit their right to any consideration and if it is built into the system then it is time to change the system that gives allowances for this behavior. It is inconceivable that arrest and charges are not immediate upon discovery of felony assault on seniors without any police personnel charges preferred swiftly and harshly. It would be nice to extend this protection to everyone but at least we should be able to agree on how we are not about to let our seniors and children be treated in law enforcement encounters especially like these two non-threatening situations.

This lady and man had their Constitutional Rights violated in much the same fashion that we have seen many times before. Sadly, until rogue policing is strongly punished and denounced we will most likely continue to see it over and over again. Meanwhile, there are still those who unconditionally support the police in any misconduct or brutality they are jammed up committing displaying sympathy and support for the police. Most police do not even support this nonsense. News flash they are not the police when committing crimes and these blatantly unconscionable atrocities, they are criminals with criminal behavior carrying a badge.

If they are here to protect and serve, I would hate to meet those who are here to harm and violate. It is getting to be hard to tell the saints from the sinners. This is not to condemn all police or policing but even among the ranks, you have to admit that this is getting to be ridiculous and very damaging. Maybe someone should let these bad apples know they are wearing body cameras and should conduct themselves as such. The egregious must be expunged from your ranks. It amounts to their individual accountability versus your collective condemnation. Amputate the disease so the police body can survive.  

Respect to the women and men who do the job with honor and hopefully the tarnish from the ones who do not will remain with them as individuals for them to be held to task. The time has come to separate the wheat from the chaff, the good from the rotten. Policing is classified as a profession and profession indicates professionals and respectability.  The hiring process, authoritarian culture, and tolerance for impropriety must be addressed to prevent further erosion of respect and authority. Zero tolerance and if not the noose you tighten will be your own and as for Port Allen and Loveland, where is the love or discretion for the seniors?

33This cannot be tolerated so I would encourage everyone to see the videos and judge for yourself before it becomes a reality near or dear to you like your parents or children. On that we should be able to agree and we can dispute the rest, just not the seniors. A journey starts with the first step and incremental concessions are a good first step. Arrest and charges against the police are a better first step in cases like the above.

We know the consequences of resisting but what are the benefits of complying or non-combative behavior? A little finesse, patience, and persuasion could save an enormous amount of settlements. Police settlements are becoming the most undesirable way to riches. If the police refuse to accept better options then they encourage payments, skepticism, condemnation, mistrust, and oversight. Many cities are self-insured which comes out of the city budget or rainy day general funds while others are insured by insurance companies. When will the risk to insurance companies become so great that they refuse to accept the liability or indemnify themselves against misconduct and these large settlements? When will the public or police tire? At some point, the tarnish will be too much for the good Officers to bear, or at least not a laughing matter of pride.

Let me ask you a question to put this into context. I like to often reverse engineer situations as if it were a debate where the opposing viewpoints are assigned and not chosen for argument. Just to stack it up, flip it, and smooth it out so pin this twist of fate. The white police personnel encounters both scenarios where they either damage the black man breaking bones or taser the black man in the back of the zone car while he is handcuffed. Now flip it where the black police personnel encounter the white lady and do the exact same.  This should crystalize for opposing viewpoints the crux of the condemnation.

It sometimes is not racial except by context of the parties involved and the appearance of racism so close that you cannot tell the difference. It is sometimes a culture and psychology present among police which is developed out of a fear, separation, superiority, and survival indoctrination exaggerated and rampaging out of control which compels these actions as well as condone them. The culture and system are made of human beings which meld into a consolidation to comprise the system so the system can only be affected to the extent of the change in the personnel.

The system changes the personnel, the personnel changes the system, or one or the other needs to be replaced if not both. Abolishing the police is ridiculous, transformation is wise. It is amazing how a bunch of egg heads always knows what is best for everybody except themselves. Here are suggestions for a three-step tango to target the problems and changes needed. One, give a questionnaire to all police departments and court personnel surveying their raw anonymous opinions of their operations, procedures, applications, and suggestions for improvement.

Two, if the hiring practices cannot more evenly reflect the population served, they should at least be well versed in the population they protect and serve to humanize a sensitivity to them. As part of the police academy training it should be mandatory to visit rec centers, festivals, and various neighborhoods throughout the city to familiarize themselves with the people and the people the police.

Three, incentivize correction and not monetize punishment for the profit of police via court appearances, the city and courts via general fund revenue, and the prisons via slave labor. Everyone does not need to go to jail but statutory or discretionary punishment both has to be identical for everyone. For example, the right to bail is not a right if you cannot afford it so a tier of offenses that clearly outlines personal recognizance releases from jail and bailable offenses in addition to high or non-bail offenses.   

It would relieve over-crowding and the system’s accountability for the room, housing, and health of those in their custody. Perhaps even increase community service for a contribution to society instead of a drain. Desperate times call for desperate measures or at least a shift in ideology. Fear of exposure, fear of honesty, and projections of failure for deviation from the old system we already know either don’t work or is inefficient will seek to prevent changes. The money to pay for these and other changes can come from the money saved from settlements and repetitive expenditures for resources to maintain the old antiquated system.

So back to the duality of the reality. There can be no resistance where there is no opposition just as there can be no opposition where there is no resistance. There must be compromise and concessions from all sides and assurances to heed and abide by the fair determination of the criteria set forth. Anyone in violation would clearly be deemed out of pocket and subject to that tier of consequences and conditions without respect to color, wealth, or occupation. The adherence to a one-dimensional past developed for the singular benefit of what is becoming less of a majority supported by a two-dimensional arrogance to maintain and justify the historical nepotism of those benefits is withering under the three-dimensional microscope of contemporary demographics now demanding a four-dimensional futuristic solution to propel us forward.  

What has been can no longer be and if the changes needed are not met then what could be will never be, yesterday is gone. The world is changing and the old policies of oppression and authoritative domination of the people or suppression of their expression is generating one hundred percent dissent and dissatisfaction whatever your position or opposition. So we all have to give a lot to get a lot and that is something we all can no longer resist for things to go right.        

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz    

 

 

George Floyd Part 3 of 3-Deductive Conclusions and Forfeited Integrity

When Playtime is Over.

George Floyd Part 3 of 3Deductive Conclusions and Forfeited Integrity

 

Welcome to when playtime is over, our goal is to stimulate thought and conversation, not to convert your perspective. Any persuasion is solely at your discretion and deliberation. For your consideration, we would like to offer  and as always for those who are easily offended, emotions will not be needed so please before entering check your feelings at the door.

 Uncompromising Evaluation

An objective examination has to be detached from the desired outcome or emotional inclination and should only examine the facts and actions as they were observed to have occurred. Then compared to any explanations given when evaluated against these observations will yield the clearest determination of guilt or innocence. Strictly an uncompromising assessment of the deeds alone removed from the identity of the person performing the deed will objectively reveal if the deed was justified regardless of who the doer of the deed may have been.

