Appealing To A Higher Authority
Equally important, if we cannot resolve simple disputes without resorting to violence, then do we even live in a civil society?
We’ve got a lot to talk about with respect to personal and public safety, so settle in, family. Feel free to bring your own refreshments, all I’ve got is water (you all should drink more water, by the way!).
Don’t Be An A**hole
First, a story out of Whittier, California, a city just outside Los Angeles. From the Los Angeles Times:
Emmett Brock thought he was dying, and his mind raced. This isn’t supposed to happen to me. This doesn’t happen this way. I can’t die like this.
He tasted the blood inside his mouth. He felt the fists land on his head. And he heard the shouts of the sheriff’s deputy on top of him, pressing him into the pavement of the 7-Eleven parking lot.
Three minutes later, the 23-year-old teacher sat in the back of a Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department cruiser not even knowing, he said, why the deputy had stopped him.
Brock was sent to the Norwalk station lockup and booked for three felonies. When he told the staff he is a transgender man, he said, they asked to see his genitals before deciding which holding cell to send him to.
That was in February. Brock is now jobless and still facing criminal charges, all stemming from a traffic stop the deputy said was based on an air freshener he’d spotted hanging from Brock’s rearview mirror.
The Sheriff’s Department has been under intense scrutiny in recent weeks for two other use-of-force incidents caught on camera, including one in which a deputy punched a woman in the face while trying to take her child. In that case, Sheriff Robert Luna condemned the incident as “completely unacceptable” and relieved the deputy of duty. The FBI is now investigating.
It may be ironic to some, but the older I get, the less deferential I become to authority in general, specifically of the institutionalized variety. I don’t care whether you wear a uniform or if you occupy a position of political authority; you’re no better than me. People like me are the only reason why they exist and why they can make a living telling us what to do. They must earn my respect just the same as anyone else. After the events of the last few years (I’m looking at you, 2020), I’d hope we’ve all become more skeptical of authority than ever before.
None of this absolves us of the necessity to obey the law and behave responsibly, however. On the surface, the incident described sounds like a questionable arrest. I continued reading the LA Times story and learned how it all started [bold mine]:
Before his run-in with the deputy, Brock already was having a miserable day. He said he’d left his high school teaching job early after a co-worker had harassed him for being transgender. It wasn’t the first time, and he was getting fed up.
A few blocks from the school, Brock spotted a deputy who appeared to be having a heated conversation with a woman on the side of the road. As he drove by, Brock threw up his middle finger. He didn’t even think the deputy would see it, he said.
A few seconds later, he spotted a patrol cruiser following close behind him. It made Brock uneasy. He turned down one side street and then another, trying to figure out whether the cruiser was following him or just going in the same direction. The deputy didn’t turn on his lights or siren, but made every turn Brock did.
Why would he/she/they (I think I’m going to settle on “they”) do this? Why would anyone flip off someone they’re not even interacting with? Before anyone says it, no, you don’t have the “right” to make crude gestures to anyone. It may not be illegal, but something not being illegal doesn’t make it a constitutional right, either. The cop may have engaged in corrupt practices to affect this arrest, but it’s not a stretch to say none of this happens without Emmett Brock gesturing at the cop first.
The definition of responsible behavior is being able to come up with a reasonable explanation for your actions. The officer mentioned nothing about the crude gesture in his report (probably because he couldn’t use it as grounds for pursuing and stopping motorists), but had Brock been confronted about it, what would they’ve said to justify their actions? Again, if you’re an uber-civil liberal who thinks people should be legally protected from flipping off cops, would you apply the same standard across the board? Should a person be able to get away with doing the same to a server? Someone working at the DMV? How about your city mayor or the president? Would the same person try flipping them off? Or is the cop an easier target? Remind me: what do they call someone who picks on someone because they think they can get away with it?
