Woke Paradoxes of Social Deconstruction By Chris Knight

     There are unexpected problems developing in the US in closing down the police by discriminatory firing of White officers, because Blacks can become collateral damage too, which is just too bad, but when one is dismantling a civilisation, a few eggs have to get broken. Likewise, with making omelettes.
  https://jonathanturley.org/2020/07/17/seattle-city-council-member-suggests-firing-white-officers-in-massive-reduction-of-police-department/

“The Seattle City Council is facing something of a dilemma in its popular pledge to cut the police budget by 50 percent. To do so would require firing a significant number of police officers, which is also popular. The problem is that the firing would be done by seniority and many of the less senior officers are black.  The solution according to City Council member Lisa Herbold is simple: fire officers based on their race.  While that would be the definition of racial discrimination, Herbold clearly believes that it is discrimination for a good cause. The federal courts are likely to disagree.  Most notably, Herbold’s call for racial discrimination against white officers would seek to undue the work of Justice Thurgood Marshall who insisted that racial discrimination unlawful and evil regardless of the race you want to disenfranchise or discriminate against. Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best released a video calling the plan of Herbold and others “completely reckless.” She also sent a letter to Mayor Jenny Durkan warning that dramatic cuts would require the layoff of hundreds of officers. The Police Department also warned that the firings would include many minority officers. Herbold insists that this would be perfectly legal despite the prohibitions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What concerns me most is not that such calls for racial discrimination are possibly constitutional but that they are so clearly popular. The EEOC amplifies this point on its website: “It is unlawful to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race or color in regard to hiring, termination, promotion, compensation, job training, or any other term, condition, or privilege of employment.” In taking this position, Herbold is opposing one of the best known opinions by Thurgood Marshall. In McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co. (1976), Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote opinions that called for the broad interpretation of Title VII to protect everyone. In McDonald, two white employees were fired after a theft in the business.  The two white employees were held jointly and severally liable with a black employee. However, only the white employees were fired.  After they sued under Title VII, Marshall wrote for the majority in denouncing such discrimination against white employees, insisted that “racial discrimination in private employment against whites [must be] on the same terms as racial discrimination against nonwhites.”  He denounced “the illogic in retaining guilty employees of one color while discharging those of another color.”  While Marshall would vigorously support affirmative action (including his dissent in Bakke), he believed that all races were protected from discrimination under federal law.

This of course would be even more egregious since Herbold wants to fire white officers due to their race alone.  They would not be accused of any wrongdoing or failure.  The problem is their race. It is notable that is not an action that is part of or in furtherance of a valid affirmative action plans ordered by a court or approved by a federal agency. See United Steelworkers of America v. Weber (1979) and Johnson v. Transportation Agency (1987). In Ricci v. DeStefano (2009), the Supreme Court ruled against the city of New Haven after a group of white firefighters and a Hispanic firefighter challenged the refusal to certify the results of promotion exams in order to promote black firefighters who performed less well.  The Court held that the City’s refusal to certify the test was unlawful discrimination under Title VII. If found that “race-based action like the City’s in this case is impermissible under Title VII unless the employer can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable under the disparate-impact statute.” Herbold would not only refuse to promote on the basis of race but would fire officers on that basis.  No test. Just a pure racially discriminatory program of terminations.  Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), Chief Justice John Roberts once declared “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”  That is clearly not the plan of Herbold and any of her colleagues who want to fire officers based on their race.”

     How long will it take for Whites to wake up? Or, do they just want to be dispossessed and die? Maybe. Anyway, at least the entire framework of civilisation will fall away, so why should I care? After all, this is policing today:
  https://summit.news/2020/07/17/as-violent-crime-in-new-york-soars-de-blasio-assigns-27-cops-to-protect-black-lives-matter-mural/

“Even as violent crime and deadly shootings in New York soar, Mayor Bill de Blasio has reportedly assigned no less than 27 cops working in shifts to protect a Black Lives Matter mural outside Trump Tower. “Just heard that @NYCMayor has 1 & 8 securing the #BlackMindsMatter mural at Trump Tower,” tweeted former police commissioner Bernard Kerik. “That’s one sergeant and eight cops, x 3 tours a day! Violence, shootings, and murder is up in NYC and this clown has three sergeants and 24 cops guarding a mural! If true, #SICKENING.” His claim was backed up by Derrick Gibson, who is running for governor of New York. Gibson said that he spoke to cops on the scene who said “they are getting paid to baby sit paint, and not happy about it.” De Blasio and his wife helped paint the BLM mural on July 9 before it was subsequently vandalized, leading the Mayor to assert, “The Black Lives Matter movement is more than words, and it can’t be undone.” Even before the recent riots, major crime in New York City had soared by 22 per cent thanks to bail reforms that allowed suspects to avoid jail and re-offend. Last month, it was reported that there had been 38 murders over the last 28 days up until June 14, twice as many as the previous year. On Monday alone, 18 people were shot in 14 separate incidents. Six NYPD officers were also injured during clashes with protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge on Wednesday. The city has already cut next year’s police budget by $1 billion, leading Houston lawyer Howard Steele to comment, “He is spending his reduced police budget on guarding his arts and crafts project instead of New York lives.”

     The anarchists and ultra-libertarians are perhaps right, that we would be better off without a state at all, with self-protection coming from gun ownership, no restrictions.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy:_The_God_That_Failed
  https://mises.org/library/gold-and-guns

 

Comments

No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Guest
Thursday, 22 October 2020
If you'd like to register, please fill in the username, password and name fields.

By accepting you will be accessing a service provided by a third-party external to https://blog.alor.org/