For the exact purposes of guilt or justification of actions, it is practically irrelevant who committed the act but only if they had a legal right to do so in the manner in which they did. It comes down to right or wrong, proper or improper no matter who did it, friend or foe. Impartiality demands that if that same set of circumstances existed with you it would be considered fair and just. This is the ultimate perspective of neutrality of judgment required with respect to the application of the law. With this lens of detachment, the incident can begin to be clarified.

The encounter was initiated by the clerk requesting a police response in c/w Mr. Floyd passing a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill. The police responded to find Mr. Floyd was located in the driver’s seat of his vehicle. He was removed from the vehicle, placed in cuffs, and escorted to the sidewalk where he was seated. He was then escorted across the street without incident but resisted being placed in the rear of the squad car. He claimed to be claustrophobic, a recognized mental disorder of anxiety, but no exclusion from being placed in a squad car or arrested.

A brief struggle of control ensued with Mr. Floyd being resistant to being placed in the rear of the squad car but not actively combative or aggressive toward the policemen. His observed intent was to not be placed in the squad car but it was not to inflict injury upon the policemen. Being placed on the ground prone is a judgment call and at the policemen’s discretion but would seem to contradict any claims of their concern for his previously displayed distress. There was oddly no verbal attempt to deescalate the situation or attempt to calm his anxiety especially since it was not a violent crime or exigent circumstances. 

If possible verbal de-escalation is the first tactic on the force continuum scale and would have seemed preferable considering the investigation into the details of the counterfeit twenty had not begun in earnest and they still had not determined what their course of action would or could be. Enforcement of the law dictates that restraint be used comparatively to the crime committed unless escalating circumstances command a more intensive response. Just as you would not use swat for a jaywalker, the response given has to be in accordance with the crime committed and the response received.

That notwithstanding, once prone on the ground Mr. Floyd’s mental state was also reflected by his physical state, he was submitted. He was within the policemen’s control and physically compliant. He was also verbally compliant pleading for his life and stating his physical condition of respiratory distress, and that he could not breathe. Mr. Floyd offered no further resistance to being placed in the car because he was prone on the ground and not aggressive, combative, or evasive at all; he was secured. But was he in custody, had he been advised that he was under arrest?

Chauvin demonstrated his total control of Mr. Floyd by virtue of Chauvin’s hands being in his pockets indicating that whatever resistance that had been present Mr. Floyd was well under control at that point. Furthermore, Mr. Floyd provided no resistance from the point of being unconscious or deceased although Chauvin continued the neck pressure with his hands casually in his pockets. Suspect control or threat of harm was never a concern. Chauvin’s casual placement of his hands in his pocket from the start reveals that any threat had been subdued.

Mr. Floyd was never able to account for the bad money transaction where a fake twenty-dollar bill turned into a homicide. Before dying, Mr. Floyd had to pass out first, meaning he was still alive but unconscious. Chauvin’s continued pressure in addition to rendering Mr. Floyd unconscious he ensured that he had no chance at survival or revival. No corpus delicti or proof of guilt was ever established since the intent was not established that he knew it was bad money.

It should be noted that if Mr. Floyd had been one hundred percent compliant the incident would have unfolded differently however did his non-compliance rise to the level of force that was used and sustained on him. Cooperation with law enforcement is always preferable but the force used for non-compliance must be measured to the circumstances. It should also be noted that so callous was Chauvin’s indifference that even Mr. Floyd’s plea for his deceased mother or his unconscious state elicited no compassion from Chauvin’s demented implementation of the ”law”. 

Now let us examine the policemen’s actions individually and collectively to establish any culpability. No culpability means that they had no effect on his death and it probably would have happened anyway at that exact particular time. They did not send four policemen for a counterfeit-twenty assignment, so who received the call and who was assisting? Was radio notified that they were assisting, and should they have even been there? If Chauvin was assisting on the run then he should have remained secondary and let the assigned car handle it to their discretion. Was there a procedural discrepancy with the response to the assignment?

Two policemen arrived and shortly thereafter another two policemen arrived. The first two to arrive on the scene engaged Mr. Floyd, and he was placed in cuffs. He was subsequently seated on the sidewalk. Nothing extraneous so far as excessive physical force except perhaps the way he was approached could have been handled better. Next Mr. Floyd was escorted across the street towards the store. Prior to being escorted across the street at least one officer stated that Mr. Floyd was noticeably in distress. What actions did he take as a result of this observed distress and when? What were the signs?

If he was in fact believed to be in distress, it should have changed from a possible arrest situation into providing medical assistance. The main reason is city liability, if he were having a heart attack and was under arrest then the city would be liable for his medical care, hospital stay, and would have to assign an officer to his room around the clock to guard him. To avoid their liability and the city’s he should have been passed off to medical personal. He could have then been made a named suspect for future charges.

Aside from that, it is their legal and sworn obligation to provide assistance and not continue pursuing arrest when medical attention is needed while under their control. The policeman who first noticed the distress had the most obligation to notify the others of Mr. Floyd’s suspected condition and why he thought so. Considering his suspected medical distress and only having the ability to arrest with prior authorization from the Secret Service for permission, that should have made them get him medical help and be on their way. It becomes problematic with the suspected medical complication and lack of jurisdictional authority to arrest.

Once taken to the ground on his stomach alongside the squad car with his hands cuffed behind his back, he posed no threat to the four policemen or no threat to escape. It is nearly impossible to get up quickly or otherwise from that position or launch an assault. If it was necessary to place him prone on the ground then there is no policy, procedures, or training that allows for any force which is no longer necessary to bring a person under control. Once unresponsive he was incapable of any resistance or threat.

Minimal force required to effect an arrest is the standard to justify force, but when it is no longer necessary there is no justification for its use and no allowance for it legally. What is the justification for kneeling on a deceased man’s neck for over two minutes and 46 seconds after his suspected expiration?  The application of the knee to the neck area is where the criminality begins, and Chauvin’s mental state of mind begins to be detectable and exposed.

It is also at this point that the complicity of the other policemen’s state of mind can be determined, regardless of if they had participated or not in the restraint, their intent also became apparent. Two policemen did knowingly, purposefully, willingly, and physically participate to some degree in exerting force and providing assistance to Chauvin to further his criminal excessive use of force with no legal justification.  They essentially participated in the assault of Mr. Floyd since there was no legal justification for force. The third policeman served as a deterrent and threat to discourage anyone who would intervene. With Mr. Floyd fully compromised there was no need for any continued force or support of it.