I realize law enforcement officers are uniquely able to ruin your day like no other government official and this inevitably results in resentment that can easily boil over. But who makes the rules? The police aren’t going to enforce laws that don’t exist. I’ve always found it funny how every time a controversial incident involving police occurs, the victims and the activists go running into the arms of the very people who created the laws in the first place. Why the same people who have such hard feelings against law enforcement think the government is going to be their friend is beyond me. Maybe because they actually don’t expect the law to be enforced? Maybe because the real problem for these people is that laws exist at all?
I’m among the first to talk about how there are too many laws in this country, many of them frivolous and unenforceable. But there’s never been and never will be an excuse for unlawful behavior, absent a reasonable justification. The pseudonymous “Jack Dunphy,” a former Los Angeles police officer, explained:
Time will tell if the police officer was justified not only in the arrest, but in his actions leading up to it. It’s still fair to say that none of this likely would’ve occurred without Brock drawing the officer’s attention first. A big component of personal safety is not drawing attention to yourself. Both criminals and police alike are on the lookout - the former for victims, the latter for transgressors. If you don’t want the cops coming after you, don’t do things that draw their attention. It’s pretty simple.
One thing I haven’t really talked about is how to interact with the police. We often hear about “The Talk” Black parents say they give their children about how to deal with the police. I find The Talk to be counter-intuitive, because it presupposes a negative encounter. If you teach someone to anticipate a bad outcome, don’t be surprised if a bad outcome results. A person who enters a situation in bad faith is going to behave different from someone who goes into it with a more positive outlook. That behavior and concurrent negative energy ultimately creates more problems than it solves and relies on a single party to de-escalate a tense situation, when de-escalation is more likely when both sides are committed to it.
So here’s my “talk” on how to deal with the police:
Follow the script - don’t try to control the situation: It should be obvious, but the enforcer, the person who has the legal right to exercise violence in the course of their duties, has control of the situation. You’re not going to “win” anything by trying to change this. Except victimhood status, maybe. Cops, like any government official, also swear by the checklist. Unless you live in a small town akin to Mayberry from The Andy Griffith Show, don’t expect them to deviate from the process. Let it play out; you’re only prolonging the misery by interfering.
Don’t overthink it - cops are people too: I recall seeing a meme years back about how people ought to be judged based on how they treat service workers, people who supposedly have nothing to offer the rest of us. I strongly disagree with that last statement, but my point is that cops aren’t all that different from any other service worker. If you wouldn’t do it or say it to a barista or waiter, why would you do it to a cop? I guess it’s easier to hate cops, but if you hate cops, surely you must hate those who employ them - the government - too, right? I find that’s not always the case. Either way, treat cops like normal people. If you want respect, give respect or at least don’t be a jerk. Waiters don’t like jerks either.
Being nervous is normal, so stay calm: It’s easier said than done. I often speak of the human body’s “fight-or-flight” response, that autonomic function your body employs as a survival mechanism, but can also overwhelm one’s capacity to think and act. You can’t really control fight-or-flight, all you can do is recognize what’s happening and allow the adrenaline to work its way out of your system. The way I cope with fight-or-flight is to immediately take a deep breath through my nose, open my eyes wide, and look around to get my bearings. Avoiding tunnel vision is an absolute must; if you’re too fixated on one thing, that exacerbates the panic. Key to staying calm is also not trying too hard to control the situation. You don’t, so just sit back and let the officer dictate the tempo. The situation is already stressful, so ease the tension where you can. All interactions are a two-way street; don’t expect the cop to do all the de-escalating. Again, you wouldn’t do that with any other person, right?
Be assertive, but don’t be argumentative: Once more, your interactions with people in general ought to dictate your interactions with a police officer. They don’t deserve any more or less respect than anyone else. At the same time, remember that a cop isn’t there to make your day and they can certainly make it worse if you’d like. If there’s something you need to say, say it like you’d want someone to say it to you. No matter what police reform advocates claim, cops aren’t under any obligation to “satisfy” you. They represent the state’s interests, not yours. If there’s nothing to gain from “winning” an argument with a stranger, you’re not going to win anything, period, from an argument with a cop. The same way you let a stranger save face if they make a mistake, do the same for cops. As Henry Louis Gates Jr. discovered in a controversial, highly-publicized arrest in July 2009, one that ultimately involved the president, goading and provoking someone as a situation de-escalates is a bad idea.
