Talking Points Memo notices that the Right is giving us different narratives in the two cases:
"If reaction to the situation in Ferguson, Mo. has been bitterly divided along partisan lines, the immediate response to the grand jury's decision in a police chokehold case in New York City has been anything but."
"Douthat was one of several conservative media personalities to seize on New York's law against selling single, untaxed cigarettes.
Breitbart's media critic John Nolte made a similar point, calling both Garner's death and the NYPD's behavior "inexcusable."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/eric-garner-conservative-reaction-nanny-state
In all fairness I actually think that's a rather inventive position by conservatives. This enables them to for once not take the side of a cop that kills a young black man-or in the case of Zimmerman down in Florida not even a cop but a wanna be cop-but take the side of the one who was killed.
Then again, I should say that I don't necessarily have a problem with conservatives or others taking a different position in each case as the two cases were actually quite different. Notice that even President Obama and US Attorney General Eric Holder are taking different positions on NYC than in Ferguson. Only in the latter are they actually starting a federal investigation.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-de-blasio-eric-garner-eric-holder-justice-department
As to the conservatives it is striking that both killings started on a dispute regarding cigarettes. Eric Garner is a victim if not a hero for selling single untaxed cigarettes but Michael Brown is a thug while stealing cigars-why not argue that maybe if the cigarette tax weren't so high this would not have been necessary?
I don't really think that the two cases are equal however. There is some truth to the claim that Brown was a thug-that doesn't mean that he should be killed with impunity, we do still have the rule of law, but it does complicate any simple narrative of a young innocent black teenager being executed in cold blood for no reason at all but that he's Black.
No-'Big Mike' as his friend who witnessed his death called him-was certainly not wholly innocent. When you are not an innocent person-legally I mean-you do increase the risk you may end up dead and it's not quite as a categorical moral slam dunk as his family, friends and many political activists might insist that it is.
Even Brown's friend's narrative of what happened hardly gives us a categorical case of him being a innocent victim who wasn't himself forcing a confrontation that might not otherwise have happened.
On the other hand, we do see a pattern where every time a cop-or in Zimmerman's case, a cop wanna be-kills a young Black man, the Grand Jury refuses to indict. I do think in both the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases there should have been an indictment-just to have a trial, I think there was more than enough question at least that a trial was in order. Yet, every case ends the same. Why is that? I think those who say it's not racism have the burden of proof on them.
At the very least we have an Administration in the White House and in the Mayor's office of NYC that this is something that we need answers to. I think that we are getting a lot more action with President Obama and Mayor de Blasio than we would with a President Romnney and Mayor Bloomberg.
UPDATE: Still the President has rightly convened a task force after Ferguson. The beauty of this is it will deal with both on a national level rather than at each local area.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/03/obama-eric-garner-decision_n_6264762.html
UPDATE: I agree with Al Sharpton that the only solution on this epidemic is a federal trial and a federal solution overall. Obama's task force will be very beneficial and important.
"If reaction to the situation in Ferguson, Mo. has been bitterly divided along partisan lines, the immediate response to the grand jury's decision in a police chokehold case in New York City has been anything but."
"A man is killed for selling *unlicensed* drugs by a cop who walks even though it's all on video: Putting the 'police' in pink police state," tweeted New York Times columnist Ross Douthat on Wednesday."
"Douthat was one of several conservative media personalities to seize on New York's law against selling single, untaxed cigarettes.
Breitbart's media critic John Nolte made a similar point, calling both Garner's death and the NYPD's behavior "inexcusable."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/eric-garner-conservative-reaction-nanny-state
In all fairness I actually think that's a rather inventive position by conservatives. This enables them to for once not take the side of a cop that kills a young black man-or in the case of Zimmerman down in Florida not even a cop but a wanna be cop-but take the side of the one who was killed.
Then again, I should say that I don't necessarily have a problem with conservatives or others taking a different position in each case as the two cases were actually quite different. Notice that even President Obama and US Attorney General Eric Holder are taking different positions on NYC than in Ferguson. Only in the latter are they actually starting a federal investigation.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-de-blasio-eric-garner-eric-holder-justice-department
As to the conservatives it is striking that both killings started on a dispute regarding cigarettes. Eric Garner is a victim if not a hero for selling single untaxed cigarettes but Michael Brown is a thug while stealing cigars-why not argue that maybe if the cigarette tax weren't so high this would not have been necessary?
I don't really think that the two cases are equal however. There is some truth to the claim that Brown was a thug-that doesn't mean that he should be killed with impunity, we do still have the rule of law, but it does complicate any simple narrative of a young innocent black teenager being executed in cold blood for no reason at all but that he's Black.
No-'Big Mike' as his friend who witnessed his death called him-was certainly not wholly innocent. When you are not an innocent person-legally I mean-you do increase the risk you may end up dead and it's not quite as a categorical moral slam dunk as his family, friends and many political activists might insist that it is.
Even Brown's friend's narrative of what happened hardly gives us a categorical case of him being a innocent victim who wasn't himself forcing a confrontation that might not otherwise have happened.
On the other hand, we do see a pattern where every time a cop-or in Zimmerman's case, a cop wanna be-kills a young Black man, the Grand Jury refuses to indict. I do think in both the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases there should have been an indictment-just to have a trial, I think there was more than enough question at least that a trial was in order. Yet, every case ends the same. Why is that? I think those who say it's not racism have the burden of proof on them.
At the very least we have an Administration in the White House and in the Mayor's office of NYC that this is something that we need answers to. I think that we are getting a lot more action with President Obama and Mayor de Blasio than we would with a President Romnney and Mayor Bloomberg.
UPDATE: I agree with Al Sharpton that the only solution on this epidemic is a federal trial and a federal solution overall. Obama's task force will be very beneficial and important.
No comments:
Post a Comment