Chauvin did knowingly, willfully, purposefully, recklessly, and negligently steadfastly hold his knee to Mr. Floyd’s neck area which resulted in his death even if only a contributory factor. If argued that Chauvin’s intent was not to kill Mr. Floyd but to restrain him, at what point did Mr. Floyd no longer need restraining? Additionally, Chauvin’s excessive force was knowingly and purposefully applied resulting in Mr. Floyd’s death rendering the force intentional and the death consequential to that force. It is expected that an 18-year veteran reasonably would have known the possible consequences, especially when warned and concerns were stated by other policemen.

What cannot be argued is that certainly Chauvin’s knee was intentionally placed there for nearly a nine-minute duration of time and he knowingly, willfully, purposefully, recklessly, and negligently without regard for the outcome because he replied to concerns acknowledging his disregard. Chauvin’s actions revealed a mindset of punishment, not restraint, with his hands in his pocket to disguise the downward force and balancing of his full weight on Mr. Floyd’s neck fully displaying the ease of his depravity, arrogance, and control. The force used on Mr. Floyd by any officer once he was on the ground on his stomach handcuffed was a criminal act and felony assault by virtue of the policemen being armed as well as the assault resulting in Mr. Floyd’s death.

Excited delirium by compression is asphyxiation defined as suffocation or a smothering effect. Breathing restriction and compression by weight is always the main trigger and can clearly be determined to have played a significant role in Mr. Floyd’s death. As a policeman, you cannot facilitate a crime or if you observe a crime you are sworn to intervene, and it does not specify who is committing the crime. Any unlawful act you are sworn to intervene and prevent. There were multiple failures to intervene or pursue an alternative action that could have saved Mr. Floyd’s life.  

At the point when Mr. Floyd was believed to have been in distress before crossing the street, at the point when he complained of breathing difficulties with Chauvin on his neck, at the point when he had no pulse when checked, at the point when an officer suggested to sit him up to avoid the known concern of death which was the eventual outcome, at the point when an officer explicitly mention excited delirium concerns, at the point when Mr. Floyd was unresponsive, and at the point when the public begged for his life were all points when and where intervention should have occurred legally.

During the assault, Chauvin verbally responded disregarding all concerns and information which he knew or should have known being an 18-year veteran on the job, a field training officer, and the senior man on the scene. The senior man is always held to a higher standard because it is assumed he has the most experience and discernment knowing what to do or more importantly what not to do.

Chauvin knowingly continued his felony assault and discouraged other courses of mitigation or intervention. He knowingly and purposefully did hold his knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck and maintained it there fully aware of the risk and without legal justification. The other policemen’s actions were to do nothing to end this excessive use of force and were actively complicit in holding witnesses at bay using the authority of their uniforms and weapons, arguably as criminal tools.

The issue of crowd control is separate from the excessive use of force on Mr. Floyd and no way is he responsible for the crowd which he did not incite which reveals that a separate response regarding that concern should have been directed toward the crowd. No obstruction charges or otherwise has been levied against any member of the crowd just as no additional force on Mr. Floyd should have been levied against Mr. Floyd for the crowds’ actions. Their fear from the crowd was due to Chauvin’s use of excessive force, not a menacing crowd threatening violence but a rebuking crowd.

They used their uniforms and intimidation of their authority in the furtherance of Chauvin’s crime. Had it not been armed uniformed policemen involved there is a more likely chance a civilian would have intervened preventing Mr. Floyd’s death. They provided protection while Chauvin committed his crime displaying their complicity and willful approval of Chauvin’s actions by their inaction or support of his actions. The two rookie policemen knowingly acted to support Chauvin to further his felony physical assault thereby consenting to his actions and sharing his Mens rea, intentional infliction of unnecessary force. Their state of mind was to willfully, purposely, recklessly, and negligently with full knowledge against all perceived risk consent to excessive force by at one point physically assisting. It is very clear; they did not oppose it or intervene to prevent it but did assist in it.

Citizens and bystanders with no time on the job or academy training knew the risk, Mr. Floyd and the public were trying to tell the policemen repeatedly. All four policemen were fully aware that their actions or inaction posed a significant risk to Mr. Floyd’s life even insinuating it themselves. The consequences of their actions or inactions were known or should have been known that serious bodily harm and/or death would be the result. Due to the 8 minutes and 46-second duration of the homicide beginning when Mr. Floyd was handcuffed on his stomach on the ground, all four policemen displayed knowing, willful, purposeful, reckless, and negligent conduct at various intervals while Mr. Floyd was the victim of excessive force that led to his death.

It is obvious that Chauvin’s intent was to disregard the risk of death to Mr. Floyd continuing even when Mr. Floyd was deceased. Chauvin continued until the EMTs arrived. None of the policemen did anything to stop Chauvin or aid Mr. Floyd. All four policemen displayed each of the required mindsets during the duration of the lengthy deadly incident at various times. This was a homicide committed by a policeman that was aided and abetted by three other policemen.

Citizen video, police bodycam, their own radio transmissions, and multiple witnesses in broad daylight in full view of the public were not deterrents to their crime but present overwhelming evidence against their actions. The question of intent or guilt for Mr. Floyd’s death would seem undeniable but due process of law and possible plea bargain or sentencing arrangements could be the only reason to claim innocence certainly not the legal justification of their actions. How can anyone defend their actions?

Mr. Floyd was a human being who was treated inhumanely well below any standard which should be acceptable from law enforcement. The law has no accommodation for such actions. Mr. Floyd’s Constitutional and Civil Rights were trampled and suffocated from his body without compassion by policemen who now hide behind their own rights seeking compassion.

Their Constitutional Rights will be upheld and due process assured them where defense attorneys will attempt to blame Mr. Floyd for his own death while being handcuffed on the ground. Despite the force continuum, display of excessive force on a deceased man, discrepancies in observable actions, and their implausible explanations they will try to justify the reprehensible by claiming no laws were broken by them. Perhaps along with some form of qualified immunity will be claimed.

Aside from the verdict still to be rendered from the courtroom, the City of Minneapolis has rendered their own with a historic settlement of 27 million dollars to settle the wrongful death lawsuit regarding this incident. The size of the settlement reflects the horrific depravity beyond reason, vindication, protection of the law, or moral standards. It was an honorable action by the City to not attempt to justify or minimize the colossal injustice which caused Mr. Floyd’s death. It should be an exemplary example of admission of blatant guilt to preserve the integrity of government and law enforcement.    

Defending obviously egregious acts greatly diminishes public respect for and compliance with law enforcement and encourages resistance to unfairness. The public trust which took many good deeds and years to establish can be nationally destroyed instantly by one act such as Chauvin’s. It can only be regained when the law is enforced equally including against law enforcement personnel that violate their sworn duty.

Obvious and blatant violations of the law, of duty, and public trust cannot be condoned and tolerated especially when it is this egregious and erodes the public trust. Such egregious acts make it hard for good Officers to maintain public trust when this kind of policing is creating problems for them and eroding their protections. The negative consequences are suffered by the law enforcement community even more so than the public. Everyone in the public does not interact with law enforcement but all law enforcement must adhere to a code of conduct imposed on them as a result of the repercussions of Chauvin-like behavior.