I think a good way of thinking about it is this: there are thousands of police-public encounters daily and, during most of them, nothing bad happens. Again, if you go into an interaction thinking something bad is going to happen, everything that’s said and done will be viewed through that lens. Positive thinking is always better than negative thinking and it applies to how we deal with law enforcement as well.
Finally, it can’t be stressed enough: don’t be a jerk, don’t make crude gestures. Just because you can’t go to jail for it doesn’t mean you have a right to do it. If you do things that draw people’s attention, don’t be surprised they noticed.
We Can’t Go Anywhere Anymore
Did you hear about this incident out of Florida?
A man who was beat down by a still-at-large suspect at a Florida movie theater last week has spoken out - revealing he sustained a broken nose during the filmed assault.
The incident happened July 10 at the AMC Pompano Theater in Pompano Beach, and left the 63-year-old victim bloodied, hospitalized, and in stitches - after he asked the much younger-suspect to move from a seat for which he paid in advance.
Footage filmed from another moviegoer also showed the altercation in full - and how the victim was then pounced on by the suspect and punched repeatedly, while others, including his wife, helplessly looked on.
Now being used as part of a police investigation, it also shows how the victim at first approached his attacker in a civil manner to ask why he and his female companion were in the prebooked VIP seats, but was instead met with a violent assault.
Appearing in a video interview over the weekend, the victim - who asked not to be named - showed off some of the damage he sustained during the scare, and revealed himself to be a disabled veteran. His assailant, meanwhile, remains at large.
As always, don’t watch the footage and don’t look at the photos of the injury the victim suffered if real-life violence makes you squeamish. That said, I kind of hope you do, because it needs to be seen how savage the assault was. I don’t care what was said - civilized people don’t respond to harsh words with a beating just short of murder. Once upon a time, that might’ve been acceptable, but we don’t live in that world anymore. Most of us don’t, anyway. But some clearly still do and think they can get away with it. The rest of us are at their mercy.
This is the victim’s account of what happened:
The victim asked the man to move from the seats, but he said he didn't budge.
“This guy just kept staring at me instead of getting up,” the victim told NBC6 on Friday. “I said to the people at this point, who didn't apologize or say thank you, I said ‘you guys can just keep the seats.’ As I’m walking away, he said ‘go run to your wife little boy.’ So I turned around and I said ‘you know I’m not the one who’s being a little boy, you took my seats and you didn’t apologize or you didn’t say thank you and I let you keep them.’”
That’s when the victim said the man became hostile and attacked him.
“He jumped up, he wanted to fight me, he backed me up, I fell over the stairs and as soon as I fell down the stairs, it was like a boxer being against the ropes, this guy just went to town on me,” the victim said.
Onlookers rushed to his aid and the victim was grateful, telling Inside Edition, “if people hadn’t pulled him off of me he would’ve continued.”
“I think he would have gone that far [to kill me] if he could’ve,” the victim added.
At the risk of overstating it, the most troubling aspect of this story is that there increasingly seems to be no way to resolve disputes between strangers without it devolving into violence. Surely, most such disputes do get resolved peacefully and non-violently. However, there are certain people out there, far too many of them, I might add, who simply cannot be de-escalated. There was nothing that was said here that should’ve triggered any violence, to say nothing of the fact a decent person would’ve moved aside instead of insisting on sitting in someone else’s seat. I’ve written extensively about the problem of social predators and this is yet another example of it. A bully decides to trigger a confrontation and dare the other party to do something about it. Sometimes, it ends badly for the bully, but more often than not, you see the bully successfully using their greater propensity for violence to intimidate others into backing down or intentionally harm their victims.
