Hey, America! Isn’t it about time that you take some personal responsibility for your actions? Well, San Luis Obispo County Sheriff Ian Parkinson absolutely does!
As he lamented a real “lack of dialogue” in this country to the Republican Party of SLO County on July 6, he lauded the real conservative value of personal responsibility—which he said was completely lacking in certain segments of the community (more specifically: criminals and Black Lives Matter protesters)—and tsk-tsked the struggle bus our country is on at the moment.
“It makes it very hard,” he whined about members of law enforcement being called racist. “I have the benefit of taking off the uniform … I truly don’t understand it.”
Oh boy. So let’s break that down for a bit, shall we. He’s mad that law enforcement has a bad rap right now and people are trying to break down the systemic racism that literally built the justice system in our country. Someone needs to take personal responsibility for all of the unarmed people who die at the hands of law enforcement every year. I don’t see that happening anytime soon!
He’s upset that people aren’t willing to talk about it. Yeah, me too, man. Public conversations are so important! That’s how change happens.
But then, the YouTube video that someone posted of his meandering diatribe was made private. That way only people who basically agree with him can view it.
A real lack of dialogue in our community, huh? Oh wait! I get it! Dialogue is only supposed to happen if it correlates strongly with one’s own opinions! Then nothing changes, and people like Sheriff Parkinson get to stay in power. Oh! I totally get it now.
Also. Parkinson seems to be adamant that he can take off his uniform. Umm, duh? Won’t you then be naked in your bare white skin? What he doesn’t seem to get is the fact that people can’t take their skin off. Black, brown, white, or other. What you’ve got is what you get.
And it’s not a real surprise that he doesn’t understand how other people feel or what their life experiences are and how it shapes their worldview. That seems to be something no one in American understands right now!
“Here in San Luis Obispo, we’re being trashed by this issue of something that is truly not here in that form,” he explained to the Republicans who truly believe exactly what he is saying.
Oh, but dearest Parkinson, racism absolutely exists here. It exists in the racial slurs of the unhappy customer yelling at the Black store manager as he got into the Pro-Cleaners Chimney and Carpet Cleaning van in Atascadero. It exists in the people who yell racial slurs at protesters who support the Black Lives Matter movement. It exists in the blackface that Cal Poly students “obliviously” sport to parties. It exists in the racist graffiti tagged at Grover Beach Elementary School.
And if all of that racism is alive and well in the SLO County community, then how can you believe that it doesn’t exist within the ranks of county law enforcement. Ignoring it and choosing not to see it is the single biggest issue.
Because it also exists in you mentioning that white protesters are the ones yelling at law enforcement in SLO County. There are Black people at those protests, too, and they are also screaming to be heard by law enforcement. They have been the ones organizing these protests we’ve had. And you clearly haven’t heard them. Not only have you not heard them, you make it sound like they don’t exist here.
And they do exist.
They exist like racism exists.
And the dialogue you lament the loss of is actually happening.
It’s happening right now, as this community discusses the recent protest that culminated with the arrest of organizer Tianna Arata. A car window was busted over the head of a 4-year-old child. A protester was run over by the same car. The way we view that situation and who’s at fault depends on our worldview and the people we choose to discuss it with.
The protest was disruptive and loud, which is exactly what protests are meant to be. It was full of anger, but it was also full of joy. It was conflicted, like we are conflicted. And it was partly a response to that 20-minute speech that Parkinson made to the Republican Party of SLO.
That is dialogue. Callout and response. Callout and response.
And boy, doesn’t it suck to be called out for something you said?
Unfortunately, most of our dialogue is happening on Instagram feeds and Facebook posts. It’s happening in the echo chambers we love to revel in—those reassuring places where we hear only the words we want to hear: Your opinion is the right opinion. Their opinion is wrong. Don’t listen.
Those are the places where what you believe about a situation will become fact—whether it is actually a fact or not. And fact at the moment is a tricky thing. Because fact is now part of our belief system. We see what we want to see and hear what we want to hear.
Dialogue actually involves engaging with the other side and doing this little thing called listening. Δ
The Shredder lives on the struggle bus. Send comments to shredder@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Jul 23 – Aug 2, 2020.
I have difficulty reading “shredder’s” monologues, as they frequently wander aimlessly while using subtle and not so subtle accusations against others, often without any foundation.
But in the case of this particular “opinion” piece, the barely camouflaged insults appear unfounded and rude.
Our Sheriff sees no “systemic” racism in his troops. For starters, I presume that most of us of fair judgement do not believe that “everyone” is a racist; indeed, I know very few people who appear in any form to be racist.