The implementation of body cameras, the loss of credibility, the attrition of public perception, the increased propensity for resistance and aggression against personnel, the funding issues, the decrease of union and bargaining power, the restrictions on equipment for fear it may be abused against the public, creation of more hazardous working conditions, decrease public cooperation, GPS on vehicles, restricting search warrant criteria, use of force and contact documentation, federal oversite, qualified immunity protections removed for honest mistakes, morale decline, dissension among the ranks, and many more are directly related to law enforcement not being willing to police themselves. When law enforcement cannot self-regulate themselves then more restrictive levels of accountability are placed upon them.

Law enforcement must evolve beyond the pathology and culture which it traditionally has operated under to change its method of operation progressing beyond the rugged physically tough beat cop authoritatively demanding unconditional absolute submission to their authority. No longer exempt from judgment being protected by their arrogant elite status as the law or by the repressive intimidation of ominous consequences separated from the people they should serve. Coercion by a quasi-military occupying force which civilians must categorically comply with or force will be justified is no longer tolerated.

Being law-abiding should not require a humbling and submission to authority even when unlawful acts reminiscent of vigilantism are imposed by law enforcement. You must simply enforce the law not become the law. Police have historically been the enforcement arm of racism, immigration, minority control, as well as labor and union disputes at the direction of those with undue influence over policy or preference. As a result, they have enjoyed a royal centurion discretion accountable only to their superiors to whom they answer relegating the commoners beneath the power invested in them creating fearful respect.

The regulation of authority, punishment, and freedom instills a reflexive apprehension when dealing with law enforcement. We all know the feeling when a police car activates its lights behind us. The perception and projected expectation of behavior during these encounters are generally uneasiness until relieved by their demeanor or the reason for the encounter. It is usually magnified to a conditioned anxiety if you are a member of a demographic where abuses have been normalized or expected. Racism has always been entrenched in law enforcement and the military with a culture of tolerance and a lack of condemnation implying a tacit if not often explicit approval endorsing that authoritative abusive mentality when no action is taken or it is condoned.

This tendency towards an adversarial mentality must be modified and admonished when inappropriate. An us versus them mentality reinforces a war-like perspective where the opposition is dehumanized to justify abuses and violations of their dignity and humanity insisting their rights and treatment is an inconsequential consideration and rationalization for lack of accountability regarding your treatment of them. War or law enforcement displayed at its worst should have regulations regarding the rules of engagement, treatment, and capture that must be followed. Law enforcement must follow the guidelines established and when blatantly in violation should concede error instead of the righteous indignation of defiance to being judged.

If you will not listen or display reason you are essentially providing no other option except to not be reasoned with thereby encouraging noncompliance further justifying a response in a self-fulfilling hazard of your own creation. Evolution is preferable to revolution when reflecting or pursuing social changes, and cooperation by persuasion to convince rather than rugged physicality or force seems a better alternative. To accept surrender is preferred to forceable submission and if fair surrender will not be accepted then resistance is forced. The goal is not a calibration of machismo but the easiest obtainment of an objective.

Let force be the response to conflict and not the cause of it. Influences of the history of policing by implication, ideology, and methodology must reflect the future of societal tolerances to preserve the most respect and support for law enforcement. The job is not for everyone, maybe not the faint of heart or brutally inclined with limited people skills. For the maximum support for law enforcement to be maintained there has to be admissions of obvious wrongdoing and misconduct. It is counterproductive for law enforcement to support violations of wrongdoing; it exposes that the system is broken and they will not fix it without further restriction of their authority. Law enforcement must be subjected to the same laws they are sworn to enforce, not above them.

It is sometimes necessary and always better to relinquish the part for the good of the whole. Good decent Officers must not be cast under a cloak of scorn with elevated hazards under hostile working conditions to defend the indefensible. The police union dues, morale, and resources should not be spent despite members’ dissent for actions they disagree with and know to be wrong. The first rule of policing is to go home every night from the job, the will to overcome and to survive encounters. The second is not to let someone send you to the penitentiary and jackpot you by their actions. I am not going to do your time for you or with you. I will not let you jackpot me and send me to prison for your actions. This is understood.

The police union has an obligation to defend officers but not to waste the resources of members by publicly and arrogantly condoning unquestionably damaging behavior which compromises the whole department’s credibility. A policeman has a fiduciary duty to supply the union with actions they can defend but not to the detriment of the union members, the police department, and the whole legal structure. The real thin blue line and honor among officers is to not ruin or let a fellow officer get jackpotted on your dime. United we stand separately we fall so that others are left standing. The primary offender should accept the brunt of the burden to alleviate as much as possible on the remaining policemen. That is the real code.

The union has a responsibility to protect the union body above an individual member understanding that one must sometimes answer so that others may serve without contempt. Refusing the obvious accountability disparages the union’s principles and by association the principles of your union members that paints the good officers with a bloody brush. When these policemen’s actions do not give you anything to work with you must save the ship instead of circling the wagons. The righteous needs of the many outweigh the detrimental actions of the few. If they blow it so badly then you must step away and condemn their actions even if by absentee proxy by removing your unwavering defense, if not your conditional support.

How many of your members agree with having their dues spent for this? How many good OFFICERS have to suffer as a whole nationally with the public perception that you promote? When you, good and bad, wear the same respected uniform it is hard to tell from the outside looking in but you know from the inside, the good from the bad. The decision must be made among the ranks, the bosses, the prosecutors, and the judges but mostly the street cops on the front line who are the most vulnerable to not allow members to tarnish them by criminal behavior because you become silently complicit by aiding and abetting that as well. The street cops surely suffer the consequences most.

When the union sees no evil and the union staunchly proclaims with arrogant indifference their support for crimes such as this, then by demonstration and proclamation the only logical conclusion left is that this could be an undetected RICO violation of an ongoing culture of a criminal enterprise with known collaborators and tolerance for criminal activity and corruption. It invites investigations and attention. At the very least it is a poor demonstration of leadership that endangers law enforcement and promotes an insidious culture waiting to implode again.

We know what it should say about Chauvin but what does it really say about those who would defend this public assassination. Who can be proud of this abomination or defend its despicable representation as good policing? What manner of twisted articulation can justify these four policemen’s actions? Why the extraordinary efforts to justify this behavior and claim that these actions were necessary and legal? Why lose all credibility to represent the other members by supporting these actions? Did these actions meet departmental expectations and are they representative of what a police union and police department can be proud of?