In many states, the level of violence seen in this incident could lawfully trigger a deadly-force response from the victim. If the victim here was concealed-carrying a firearm, for example, and managed to draw it and fire upon his attacker, he could very well have been justified in doing so. But then the narrative would be completely different. For one, you’d probably be hearing about this story in the national media due to the involvement of a gun and the racial disparity. Regardless of the facts, the victim’s actions, not the aggressor’s, would be receiving the lion’s share of public scrutiny, all under the presumption of racism. As if it’s some moral outrage to respond with deadly force to a deadly attack. As if the only reason a White man could shoot a Black man is racism. As if it was the victim, not the attacker, who escalated the situation by insisting on having what he paid for. We’ve seen this all play out far too many times for it not to be some big mystery what would happen if the victim exercised his right to self-defense using lethal force.
In an environment like this, it seems like there’s only two options: avoid people altogether or don’t go out at all. It’s absurd, of course. What’s the point of living in society if we’re ultimately avoiding everyone or bunkering down in our homes? Sure, we all want to be left alone to lead our own unique lives, but we all need to deal with others at some point. The purpose of civilization is to survive as a group. It’s not going to happen if we’re constantly avoiding each other. There’s been extensive literature authored on atomization and I think we’re at the point where totalitarianism is the logical next step. No, I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but I’m saying that this is how it happens. A society where its individuals don’t regard themselves as part of a greater whole and view others as threats - to their bottom line, their ego, even their lives - will increasingly be held together by force.
There’s always risk in social encounters. Personal safety demands that we draw boundaries around ourselves and avoid getting into situations that pose unnecessary risks. But we’re not talking about being at a bar at 11:30 pm. We’re talking about being at the movies, a place where families and children are supposed to be able to go to without fear. If civil behavior cannot be expected at the movies, then it cannot be expected anywhere. Equally important, if we cannot resolve simple disputes without resorting to violence, then do we even live in a civil society?
A number of observers remarked that the victim should’ve informed theater staff and had them handle the situation. Again, this is a simple dispute, where one party was clearly in the wrong. There’s absolutely no need for a third party to adjudicate every one of these instances, nor do I think it would’ve necessarily helped in this situation. Maybe it doesn’t result in the subsequent beating, but violent people blinded by their own egos and obsessed with being “disrespected” don’t go down quietly. Either way, if a third party needs to get involved in every such situation, it’s proves that yes, some people really are perpetually problematic and no, they cannot function in society and need be constantly policed to protect others from them.
What this incident and others like it demonstrate is the increasing absence of a higher authority to appeal to. Societies have a general idea of who’s morally right and wrong in these situations. If not, then the state will decide. That’s how it’s supposed to work, anyway. But in America, the state has decided we all not only stand on the same legal ground, but we also all stand on the same moral ground. As such, nobody’s ever right or wrong in these situations. To the extent morality even exists, its been weaponized, dictated by your race, gender, sexual orientation, by history, generational trauma, and all sorts of other factors without relevance to the situation at hand.
Instead, our appeal “system” is based on power. Perhaps that’s always been so - after all, societies aren’t governed through love - but societies that manage their affairs exclusively on the basis of power tend to be authoritarian, violent, or both, which is usually the case. Fear and terror are the language with which we conduct our affairs. I get that most of us don’t live our lives in constant fear of the authorities (neither do I), but just because we don’t fear it doesn’t mean it isn’t there. It’s when we encounter conflict that the reality of the social order we live in becomes apparent.
I can’t even provide any personal safety tips in the context of the theater incident, because I’m not sure what else the victim could’ve done besides walk away silently. What his assailant was doing was wrong from start to finish and it’s not right that he cannot be called out on it. In a way, the victim made a mistake in trying to appeal to his attacker on the basis of common decency - since when do criminals and thugs possess such a thing? But I can’t blame him either. After all, he was insulted and we don’t like that. It wasn’t like he insulted him in return. All he did was admonish him for failing to behave like a decent human, but the social predator couldn’t have that, could he? Not only are you supposed to let him do whatever he wants, you’re supposed to keep quiet and suffer in silence. It’s his world and the rest of us are just living it.