The expression “systemic racism” seems an ill defined term which presumes racial prejudice where you cannot find specific behavior to evidence racism. That’s too much like “when did you stop beating your wife” as a term to be used in decent analysis or polite company.
If Ian does not see widespread or ingrained racism in his team, that’s a good thing. And unless “shredder” has some specific facts upon which to allege racism within our Sheriff’s office, the appropriate thing to do would be not to make such an allegation in the first place.
Many of us are tired of the loose, accusatory tone of those who find our country lacking in every manner they can imagine. Perhaps it would be a good time for us to relax and recognize that the vast majority of folks in our community are decent hardworking citizens and neither consumed by hostility toward any other group, nor looking for an opportunity to bring others down.
Clovisdad, you once again prove that you either cannot or refuse to actually understand what systemic racism is. Do yourself a favor and do some research. While you’re at it, stop presuming to speak for anyone aside from yourself. Your comments nearly always have the out of touch tone that you seem to know what the majority of your fellow citizens believe and that is quite frankly wrong. Open your mind to other points of view and ideas, you close minded, ignorant bigot.
I can’t breathe . . . In this mask. -Karen
Clovisdad makes a good point, and DIV DIPAV unintentionally supports his point that “systemic racism” is a vague, undefined meaningless charge, when he demands that Clovisdad “do some research”, instead of himself giving specifics. Just what SPECIFIC racist acts are local law enforcement guilty of? Claiming to know that a “majority of your fellow citizens” believe something is meaningless when you fail to identify what facts they supposedly believe? What we are seeing out of the “progressives” is not a reasoned argument, but more of a howl of emotional angst over a narrative which they have repeated so often to each other that it seems true to them.
My response to Clovisdad is in reference to other similar comments he has made here in the past. He claims that systemic racism is a nebulous and undefined term. I have defined it for him before but he refuses to acknowledge what it actually refers to. It’s rather telling that he always writes the term in quotations, as though he doesn’t believe it has a definition. Another tell from his posts is a very defensive position and an often repeated assurance that he is not racist. In my experience, when someone goes so far out of the way to tell everyone that they are NOT something it’s because they really are, especially when nobody is accusing them.
So, again, for both of you, here is a definition of this supposedly vague idea:
Institutional (or systemic) racism was defined by Sir William Macpherson in the UK’s Lawrence report (1999) as: “The collective failure of an organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.”
Again, what SPECIFIC acts constitute this “systemic racism”? Providing a definition in a 21 year old report is not helpful. Let’s have the facts.
I’m not going to hold your hand all the way, at some point you need to start doing your own fact finding, but here’s a few examples:
https://www.businessinsider.com/us-systemi…
https://abc7news.com/systemic-racism-defin…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/if…
https://www.vox.com/2020/6/17/21284527/sys…
Even from Ben & Jerry’s:
https://www.benjerry.com/whats-new/2016/sy…
It’s actually not very hard to do even cursory research. If you want to close your eyes to reality there’s not much hope for you.
Once again, I ask for SPECIFIC acts and conduct. You sent editorials and opinion, definitions, and some opinion by an ice cream maker which has nothing to do with SLO. I can only conclude that you are not aware of anything specific, and are just dutifully reciting your feelings on the subject.
I guess you didn’t understand my initial position did you? I am merely trying to get clovisdad to understand what systemic racism is. Go back and read my posts. Where did I say anything about SLO law enforcement? My goal is to get an ignorant white man to realize that this term does indeed have meaning and it is NOT some vague buzzword.
As for you, you can continue to demand whatever you like, I’m not going to deliver something to you just because you ask for it, especially since it’s not what I’m talking about. My issue was and is people like clovisdad (and now you) who like to pretend that systemic racism is not just defined, but a very real and unpleasant taint of many of our institutions. I have provided a definition and examples now, feel free to continue to make unfounded demands if you like, I’m done here. Work on your reading comprehension for the future.
You might examine your own reading comprehension. The original article was an attack by the Shredder on Sheriff Parkinson for saying there was no systemic racism, and Clovisdad indicated that the Shredder had failed to specify any specific acts or conduct by local law enforcement constituting “systemic racism”. You then attacked Clovisdad, calling him a “bigot” for raising the question. I asked you to specify whatever acts and conduct of local law enforcement YOU consider to constitute “systemic racism”, but instead of giving any specific examples, you merely responded with various left wing jargon and polemics, including authoritative pronouncements from an ice cream maker. From your inability to point to any actual facts, I can only assume that you agree that there is no “systemic racism” locally.
Below is my perspective of the entire “Tianna Arata Millennial Affair” with “Major Heidi Disharmony” – See my youtube video commentary here: https://youtu.be/hBxUyErz59U