If they did not fear for their actions, then they should not fear to have it called for what it is and suffer the consequences. At its core, it is murder by all standards for all involved which should come with extended stay, room, and board, free amenities, free utilities, plenty of company, and lifetime membership for Chauvin should also be included.  More specifically extensive prison time for all four, levels of accountability, and deterrents must be set. The success of any conviction is not in imposing the highest charges but in dispensing the most prison time to be served. At the Judge’s discretion sentences should run consecutive meaning one after another which means maximum prison time.

Local, national, and global outrage has been agitated to condemn this vile murder while some would defend this evil at enormous cost claiming support of law enforcement or Mr. Floyd’s non-compliance. This not racial, black or white but human, he was a human being with a family and loved ones whose actions did not rise to the level of what we all witnessed. It should never be witnessed or suffered again. If this were done to an animal the depravity would be obvious and the outrage universal or would you prefer that this happen to other men, women, and juveniles as justified standard police operating procedures especially over minor offenses.

Police procedure and conduct are what is on trial. Why hasn’t the ongoing protest, property destruction, billions of dollars in resources and lost productivity, racial division, and decay of law enforcement respect, safety, and morale not been enough to admonish the actions of one man’s barbaric casual act of murder? Remember, this is all over a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill and the question must be asked was it worth it?. If you need any further guidance on if it was worth it the City of Minneapolis just gave 27 million reasons why it wasn’t.

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Crimes Against Humanity The Extended Reality

When Playtime is Over.

Crimes Against Humanity- The Extended Reality

 

Welcome to when playtime is over, our goal is to stimulate thought and conversation, not to convert your perspective. Any persuasion is solely at your discretion and deliberation. For your consideration, we would like to offer Crimes Against Humanity- The Extended Reality and as always for those who are easily offended emotions will not be needed so please before entering check your feelings at the door.

Hard but True, Raw but Real

Let’s get down to business removed from the political correctness and pretense of social graces to speak openly without regard for contrived moral consciousness, forced remorse, or unwilling accountability. Let‘s put everything on the table out in the open to analyze everything in terms of present and future projections regarding racism and discrimination. Strictly speaking, it is a culmination of psychological conditioning, economic exploitation, and opposed interest which stubbornly continues similar to an addiction to delusion. The delusional addiction is to an entitlement of preferential accommodations and self-image of superior character selfishly pursued at the expense of all others not in your identifying group. Blacks seemed suitable and were easily identified by their dark skin tone for exclusion.

Your subgroup is sustained by a subculture of suppression to appear above all groups of animals and humans at the self-proclaimed pinnacle of the biological chain. This was not accomplished by actually being that but by elevating your subgroup above all others by standing hoisted high upon your artificial privileged advantage appearing to loom above the rest. It is like the great Oz who was not the all-powerful as being portrayed but a sniveling insecure little round man hiding behind a curtain of vulnerability pretending to be invincible. This created great fear and respect as long as the curtain remained closed.

The curtain has been pulled back revealing the fear and inadequacies that lead to the need for and continuation of this façade.  Without this belief and confronted by reality the acceptance of no such advantage before God or man means the masquerade is up. This creates the stubborn need to refuse to relinquish that idea because it is the core of your being, your identity. It is shocking to your core and psychologically devastating to deny the foundation of your beliefs despite overwhelming evidence that it is not true. Further to admit your atrocities committed in order to cheat your way to the top is inconceivable to the psyche, so the ramifications are minimized.

That only leaves one alternative, that is to deny its benefits and do everything to keep it going otherwise the image is shattered and so are you. It then becomes a desperation of survival where racism and discrimination must continue. To remove them would be symbolically likened to removing your air, but literally, your air of superiority closely followed by its advantages. Furthermore, the diminishing of your future demographic advantage brought about by fewer babies born per family while ambitiously pursuing your wealth and careers, inter-racial relationships of all kinds, sexual alternatives to procreation, and the death of staunch racist ideological individuals over time lends itself to a bleak projection.

The continuation of this projection is not favorable to the white male dominancy of society. The white male historically had no consideration for anyone, including the white female, with one exception which was inclusion when and to the degree that you were needed to sustain their position. Now their reckless actions have had unintended results which have served to undermine the very purpose they sought to preserve. Now it is a crisis of survival thirty to fifty years down the road from now. Change has long been set in motion and change is coming. Adaptation to change has always been the key to survival and survival reliant upon cooperation within the species.

I am not under the illusion that racism is about to end anytime soon but will allow for the whimsical notion that the ideological DNA of some individuals bent on racism or their survival dependent on racism may abandon it. The glacier shift of the racist collective to be persuaded of the benefit for themselves in changing their unjust perspectives, the closer integration of racial identifiers and similarities, the demise of bigots, and discouragement by the punitive connotations attached are the mitigating factors for change.

There is no easy way to say it and no need to sugar coat it in the context of history if judged by the last hundred years and the next hundred years. A little over a hundred years ago in 1906, it was acceptable to daily put a black pigmy named Ota Benga in a cage with monkeys in the Bronx Zoo on display to visually convince the public of the animalistic nature and close proximity of blacks to animals. This surely contributed to his eventual suicide but definitely even more lasting was the effect it must have had on whites who witnessed it. The New York Times wrote in support of this barbarity as basically eugenics on the display of the missing link for perpetuating myths and stereotypes to be taken as fact.

There can be no misconception that there have always been decent compassionate whites who have denounced slavery, racism, and discrimination and as time moves on their numbers have increased to the present multi-race coalition in solidarity with blacks about the horrendous treatment endured and the necessity to end it and install equality. It is an advantage and privilege that they do not want or need at the immoral expense of other human beings. The key to committing these atrocities is to devalue, reduce, and dehumanize your victims to a deserving or irrelevant position unworthy of empathy or compassion. But the question then becomes who appointed you to make such a determination.

You see that is where religion and other forms of reinforcement and repetition are applied to believe and validate anything to defend and promote their belief no matter how sanctimonious and preposterous the justification may be. The elements of this twisted reality are a classic example of schizophrenic behavior, where their self-perceived contradiction to and diversion from reality morphs into a nightmarish fragmentation permitting unthinkable behavior and lack of willful remorse making it easy to repeat.  The extreme aggression, savage demeanor, and arrogant defense of the atrocities committed under the guise of conservative Christian values goes without saying that they would appear to be contrary to any actions a Christian not suffering from extreme mental illness would ever commit.

Compound that by its pervasive nature and it reveals a group brainwashing seemingly under demonic psychological indoctrination resulting in a mental slavery powerless to resist its destructive programming. A programmed compulsion of righteous evil and disregard for actions expecting no consequences. The portrayal of blacks as savage, dangerous, sexual predators, stupid, animalistic, and the list goes on and on serves to conceal the depravity of the accuser when their actions are compared against the accused. The racial slur “coon” has its origins in the practice of hunting and killing human beings for fun. How could the indiscriminate murder, enslavement, beatings, and rape of blacks not be more indicative of the savage provoking tendencies of whites claiming to be civilized? Now, who has really demonstrated the real savage and animalistic predator actions of a barbaric inclination if not whites?         