Do we really want to live in a country like that? In many ways, we already do. Sure, the rest of the world is worse off and we still have it very good in this country, but the lack of predictability in the system is what’s unnerving. A society whose red lines are ill-defined and inconsistent inevitably breeds chaos and disorder. If we can’t deal with interpersonal disputes and social predators without needing to call 911 every damn time, we’re already a failed society that’s just begging the government to take complete control of our lives. Only the people who possess a monopoly on violence can keep us safe from each other, then.
One last thing before moving on: the Florida movie theater incident reminded me of this incident from a few years ago that took place on a New York City subway. Don’t watch if you don’t want to, but it’s a Black man punching a White woman in the face because his pride was wounded:
https://twitter.com/25_GoreTV/status/1657018583757496321
In the Florida theater incident, bystanders intervened as they should’ve here. But here? It’s a crowded train and not a single person dares to protect this woman, whose only error was that she had the temerity to confront a violent man. The indifference is appalling. It’s amazing how unwritten rules, like “Don’t harass or assault women” go right out the window under certain conditions.
Sure, he may have been arrested and charged in the end (I don’t know if that’s actually the case), but it’s not just about upholding the rule of law. It’s about upholding social norms and values, the very things that allow a society to function without degenerative conflict. Once a rule is broken, the only way to correct it is to address the matter on the spot, not long after the incident has ended and not at the hands of indifferent state bureaucrats.
A part of us resents those who play the role of hero, maybe because it highlights our personal inadequecies, but what’s a society worth if its people don’t protect the weak from the strong and the innocent from the predator? It means so much more when our fellow citizens come to our defense than when the authorities and “professionals” do. Why? Because we are humans, we care for each other, and are, in some small way, invested in each other’s well-being.
At least, that’s how it’s supposed to be.
Can’t Be Bothered
Speaking of indifference, witness this unbelievable incident out of New York City. Once again, don’t watch if you can’t stomach real-life violence, but it’s a video of a carjacker attempting to elude authorities by jumping off a bridge and falling from a height of over 20 feet:
https://twitter.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1683143380648247298
The fall is shocking, but it’s the reaction of the women he lands near that’s drawing the most attention. Here’s a description of the incident from Britain’s Daily Mail:
New video was posted to social media this week that showed the bizarre July 11 carjacking spree when the suspect, identified as Ismael English, 20, was seen fleeing the scene after he allegedly stabbed Lyft driver Yadav Kumar Dhungel, 36, who was driving a Tesla in the unprovoked attack.
Surveillance footage showed English running across FDR Drive attempting to carjack two other vehicles and diving headfirst through a rear window in one of the vehicles.
The thug is then seen sitting on the ledge near the overpass of the Manhattan Bridge, before he dangles off the ledge of the busy highway. Only one of his hands is seen gripping onto the concrete barrier, before he dropped 30-feet onto the pavement and landed near three unidentified women.
As English was lying on the ground twisting in pain, the ice-cream-eating trio was unfazed by the drama. They momentarily stopped, stared at the injured man and then walked away and continued their day.
None of us should feel sorry for this savage, so I don’t want to be too hard on those three women who displayed apathy towards him. But come on: a human being just fell and landed right next to you. Unless it’s something that happens to you every day, most normal people would do more than simply shrug.
Keep in mind, if he landed atop one of the women, they would’ve been seriously injured or even potentially killed. I’m not one to panic just because something bad almost happened to me, but the complete indifference to the fact someone very nearly fell atop them is disturbing, to say nothing of the indifference to a human falling from the sky, period. For all the women knew, he was an innocent man whose fall was the result of mere negligence, or he was a victim who got shoved by an attacker. He obviously wasn’t, but my point is when you see someone in distress, you don’t walk away like it’s no big deal.
