The Wrong Wire! How Hyper-liberalism Fails to Stop the Clock on Racial Injustice

Defund the Police! Abolish ICE! Silence is Violence! Other than an atrocious branding perspective, these slogans birthed from a string of social justice tragedies share one thing in common: a flawed approach. While any rational being can recite a number of wrongs committed by police precincts and Homeland Security subdivisions nationwide, the emotional responses they trigger gravely outweigh logical countermeasures. If the mainstream response from Liberals to alt-rightism is their own recipe of agenda extremism, then it all but guarantees the undesired continuation of their counterparts agenda, and here's why.

Let's start with the misguided championed slogan of ''Defund the Police.'' Other than costing Democrats seats in the house in the 2020 midterm elections, this slogan takes a legitimate call for change and dresses it in the worst possible name. I think there's no shortage of people who would be in favor of reappropriating the staggering budgets of local police precincts to more social service expenditures, however branding that prerogative as ''Defund the Police,'' seriously? Were other slogans such as: ''Power to the Arts,'' ''Spread the Wealth,'' or ''Pass the Funds'' not in the drawing hat? They certainly would've carried the same message without having an alienating affect on an already heavily polarized nation. But instead, studies have shown with help from hyper-liberalism the slogan of ''Defund the Police'' has only worsened the issue it seeks to rectify. Numerous state legislatures have enacted bills that penalize counties that defund police budgets, proposed measures to suppress constitutionally protected assembly rights, and riled Trumpers even further. Reallocating police funds is no small feat given this country's relationship with public safety. Instead, highlighting the need for increased funding for education and healthcare might prove more fruitful. Demonstrating the need for increased federal funding for these areas, especially in constituencies where elected officials seek to suppress them, would likely yield a more impactful outcome.

Next up, ''Abolish ICE.'' This slogan is undoubtedly due to the human rights violations of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement division of DHS. But with a federal budget of over $7 billion dollars, this department with countless atrocities against human rights isn't going anywhere. The idea that it can abolished with a flick of wrist is childish wishful thinking. Why not focus efforts to changing the department's objectives and the procedures in which executes them? The prospects of this may have been slim to none during the previous administration, but now with Biden in the White House, the opportunity to raise this potential is more tangible. In light of the pandemic, this task might not jumpstart at the speed human rights activists wish it, however the potential for it to take flight can be real. This would require the extremest term of ''abolish'' make way for a more sensible heading, and for policy reasons that's a good thing. ''Restructure'' or ''Transform'' may not have the same radical tone to it, but it's one that can align with congress's views and ultimately they are the ones with the power to change it. Democrats hold a slim majority in both houses, and if they are going to have the window to act on this worthy cause, they need a better brand than one that calls for abolishing a multi-billion, tax-payer funded department. Policy enforcement is highly dependent on that department's acting director, and with a Biden appointee leading this subdivision, it starts with him. Rallying desired changes in how this subdivision executes its objectives behind a pragmatic replacement agenda is essential to triggering change. Perhaps the most crucial change that needs to happen first is probably letting him know you don't want to abolish his division and terminate his employment..

Transitioning to the blind, virtue-signaling slogan of ''Silence is Violence,'' this generation-passed phrase reemerged from the protests in response to the murder of George Floyd. This slogan emphasizes that anyone who performs below the mysteriously set bar of social outrage against racial injustice is only contributing to continued police violence. As charming as this slogan is, its message is deeply flawed. In reality, it's a battle cry from those who champion themselves as carrying the torch through the next civil rights movement. Plot twist: they're not. I fail to see how posting a black square on one's instagram before continuing to peruse TikTok raises your ''voice'' to the halls of congress. Racial justice reform has been developing in this country for generations. The idea that individuals who are often privileged, middle class, and white setting the standard for advocacy on behalf of the black community is both disrespectful and uncomfortable. What those who preach this phrase fail to understand is that sometimes silence is single mother working 3 jobs to make ends meat. Sometimes silence is an undocumented immigrant who can't speak English. Sometimes silence is an unemployed student bearing the weight of crushing debt. But those who call attention to how people's silence is ''violence'' don't consider the bigger picture. They're incapable of viewing the reality beyond the borders of their performative activism.

From the dialogue that I've had with friends of the black community, I've listened to how shouting a meaningless slogan falls short of changing the obstacles they face as black Americans. Sadly, this slogan is far less about calling for advocacy on behalf of the black community and instead is used to inflate the egos of those who would put themselves on a pedestal of pseudo-moralism. So perhaps instead of marching along a predominate crowd of non-black people, maybe hold more dialogues with members of the black community and act on a more realistic campaign slogan?

These slogans produced in light of racial and social injustice carry genuinely admirable messages, but the practicality behind them is nonexistent. Our responses to these events should stand on the shoulders of logic and reasonable calls for change, not emotional triggers. Platforms such as Instagram and Twitter have only permeated this base, and it's time to rethink our approach. Because based on the trajectory of the alt-rights response to these emotional counterassaults, we're letting genuine need of change slip through our fingers.