The transference of these ghastly behaviors which are identifiably one-sided against blacks serves as the propaganda-driven denial of the racist incubation reflected by whites without concealment. Just educate yourself on the extent and practices to better understand the journey and current condition of both sides. Rejection of the facts may be the only way to align yourself with the insanity and brutal reality blacks have faced at the hand of whites in this country. The dehumanizing realization of white atrocities is understandably frightening to whites wondering how can a people be treated so viciously and still stand for the flag, defend the country, and endure the bullshit.

Patriotism is the current code for allegiance to inequality and misplaced blame on others for actions and disappointments resulting from your own miscalculations. The exclusive claim to be the only guardians of patriotism has resulted in an erosion of its principles by the mangling of its meaning, application, and demonstration. Forced adherence to your manipulation of superiority into patriotism on anyone who does not look like you has had the effect of creating resistance to something which was never a point of contention, it has always been inequality.

The current fervor of voting rights are more aligned with voter suppression than voter fraud because the day has passed when you could regulate the outcome of the election as evidenced by the election of former President Obama. The will of the people’s vote cannot be calibrated to assure victory for you, so it must be suppressed against you. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 would not have been enacted if it were not needed in response to racism and voter suppression. Whites were in agreement that this was the case and countermeasures had to be implemented specifically to ensure that the target of these oppressions, blacks, had judicial protections for voting.

So, it would stand to fact and reason that neither the Civil War nor the Emancipation Proclamation abolished the slavery mentality. The ratification of the 13th Amendment in 1865 abolished slavery but it then transitioned into Jim Crow and blatant systemic prejudices. One hundred years after the Civil War ended the need for legislation was a recognition that racism, voter suppression, and discrimination were still the Jim Crow law of the land. It would then be counterintuitive that discrimination and oppression had continued beyond the Civil War but sadly very true it had.  

Affirmative action and similar actions would not have come about if these ongoing oppressions had ended when some claim, but many have continued on despite these remedies. It is an affront to decency to have the unmitigated gall to whimper about reverse discrimination and unfairness of opportunity allocations and access based solely on race designed to alleviate the disadvantages systematically imposed upon others by you.

To deny fairness to others by declaring your plight of unfairness and inequality is to either proclaim yourself stupid, irrational or a racist. I would like to think the best of you and given the benefit of the doubt assume that you are simply irrational. The overt discrimination and exclusion practiced has been solely based upon race but to bemoan your suffering by the inclusion of others while crying about opportunities you had readily denied others exceeds an elevated threshold of irrationality.

To be held liable is not discriminatory or discretionary but should be expected. Cancel culture cannot be used for absolution to ignore your culpability granting blanket immunity oblivious to your actions. It is deemed unfair by a cry of cancel culture regarding white’s accountability for their transgression when facing societal condemnation or discontinuation of patronage. Drawing the line and adopting unpleasant consequences by the withdrawal of voluntary support is not an obligation owed to the offender but a right of the offended.

White males in particular lack the credibility to complain when they have always been on the till with a place of improper privilege subsidized on the public draw with a hand in the cookie jar and thumb on the scale. They value freedom, prosperity, and fairness exclusively for themselves and are quick to complain when their expectation of preferential treatment is not met. It is ridiculous to insist that such monumental injustices be sweep under the rug while even the slightest rebuke of your privilege is exaggerated to an intolerable injustice. Stop it, they don’t make rugs or exaggerations that huge. This strategy to alienate yourselves from blame by denying your privilege and claiming victimization contradicts the historical substantiation of your actions.

The mentality and benefits are so great that some would masquerade themselves as part of the Confederate heritage. One is born in Canada of Cuban descent and named Rafael as Texas Ted to Americanize his image for easier assimilation into the good ole boy’s club. Could you imagine the difference in perception between Rafael Cruz and Ted? Another would claim his Confederate membership even though his lineage is German of the drumpf clan whose real fortune is that his grandfather was exiled from his native land for draft dodging returning back to America where he had fled.

Neither of these persons’ American lineage extends beyond their grandparents at best, nonetheless have claims of their Confederate heroes and heritage. But white skin, anglicized name changes, and cultural adaptation allowed them to assimilate and minimize if not avoid racial discrimination. This is the lure of white privilege while distancing themselves from their true heritage and diverting attention from themselves by ostracizing others and denouncing immigrants while their families are not too far removed from the immigration tree. What better to illustrate a reversed crab in the barrel mentality instead of franticly keeping them in they keep them out designating more assurance of privilege for themselves. A sort of all-in-the-family of preferential treatment requiring adaptation of Confederacy biases. White skin alone is the main inclusion factor with bias is a bonus.

MAGA is an adaptation of the make Germany great again philosophy used by Hitler in his rise to power and espousal of white privilege in a maniacal pursuit. Tell a big enough lie enough times very loudly over prolonged periods of time that the people will not only believe it but accept it as the truth was Hitler’s mantra. These same tactics are familiar tactics of American Republican politics and ideology today raising the question that if the nostalgic return to a MAGA time was possible then what time would that be. Would it be a time for lynching, coon hunting, forced labor, or any other litany of atrocities since there was never a time when they did not exist in America? What elements of slavery and discrimination would be preferable?

Are these the conservative Christian values we are to return to as demonstrated by history? Many lesser forms of these atrocities are already present, and the Republican party has been maligned with not only acceptance but the promotion of these aspirations by association with MAGA principles. If not a return to slavery certainly the continual furtherance of white privilege by the dehumanization and discrimination of blacks specifically and minorities in general, now to even include the poor. Let’s call it what it is, and you say what you mean. No further proof that America is off the rails realistically beyond redemption than half the elected officials refuse to denounce an insurrection or exclaim that it is wrong to murder a black man by choking him out in broad daylight placing your knee on his neck.

There is plenty more but what more do we need. Refusal to condemn and reject these actions actually condones them. The reason why they are acceptable is that it furthers your agenda. If a dog would have been choked out Republicans would have been outraged because it does not further their agenda and their estimation of the dog is above the dehumanization felt for blacks. Do you for one second think they care about unarmed blacks being killed and sprayed with bullets as long as it is understood that for example, whites storming the Capitol are not to be treated like the n-word. Only one shot fired but a black can be fired up multiple times in the back. No precautionary show of force or mass arrest but some would still ask what disparity?

Not condoning or requesting a violent response but simply highlighting the disparity that seemingly can only be based on race. What happened to the stance of when the looting starts, the shooting starts? On Capitol Hill, where an overwhelmingly almost exclusive mob of whites attempted to overthrow the government in the ultimate act of looting, there was less enforcement than if a Nike store was being looted. Furthermore, the outcry is deafening from those being held accountable, can you imagine their shock and indignation at being called to answer for the very attempt to overthrow the government.  What is this country coming to when whites are being arrested for being patriots to the Confederacy and blacks are expecting equality and redress?

