The Responsibility to Challenge Hate Groups-Social and Formal Connections

Throughout the years I have found that hate and self-identity are very much mixed up together into a personal schema. Because we form our identities through our social groups they become a primary driver on how we act and treat minorities (...or each other. Its more along the lines of dealing with differences...minority, majority, or otherwise). While each group of friends may have their own beliefs these same social connections can also impact law enforcement and their perceived obligations to those social networks.

We have responsibilities to ensure that local needs are met but we sometimes have to think beyond that to the bigger national picture. Government entities have greater responsibilities to ensure that Americans as a national collective are having their needs met (There are many reasons on a macro level why we must support a free society. Hundreds of years of philosophical pontification and research tell us the types of freedoms that lead to motivation and societal growth. There are balances to individual and collective rights.). Social groups can cause havoc on institutional effectiveness (The more social groups derail institutional missions, the more misaligned the institution becomes.) 

While many of these local groups might not view themselves as racists and bigots their inability to accept small differences means they have closed themselves off from any variation in their identities (in and out group dynamics form based on these subtle group codes/beliefs.). While much of these perceived differences are small they can easily exploited for personal gain (that is the problem.)

I'm a supporter of police and have interacted with them enough in numerous capacities to understand that as an occupational approach they are intent on doing the right thing. However, when social networks become involved these right things become blurry through divided loyalties. I've seen departments do the professional thing and insulate their officers and others do the opposite and in turn decision making was skewed toward pushing for a specific outcome.) 

Law enforcement should always seek to maintain objectivity so as to solve the most amount of problems to fulfill their institutional contract to society. The wrong type of information by the "right" type of person can create big problems. Instead of looking at the facts, we are willing to run with conjecture (at least until we are confronted with more accurate information that is hard to ignore. This is why one cannot truly say they "know" something. Its all possibility based on information presented and how we construct meaning from it.)

It takes time to sort of ferret out the different factors at play (If it was that easy we would have solved it a long time ago.) Despite that there are a few general lessons we might gather from situations like these. What I can say is that we should think about how to protect against allowing social groups  1.) from being easily manipulated and 2.) social connections to law enforcement that can be exploited.

While race and racism has become a politically charged topic it nevertheless is an absolutely necessity to tackle in the modern world. We are smarter now and know that we need all human capital pulling in the same direction for national development. That will be very difficult if misdirected social groups determine the course of direction and warp the values of law enforcement, judges, policy makers, etc... (Depends on who your source of values and knowledge is? Pick a vision of what the country should look like!). As a nation we need to set our compass higher and restore/maintain trust in those institutions that can make or break our futures (These institutions have a purpose.). 

People would think I'm liberal but that's not really the case. I do believe it is time we make racism and bigotry taboo in good moral conscious so that we can all compete together on the global marketplace (...suppress racism and not differences of opinion. We always need healthy debate to solve problems. If there is a problem solving evidence based discussion going on then its a good discussion for growth.). I support our officers 100% and support the removal of officers that tarnish the institutions good reputation (Individual officers shouldn't detract from the positive activities of many good officers. Strengthen of the system sometimes means removing bad apples and making a more empowered force to report wrong doing. A culture change may be necessary for some departments. I prefer to take what is working already and enhance it as a solution so we can build off of existing officer strength. Strengths based approach for leadership enhancement and officer retention.)