A slightly similar incident occurred in Vancouver earlier this year. A 37-year-old father was out with his family when he was stabbed and killed at a Starbucks by someone he asked to stop blowing smoke his family’s way. The story drew attention in large part because of the indifference of bystanders, in particular a man who was seen on video sitting in a corner, sipping his coffee, feigning ignorance of the situation while the victim bled out just feet away from him. The incident was the topic of an entry I wrote on my Substack shortly after it occured.
Here’s a passage from that entry. I think it rings true regarding the New York incident, too:
Exercise caution, absolutely. I understand people may not want to attract the attention of a killer. I can also understand some of you might be put off by the sight of blood. I get it. What I don’t get is sitting there and pretending like nothing’s happening. I find that indefensible. I spoke a few posts ago about how our society is comprised of sheep, who live to be protected, wolves, who prey on the sheep, and the sheepdogs who confront the wolves in defense of the sheep. The guy sipping his coffee is obviously sheep, but he takes it to a whole new level when he can’t bring himself to recognize another human being is dying in front of him, as if it were just some lovers’ quarrel not meriting his interest.
If you think I’m being too hard on this sheep, imagine that was your family member bleeding out on the ground. Anyone who says they wouldn’t be infuriated by the apathy and obliviousness exhibited by the bystanders is a liar. If we’re going to live in a society, even an atomized one such as ours, we need to be able to expect something out of our fellow citizens beyond merely letting us be to live our lives. At least a show of concern, instead of withdrawn disinterest. Does Mr. Coffee-Sipper realize he cannot expect of others what he won’t provide for others? Or, does he live his life going all-in on the bet nothing bad will ever happen to him, like so many foolishly do?
Of course, there are plenty of incidents where people do come to the aid of others, where citizens exhibit bravery and courage in the face of danger. I just don’t know if that’s the norm. I like to believe that there are still plenty of Americans out there who’ll come to our aid, but what I do know is that you can’t expect them to. You’re lucky if they do. I think there’s enough evidence out that shows many of us will watch you die instead.
How they manage to sleep at night, we’ll never know.
Weak Men Create Hard Times
One last thing and I promise I’ll keep it short. From San Francisco:
I can’t find a better picture that illustrates our current moment. The country has become so decadent, so incapable of dealing with reality, that it’s better to remove the furniture and keep everyone away because it’s easier than confronting the problem.
It’s going to be the topic of an upcoming entry, but having nice things come at a cost our society wants, yet is unwilling to pay. I’m not talking about taxes here. Far too many believe, incorrectly, that not only is order the norm, but that order is “boring” or burdensome. They’re not entirely wrong on the second point. It’s a huge responsibility to maintain civilization and most of us aren’t up to the task. You’d think those who aren’t up to it would at least stay out of the way and let those who are do the hard work of keeping what forefathers built for us, but no. In their boredom and self-pity, they choose to destroy and ruin it for everyone else, believing themselves to be liberators from oppression. It calls to mind something Hannah Arendt said in her magnum opus, The Origins of Totalitarianism:
The members of the elite did not object at all to paying a price, the destruction of civilization, for the fun of seeing how those who had been excluded unjustly in the past forced their way into it.
Keep it up and one day, places like Starbucks and all other businesses will become places you go to pick up items you ordered ahead of time, and where an employee hands you the items from behind the safety of a robust barrier. Or you can have everything delivered to you and left outside your door. We’re already kind of there, aren’t we?
In light of the release of the movie Barbie, I want to close with my all-time favorite Internet meme. Apparently, you can illustrate the four stages of the civilizational cycle using Ryan Gosling!
I think we’re still in the “good times create weak men” stage of our civilization. Unfortunately, that means there are many more weak men to come and many more hard times to come as a result. But what about you? Which stage of Ryan Gosling do you think represents our current moment? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Max Remington writes about armed conflict and prepping. Follow him on Twitter at @AgentMax90.
If you liked this post from We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here, why not share? If you’re a first-time visitor, please consider subscribing!