The discrepancies of response and expectation change when it is blacks involved with the law unequally applied or by anyone even expecting it to be applied equally. How can one unarmed black be more of a fear-provoking threat and intolerance than a whole mob of insurrectionists?  The justification for Capitol Hill law enforcement restraint was praised while questionable articulation for use of deadly force against unarmed blacks is not condemned. Not advocating for less respect for white lives but equal respect for black lives. There has to be a comprehensive understanding, standard, and application of the law that does not give carte blanche for law enforcement misconduct and abuse of citizens.

Qualified immunity has to have clear objective parameters where protections are no longer enjoyed, and resources expended for disqualifying conduct. Law and order, crime and punishment, as well as wrongdoing and judgment must fall unabated on the actions committed and the person who committed them not the exemption of their guilt. The guilty deed is tethered to the guilty’s name if integrity is to be maintained otherwise it occasionally and eventually will lead to some feeling they are left with no choice but to resist detriment. When left with no choice, the choice then is made clear. While police are necessary, their actions cannot be above the law simply because they are essential and less likely to impact a white person adversely.

By the same indication, police interactions are negatively exaggerated, emotionally inflamed, and apprehensively predisposed reflecting reverberations from injustices and perceptions that influence citizen’s cooperation and politeness. The point is that a recalibration needs to occur on both sides, but the abuses of authority are not immune to the adjustments needed for the improvement of interactions. The submission to injustices brings about a greater dissatisfaction and resistance that escalates into a more hazardous condition for all concerned. Mutual respect deescalates conflict and promotes cooperation.

What encourages resistance, divisiveness, and danger is injustice, racism, and despair. The cause and effect is obvious and the dismay at the resulting outrage disingenuous, and of course based on if it is happening to you. A plea for solidarity healing society only becomes an objective when you are not the one making the concession, the balance of power has shifted away from you, or you stand to lose or lost something. It would have been better and more convincing had that been your mantra when you had the leadership influence. Now the tables have turned the plea for bipartisanship is uttered and the priority of moving forward together healing a fractured country at a fragile time is encouraged.

Renovations are always best when you are already working on improvements requiring one cleanup, suggesting that grievances be delayed for the good of the whole would somehow benefit us is contrary when your concern was and has been to benefit only yourself. So many times, in the past this conciliatory posture has only resulted in a delay, not improvement proving to be a sadistic prank time and time again. So, if this is truly a time of healing and bipartisan cooperation then the Republican leadership should try to cast at least one single bipartisan vote as a sign of their sincerity.

Extending the olive branch for once instead of demanding concessions to conform against conventional wisdom and our best interest. Adhering to your advantage of inequality assures that we all take the ride to the bottom as you have exhausted all of your deceitful persuasions. There is plenty of work to be done and time is squandered not resolving the issues that can and will no longer be silently suffered. The accumulated depletion of will and resources will not accomplish your objective since your preference is not the only consideration to be considered. Compromise and cooperation can not be adverse abstract principles, they are the way forward. You can not persist in taking pride in obstruction and destruction to exert a futile exercise of power.

History is undefeated and has proven that resistance to change and stubborn ill-fated indecision has led to obsolete power and existence. The arrogance of America will not let it recognize that there have been many demises of world power among nations based on the civil disorder and refusals to make changes. The societal collapse is often preceded by extreme economic instability and fluctuations, the infrastructure and labor deterioration, hunger and chaos, and then governmental collapse. Balance and equilibrium are universal laws and imbalance by its nature are unstable and prone to collapse. The imbalances of racism and oppression worldwide are now wobbling.  

Now the question is which will come first the change or the collapse? I do not believe it will be changed because of the opposition to it and the universal foundation of deceit it has taken to last this long. It is collapsing under its own weight of deceit and denial. If celestial gravitational collapses occur due to the contraction of its own weight or pull inward succumbing to disorder, then why is America exempt from collapsing from the contraction of its selfish stubbornness to adhere to the harmony or order of the universe or the will of God. No need to look to the sky since history and anthropology can confirm the earthly demise of civilizations that once had great power. The turmoil of the year 2020 was a premonition that cannot be survived repeatedly especially with the tailwinds still being felt. 

Progress and transformation in order to form a more perfect union not defined or restricted by the past is the way forward. Those who long for the past are afraid of the future. Uncertain of their prospects and secure with the status quo without regard for advancement but clinging to stagnation to prolong their significance. By nature, the young becomes the old and the old gives way to the new. This country was built on racism and the surpluses from black labor. Vast wealth and resources have been accumulated and shielded from blacks without question. Can there be any further denial of that? Should there be a recognition of that in words and redress? Damages can not be undone or life restored but mending can be pursued.

Since I have stated my pessimism or realism about significant change not being forthcoming let me just express what could or should happen. The first restorative action which will have the greatest impact is to cease and desist the nonsense, to just knock it off. Despite all the lives lost and mangled, the economic inflictions have had far more reaching implications than the murders. Personally more apologies, ineffective methods, or promises are not needed. The deaths caused and atrocities committed cannot be rescinded but the wealth benefits denied can be recuperated like stolen artifacts are returned. The government, businesses, and institutions should pursue more than conversational remedies since they received real monetary benefits, money would be a suitable substitute for words.

Financial is not the only form of payment and the government should not be the only payer but make no mistake slavery was about the benjamins, so the benjamins need to be paid. Services are the most likely form of payment that only require tendering the services, terms, or business you already provide such as free higher educational opportunities. Generations of descendants of slave owners have benefited greatly from what they established to pay it forward for their ancestors.

The primary distribution would be of opportunity, development, and investments but mainly just stop the bullshit for us to receive a fair shake. If no white person today has owned a single slave; they most certainly are recipients of racist privilege, enjoyed the restrictions levied, or were enriched by the bias practices so entrenched in American society.  It is not unfair to you that someone else would get a fair shot after your road has been paved by discrimination. Forty acres and a mule was the unfulfilled promise and elimination of discrimination still the dilemma but economic viability and sustainable resources are the reparations now required.

The Civil War basically set the parameters for economic profit-sharing the way the American Revolution did, only domestically this time. The north received a more equitable distribution of the profits along with a more sensible voluntary method of extracting the surplus of exploitative profits from black labor based on black’s lack of options and suppressed conditions. The south received the ability to continue operating as usual with the adaptation of the new method of extraction, supposedly voluntary labor with slightly lower profit margins. They both received plausible deniability. The dehumanizing treatment was pretty much the same and freed blacks still worked on the plantation scratching out a living at master’s behest only now the new and improved way of debauchery was called Jim Crow.

