(please forward widely)
Some say the real issue in Ferguson isn't race, but the
militarization of the police. It is very much a matter of race, as well as
the expanding militarization of the domestic police force promoted by
government policy since 2001. Just as majority-Black Detroit is a bellwether of broader attacks on the U.S. working class, majority-Black Ferguson represents a nationwide wake-up call of
things to come, in cities and towns of all
races and nationalities. However, it is no accident that the rulers of
a racist society will test their weapons and policies on those most oppressed –
people of color and the poor, most often one and the same. Police killings of
unarmed civilians are nothing new, and usually, if the victim is an
African-American youth, there is no uproar – it is business as usual. In 2012,
the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement released a study revealing that every 28
hours a Black person in this country is the victim of murder by police,
security guards or vigilantes. USA Today
reported last week (based on FBI data) that two black people a week were killed
by white police from 2005 to 2012 and nearly one in five were under 21. What
is new is that the militarization of the domestic police force, flying under
the radar for decades, particularly since the “War on Terror” was unleashed in
2001, was exposed to the world in the aftermath of the brutal slaying of Ferguson
teenager Michael Brown. Under the guise
of “fighting terrorism,” we now have a domestic police force that looks,
thinks, and acts more like an invading and occupying military than a
community-based force to protect the public. The
June ACLU report, entitled “War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of
American Policing,” documents this alarming trend. The report summarized: “excessive militarism
in policing, particularly through the use of paramilitary policing teams,
escalates the risk of violence, threatens individual liberties, and unfairly
impacts people of color.” This
trend of militarization of the domestic police has been deliberatively promoted
by Homeland Security by giving away and selling huge quantities of surplus
weaponry to police forces in municipalities large and small, regardless of
“crime-fighting” justification. Towns
that could not dream of funding purchases of armored vehicles now have high
tech military equipment, and this ownership then encourages their use. As a result, we are seeing SWAT teams
indistinguishable from combat military units being used in routine drug raids,
sometimes resulting in the deaths of bystanders. Images
of armored vehicles, explosions and tear gas, and police in riot gear with
assault rifles, normal in U.S. wars abroad, are now brought home. The artificial distinction between police and
army is being broken down and we are seeing what has been true all along: both
serve the interests of the corporate ruling elite as opposed to the people they
ostensibly are there to help. Further,
the wars both abroad and at home make the war industries and intelligence
corporations very rich. Initially
justified for use in the “War on Drugs,” then the border wars, and of course,
to defend against “terrorism,” today we see the overriding label of ‘Homeland
Security” used as the backdrop for attacks on Occupy encampments, demonstrators
at the Democratic and Republican war parties’ national conventions, and
expressions of outrage and horror when racist police brutalize and murder
defenseless people of color, as in Ferguson today. At the same time, journalists of the
so-called “free press” are also endangered and stifled. Wars abroad are fought over domination and energy resources,
while the war at home is used to quell dissent. This has been a developing
trend. Always available for use in communities of color, coordinated,
multi-city, military-style strategies and tactics were used to suppress the
Occupy Wall Street movement. U.S. surveillance drones, once (supposedly) used
exclusively overseas, are now showing up in U.S. cities. The widespread
domestic spying by the NSA was perfected by the military operating in Iraq.
Barbaric conditions in the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo prisons are mirrored in
the practices of long-term solitary confinement and even outright torture
employed in many U.S. prisons, particularly the Super-Max and “Communications
Management Units.” There is no sacred firewall between domestic and foreign
policy, and the people of the United States, particularly the poor and
oppressed, are increasingly being treated as a hostile force to be controlled.
The War on Terror has come home to roost. Just as the government prepares for possible war scenarios
overseas, it prepares for domestic unrest here at home. Washington is acutely
aware that one out of every seven people in this country now lives in poverty, with
the percentage much higher in Black and other communities of color. Youth of
all races are in despair over their economic futures and are increasingly
demanding change. Organized labor is again showing signs of militancy,
particularly those unions seeking to organize the most oppressed workers. The
Occupy movement popularized the understanding that a mere 1 percent of the
population controls so much wealth that it is also able to control the
political process. The anger over these underlying economic and social
conditions can explode into rebellion when sparked by blatant police abuse such
as the public execution of Michael Brown in Ferguson. Whether aimed at spontaneous community rebellions or
organized protests, the development of a militarized police force is not simply
the result of the availability of some surplus military equipment. It is part
of a very conscious plan to control, repress and destroy an awakening
working-class consciousness, particularly among people of color. Ferguson has also shown a spotlight on other connections
between domestic and foreign policy, in particular the parallels between
occupied Palestinians and the beleaguered population of Ferguson. Crowd- control
weapons used in both places are “made in the USA” and U.S. police personnel
from Ferguson and elsewhere receive “counter-terrorism” training in
Israel. Gazans have sent messages of
solidarity to Ferguson, as well as practical advice on defense against teargas
and military might. One Palestinian sent
a photo of himself holding a sign that read, “The Palestinian people know what
it means to be shot while unarmed because of your ethnicity.” Protesters in Ferguson reciprocated by
carrying signs likening themselves to Gazans under siege and chanting “Gaza
Strip.” Ongoing
resistance is also a shared commonality.
In an August 20th column in Black Agenda Report, Glen Ford
writes, “The
brave and besieged people of Ferguson, Missouri, have already caused serious
complications for the U.S. National Security State. By virtue of simply
standing their ground in their own small city, the demonstrators have forced
the local, county and state police to show their true, thoroughly militarized
colors." What
can be done? Marches and rallies around
the country must continue and demand an end to police militarization and the
legalized human rights abuses against millions of citizens. Stand with the people of Ferguson to demand: Cops, state troopers and National Guard out of Ferguson! No to racist murders! Justice for Michael Brown! End police militarization! 8/23/14
click here to donate to UNAC Click here for the Facebook UNAC
group. To remove yourself from the UNAC listserv,
please send an email to: UNAC-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net |