The Industrial Revolution begging in 1860 is what greatly influenced the end of legal slavery and the most likely cause of its abolition because it transitioned from sole dependence on human labor to machine labor. It created new models of efficiency and manufacturing making the old slave model obsolete but it did not eliminate the need for a permanent underclass to manage the machines. It lessened the method of physical labor required and increased the productivity for greater profits more evenly distributed among the north and south. The master-slave relationship became the boss-to-worker relationship model still practiced today as the basis of the economy with many of the same philosophical principles regarding labor.  

The master to slave mentality and dichotomy persists today for whites to become indignant at the very suggestion that discrimination exists or the audacity to expect relief. There is a diametrically opposed residual effect of this mentality that has dissipated over time but still exists. A polar opposite of a shared personality disorder, racist whites psychopathic character traits devoid of compassion or remorse and black’s submissive need for permission and conciliation. The refusal of whites and the request of black regarding reparation displays both mentalities. If they are delusional then we are imaginary or is that the other way around, it is hard to tell.

Centuries of bigoted behavior still leaves us in the position of requesting what an overwhelming number of whites refuse to give or recognize. The context of slavery and the psychological realities created a subculture of survival for blacks which in essence has manifested into our saving grace and sustaining resiliency. The missing piece has been cohesion securing an identifiable targeted objective with a solitary concentration. Targeted penetration into isolated and sustainable components using relentless incremental campaigns of focus building scope and momentum. So, if reparations are forthcoming then beautiful but until then we must forge ahead from a position of fortitude, focus, and resolve to realize that a shift in the paradigm of our perspective is the most efficient and assured way of securing equality.

Previously suffering from an extreme deficient, we now have sufficient agency to pay ourselves first. Meaning no permission is needed from others for assurances of equality but that as always, we must renew our efforts from where we are now with what we have to build alliances and coalitions for prosperity and equality starting with us. We have enough, we have plenty but the division of our resources and purpose cannot be counterproductive or diverted, discipline is needed. Certainly not separatism, we have paid too much but inclusion on our terms to equally wet our beak.

Repeated requests always transforms into pleading which is always distasteful under any circumstances and rarely effective since it grants the power to refuse as well as to grant the request. Far from being downtrodden or self-pitying, we should be encouraged at how far we have come, what we have had to overcome, and what final frontiers of racism we are near to conquering. You never had the right to dominion over us so now we do not need to seek your permission for our salvation, reparations are for your salvation. Again, the most valuable gesture would be to knock it off but either way we have made tremendous gains to close the gap notwithstanding the tremendous gap that still remains.

Rest assured your children will not face the retribution of your actions but will have to adjust to the extinction of your privilege. Your survival as a race will not be endangered as you claim to fear but your greatest fear of elimination of your advantage will be realized. The privilege or displeasure of white America will be no longer the paramount concern on which society operates. Your substantial resistance should be more productively directed toward rectifying the problem not denial and concealment for the continuation of your comfort. The hypocrisy of denouncing bullying, being too strong for bullying does not extend beyond being too weak for racism perhaps the greatest form of bullying. Your racist fragile psyche and mind are dependent on the intimidation of racism. The poisoning of a weak mind believing that white skin somehow makes you divine.    

Deprived of privilege your means of survival will not be like the constant struggle for survival from the lowest socio-economic status of society like ours has been. It will not be sabotaged by the systemic injustices you have consistently heaped upon us. The crux of many issues in the black community has been influenced by slavery and Jim Crow which will not be anything you will have to contend with as contributing influences of dysfunction in your communities only as a haunting nightmare of your actions. Black is not only a race but has been a condition, a condition that has had an extreme toll. Your levy for the crimes against black humanity and atrocities committed over centuries has a tariff which should be paid in this realm but if not  maybe the one after this with your soul.   

Deflection or denial of these conditions cannot be independent of issues confronting the black community since close examination will likely reveal a correlation to slavery, discrimination, or the psychological trauma caused by them. Not to mention the generational poverty caused and endorsed. The repeated insistence to deflect onto other problems in the black community does not absolve you of your infractions or justify our exclusion from equal treatment under the law or equivalent opportunities.

A three-dimensional understanding of a four-dimensional problem leaves you one dimension short of a resolution. The Confederate heritage and the American legacy are synonymous with each other from the inception of this country and the founding father’s vision. If the founding fathers were as wise and great as they are portrayed then why was slavery allowed to be woven into the fabric of America’s DNA? It was intentional and may be the reason why many whites think they need to take the country back for white exclusivity in accordance with its purpose.

The founding father’s guidance and influence is still the overriding authority today of adherence suggesting their vision has transcended nearly four-hundred and fifty years of governance but not the detrimental effects of slavery. The constant square peg in a round hole predicament of stretching the interpretation of their intent on matters they could not have envisioned essentially expresses the intent of the current interpreter. The emphasis is then on the current interpreter to subjectively convey their own understanding and guessing the original intent or interpretation. Clarity of interpretation then is the paramount objective or selective choice of a subjective interpreter but still conjecture.

The confusion and misconceptions of understandings and allowances of iniquities have traversed, deviated, and wandered over time as well as the subjective translations of intent and purpose, but the one constant has been economic exploitation by the manner of racism. The founding father’s in their infinite wisdom must have calculated the compounded effects and centrifugal implications of racism and surely the need to one day have to address the restitutions accrued and satisfaction required relative to reparations. They surely had the foresight to envision that it would become one of the perils of the country surviving just as the American Revolution had. They would have also known that the refusal to remedy the offenses could only be enforced by a domestic threat from those seeking to maintain their advantage attacking anyone or anything that supported the change, even the government. The last time it was called the Civil War and this time it is called Trumpism, MAGA, Patriotism, and Republican complicity.

If my words, tone, and honesty are harsh then the reality has been more harsh and bitter to experience for us over a prolonged period of centuries. Feeble attempts to misrepresent, reduce, or quantify our damages expose the unwillingness to understand, preventing a resolution. You must first understand then accept the problem thru the spectrum of the casualties caused before you can rectify them. Racist ideology and white’s resistance to being held accountable leaves me unconvinced that significant change or national reparations are on the horizon but collapse is impending. The combination of racism and economics fueling the downfall as symptoms of the illness. The disease is self-righteous arrogance not capable of change exposing a self-destructive premise.  

If repeated reminders of discrimination and disregard for resolution are any indication that racist compulsion leaves bigots powerless to resist and hopelessly cursed destined to be like the scorpion’s sting, being in their nature to sting even if it destroys them as well. There can be no real remorse without redress and consequences to express and satisfy the wounded but the truth is that there can be no healing without remedy. While some are hoping and wishing, I am well beyond the age of believing Santa Claus is real or if real reparations or healing will be achieved any time soon.

 

P.S. Be sure to wear your seat belt, we are expecting some stubborn turbulence ahead.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz