What’s Wrong With Policing in America?

Mark Fischler Cognitive, Ethical, Integral Justice Warrior, Moral, Perspectives, Politics, Values, Video, World Affairs, Worldviews 30 Comments

Become a supporting member to watch the full conversation

Every member of Integral Life gets access to the perspectives library (15+ years of content) and a constantly evolving Integral Life Practice platform. Learn how to apply Integrative metatheory both to the most complex global issues and your everyday life & transform yourself in order to thrive in a rapidly-evolving world of the 21st century!

Get Full Access For $1 (30 days)* Or get an annual subscription ($99, 40% off) * Trial price for the first 30 days, then $15/month. Cancel or switch plans in 2 minutes at any time.
O

n April 20th, 2021, former police officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty on all counts for the wrongful death of George Floyd, whose highly publicized death after being pinned to the ground for nine agonizing minutes sparked a new wave of #BLM protests all over the country throughout 2020.

Like everything else in the social media age, the question of policing in America has sadly become yet another theater for our ongoing culture war, rife with the same sort of tribalism, confirmation biases, and all-or-nothing mentalities that have infected every other important social challenge we are facing.

It has become predictably Rorschachian, where everyone sees only what they want to see according to their own political identities, allegiances, and focus-tested narratives. For many this verdict was celebrated as a rare moment of accountability for police officers who have too often circumvented any lasting consequences for their crimes. For others, this verdict represents an all-out assault on civilization itself as it further erodes the “thin blue line” that separates us from total barbarism.

But there are questions we simply cannot answer if we are only taking a partial and partisan view:

  • Why do we see so many cases of apparent police abuse being recorded so frequently, but punished so rarely?
  • What are some possible solutions that can help create more social trust for our police organizations, and a more peaceful society for all of us?
  • What are the dangers of overreacting with the sort of #DefundThePolice and #ACAB (“all cops are bastards”) narratives that we see from the left? What are the partial truths contained within those narratives?
  • Is the problem of policing in America better framed as a “Black Lives Matter” issue, or as a genuine “All Lives Matter” issue?
  • What does an optimal police force look like as a healthy amber social holon, and what is preventing us from creating that healthy (and necessary) structure?

It’s easy to say something like “well, everyone is right” — but when it comes to cases like these, who is more right? After all, we as integralists want to include as many different perspectives as we can into our own, but it also remains true that some perspectives are simply more valuable, more high-resolution, and more true than others. And yet, even the views we regard as being “lower-resolution” can help us identify blind spots in our own perspective, or illuminate more fundamental issues that may otherwise go unnoticed.

Watch as Mark and Corey take a careful look at the Derek Chauvin verdict — and at the state of policing itself in America — as they offer their own personal views and try to sort through the conflicting narratives surrounding this tragically controversial cultural fault line.

Transcript Excerpt

Mark: So Joe Crystal was a cop in Baltimore, and an incredible TV show called The Wire really told a lot of the stories of what happened. But you know, this guy was just an amazing cop, just straight up as good as they get, and saw a handcuffed defendant brought back into a house and then he was viciously beaten by other officers. And he exposed it, and his career was ruined. Nobody wanted to work with him. People threw rats on his car. He was confronted time and time again, called him a rat. He was shifted around in the department from different agencies within, nobody wanted to work with him, to the point where he quit and became a sheriff in Florida.

A guy was beaten, and they all closed ranks, and they didn’t care.

[George Floyd was in] 2020. Joe Crystal was like 2005. And in the 1990s in New York city they talked about the “blue wall of silence”, and that was a real thing. But in Buffalo in 2020 — do you remember this elderly protestor that was shoved by the police, smacked his head, was bleeding? He was in a pool of blood, banged his head. Two officers were suspended, and then 57 officers resigned in disgust — not over what happened, but they resigned because they didn’t want to be a part of the riot team anymore because these guys were suspended for doing what they did. So it’s like the classic Nuremberg defense, you know, “we’re just following orders, why are you blaming us?” Again, this is the culture that makes this really difficult to get at, and why part of the answer is culture has got to change.
 
Corey: You just nailed it. Because this is “the thin blue line” as it’s often called — which maybe we can call “the thin Amber line” — and I see this as a very common pattern with a lot of these Amber institutions that are themselves, for whatever reason, not being held accountable to Orange principles of law.
 
And I think what happens is, these Amber organizations wield power in a particular way. Power has a very particular meaning at Amber, and usually the kind of power that you seek is a totalizing power. Right? And when it comes to these power games, when these groups are for whatever reason unable to be held to account to Orange standards of law and order, then you see exactly these kinds of dysfunctions. This is when you start to see not only massive cases of abuse, but cases of abuse being covered up. Or if they even do come out to light, the accountability is so minor. A lot of these officers who end up actually getting fired from their jobs, what they’ll do is they’ll just pick up and move two towns over and get rehired again. And it’s like their career just kind of goes on uninterrupted. They just have to, you know, leave one community and go into another community, and there’s nothing about what got them fired in the first place that follows them through their career.
 
So it seems obvious that we have these pathological Amber structures. And here’s the irony: these Orange principles of law and order depend on these Amber organizations being healthy, being trustable, et cetera. One of the first points I made in the show is that we need Amber in order to contain Red, and there’s a lot of Red out there. There’s a lot of assholes out there who will not hesitate to kill another human being because they’re standing in their way. There’s no shortage of that in this country. So it’s a real threat. And being a police officer is not an easy job by any means. And yet if we, as a society, allow ourselves to get to a point where we mistrust these structures that are responsible for keeping us safe – this is where I partially agree with Tucker Carlson’s view that this case against Chauvin was an attack on American civilization itself. Well, you know, if we actually start tying our police officers’ hands and making it so that they cannot respond the way they oftentimes need to respond to these real threats, then yeah, we will see a genuine social collapse as a result. But I think it’s a bit of a straw-man leap there to say “therefore we don’t need any accountability whatsoever”.
 
I think it just speaks to the complexity of the problem. We need to both understand that we need a strong Amber institution when it comes to the police force, and because it is so Amber, and because it’s so important and fundamental to society itself, we need to have the trust that it is properly enfolded in with our Orange standards of law and order.
 
Mark: That’s where I was going to actually maybe take it a little bit with you, and you kind of said it, but that maybe part of the answer is policing actually needs to be an Orange structure with a healthy Amber enfoldment with units of Amber. But we’re seeing, as a structural element onto its own, that the pathological elements come through too much. And the reasons why we evolved to higher forms of human rights and liberties under Orange structures is that it’s really had to fully evolve to an Orange structure with Amber enfoldment within. And you know, that may get us to a better place, and then maybe a hundred years from now we’ll be arguing about how it needs to be Green with Orange units therein.

If you enjoy this episode, be sure to check out more episodes of Integral Justice Warrior. Watch them all for only $1!

Written and produced by Corey deVos


Was this valuable to you?

This voting is anonymous:

Previous  Episodes  of  Integral Justice Warrior
Afghanistan: Meeting at the Crossroads of Complexity, Chaos, and Compassion

Afghanistan: Meeting at the Crossroads of Complexity, Chaos, and Compassion

Cognitive Ethical Integral Justice Warrior Moral Perspectives Politics Values Video World Affairs
Magdalena, Mark, and Corey try to bring a bit more wisdom and compassion to the topic of America’s occupation and...
Watch Now
The Forgotten People: Restoring Justice for Indigenous Cultures

The Forgotten People: Restoring Justice for Indigenous Cultures

Ethical Integral Justice Warrior Perspectives Values Video World Affairs Worldviews
Join Mark, Corey, and special guest Magdalena Smieszek as they take a careful look at the many indignities and injustices...
Watch Now
Israel/Palestine: Where Do We Go From Here?

Israel/Palestine: Where Do We Go From Here?

Cognitive Ethical Integral Justice Warrior Leadership Moral Perspectives Spiritual Video World Affairs Worldviews
Watch as Magdalena, Mark, and corey explore the long and complex history of the region, offer their own thoughts on...
Watch Now
Heartbreak in Boulder: Finding Meaning in the Wake of Tragedy

Heartbreak in Boulder: Finding Meaning in the Wake of Tragedy

Emotional Ethical Integral Justice Warrior Moral Perspectives Values Video World Affairs
On March 22nd, a mass shooting took place at the King Soopers grocery store in Boulder, Colorado which claimed the...
Watch Now
From Woke to Awake: An Intersectionality of Perspective

From Woke to Awake: An Intersectionality of Perspective

Cognitive Ethical Integral Justice Warrior Moral Perspectives Politics Values Video World Affairs Worldviews
Mark and Corey have a rich and far-reaching discussion about our present political realities and challenges, dedicating the first half...
Watch Now
Biden’s First Month, Trump’s Second Impeachment, and Cancelling Cancel Culture

Biden’s First Month, Trump’s Second Impeachment, and Cancelling Cancel Culture

Integral Justice Warrior Perspectives Politics Video World Affairs Worldviews
How is the Biden Presidency going so far? Will Donald Trump be convicted in the Senate for his impeachment trial?...
Watch Now
Insurrection, Censorship, and Madness

Insurrection, Censorship, and Madness

Cognitive Ethical Integral Justice Warrior Perspectives Politics Video World Affairs Worldviews
Mark and Corey take an in-depth look at the heart-breaking events at the Capitol, offering their own full-spectrum response to...
Watch Now
+View All




Mark Fischler

About Mark Fischler

Mark Fischler is a Professor of Criminal justice and current program coordinator for the criminal justice and criminology programs at Plymouth State University. Prior to joining the Plymouth State faculty, he practiced law, representing poor criminal defendants for the New Hampshire Public Defender’s Office. Mark has worked extensively with alternative theoretical models in law, constitutional law, and higher education, and has published on integral applications to teaching, being a lawyer, and legal theory. His focus in the classroom is ethics and criminal procedure, and is well respected for a teaching philosophy that emphasizes recognizing the humanity and dignity of each student. Professor Fischler was awarded the outstanding teaching award at his university in 2014. He currently offers a weekly Spiritual Inquiry class through Satya Yoga Studio.

Corey deVos

About Corey deVos

Corey W. deVos is Editor-in-Chief of Integral Life, as well as Managing Editor of KenWilber.com. He has worked for Integral Institute/Integal Life since Spring of 2003, and has been a student of integral theory and practice since 1996. Corey is also a professional woodworker, and many of his artworks can be found in his VisionLogix art gallery.

Notable Replies

  1. I’ll “bite” on defund the police:
    Currently Police receive much of their funding in the form of weapons, riot gear and military equipment that has nothing to do with crime prevention and everything to do with power and control. Often police departments just find themselves with a windfall of military equipment designed to fight urban warfare, and then they feel the need to find a use for such equipment.
    Another aspect of this militarism of the police is funding obtained through the “war on drugs” where law enforcement can seize cash and assets they believe are linked to the drug trade without due process. Just having a large amount of cash is one such “suspicious” activities and there have been documented cases of police just taking sums in excess of $10,000 from people completely unconnected with the drug trade just because having large amounts of cash is probable cause.
    Then the drug trade brings up the topic of victimless crimes. The war on drugs is a self perpetuating orobos. The United States learned in the 1930’s that prohibition does not work, but doubled down on drug prohibition with the war on drugs due to the massive government budgets such programs require. Then they were funded by not actually stopping the drug trade, but just seizing enough to keep the self perpetuating loop going. The result is 50 years later we have a prescription opioid epidemic because we funded the police instead of mental and psychological health.
    So yes, defund the police first in regards to military equipment that is designed for urban warfare and defund the police’s funding obtained from illegal seizures without due process via the war on drugs. Yes, also defund training programs that are oriented towards suppression of democratic freedoms.
    Begin funding instead mental and psychological health programs, including self actualization and self worth programs in public schools.
    We saw in 2020 what happens when there is no accountability at the Federal level and the police use this equipment, tactics and philosophy to suppress first amendment rights. In many cities they fanned the flames. “The Police” can only be trusted with democracy insofar as they fear repercussions in the courts.
    Defund the Police is only bad if seen as an absolute “all or nothing” position. Logically and and rationally there are huge problems with how law enforcement is funded and what they use the funding for (oppression and perpetuating the crime cycle rather than ).

    I’ll also take a stab at ACAB:
    I think this has more to do with people identifying their profession as themselves. I think most people in integral do not identify their career as their own personal identity, and at the end of the work day shed that persona and engage in their family and social life as their authentic selves.
    But certain careers require or at least strongly encourage people to become their professional personas.
    With police we are left with a situation where they are trained to be assholes and bastards on the job, and largely take that on as their identity as part and parcel with being a cop.
    Anecdotally, I have met or been friends / acquaintances with many Navy Seals and Special Forces personnel in my life and I have no doubt they’ve killed lots of people and would be scary to meet in a war zone. But they are generally “cool dudes” at a BBQ. It’s almost as if the longer they are in the more well adjusted and even benevolent they become. Also anecdotally, not once have I even met a Police or retired Police in a social setting and thought the same. It’s almost as if the opposite is true of Police Officers - the longer they are in the more unpleasant they are to meet socially. Of course I can’t say “All”, because I’ve socially interacted with few police.
    I have been given a break and not ticketed by police officers on the job. I’m not sure where this falls on the range of privilege vs the police being nice. But it only happens if I overtly and vocally recognize the officer’s power and stroke that a little to get out of a $100 ticket. Anecdotally when I’m not in a mood to stoke an officer’s ego - I get the ticket, lol. Only once did me sticking to my rights and not stoking their ego result in the officer calling for backup. (I refused to give her my telephone number, work address and drivers license for a bicycle citation). I often wonder how all these encounters would have gone if I was a different race and/or did not dress and present myself as a member of the White Educated Professional Services class.

  2. I considered typing out all of my relationships with police, but in the end I don’t think it’s constructive because this is fast becoming an “everybody” problem. The recent COVID lockdowns brought these issues to everyone’s neighborhood, as even people in posh elite neighborhoods had their comfort zone pushed against. There was a story in the news locally where a woman walking her dog in a neighborhood with $5+ million homes got a $5,000 ticket for stepping one foot into a park and thus violating the Mayor’s lockdown orders. There were so many people who got $5,000 COVID violation tickets that a judge just threw all of them out, and now the fraud of our Police Department during COVID is in the public discussion.

    I think actual police criminal activity has to be dealt with by an outside force. The oppressed community do not have the power - or they would have addressed it before now, and the police don’t have the desire to fix the problems - or they would have before now.
    Criminal activity by the police really is what we are dealing with as a norm for decades. Here in my city it’s finally out in the open and being published by newspapers. Fraud is a crime. Making an untrue statement on a police report is fraud. I would say that crime is rampant in our Police Departments across the country. The crime of fraud is so insidious because it has covered up much darker crimes for decades. I might put my conspiracy hat on and say that here locally it’s only in the news now and being investigated because they gave a $5,000 ticket to a rich woman in the elite social class with political connections - but there it is.




    Also in our state news is a story of a Police Chief and his County Prosecutor wife and a few other police officers maliciously conspiring to frame someone because of a personal grudge.

  3. One thing I find interesting about these discussions is that there is often an assumption by many that critics of the police are viewing things from the outside.

    I really do challenge this assumption. It’s a very limited point of view that only someone within a tribe can solve the problems of that tribe. On the contrary, I’d say “A problem can rarely be solved by the same mindset that created the problem.”

    Related to this is the belief that the Police have the capability to find these answers from within their own ranks, and that people who are not within the ranks of police are not able to find answers and will create conflict and distrust.

    At the point we are now in Policing America, the Police in most cities are not able to Police themselves without some kind of external pressure to do so. Plumbers and electricians need a code that they have to follow or have their license revoked or fines imposed by an external licensing body, so too do the police need an external body monitoring them and implementing disciplinary measures to violators. Whether this external body is the court system or an administrative system, it cannot be under the same umbrella as the Chief of Police in that city.
    I agree with Mark in the discussion when he says that the Police rank and file have to be Amber to keep a check on red - but they need Orange to keep them in check.
    In the Military this is done through an enlisted corps and an officer corps, and it’s very effective almost to the point of being the most efficient organization we know in dealing with Red. There are many Hollywood movies that accurately display this conflict between the Amber enlisted man who goes into red as part of his job description, and the officer corps that is expected to maintain Orange ideals. “A Few Good Men” comes to mind most clearly where the protagonist is fighting for Orange ideals in an organization with an Amber / Red mission.
    In the military this line is very clearly defined and lived day to day. Military Officers don’t fraternize with enlisted, and have a much stricter code of conduct than Enlisted do. Most of the Officer Corps has never been enlisted.
    While Police do have ranks, there isn’t nearly the same separation within the organization as in the Military, and usually the Police Lieutenants are trained by the rank and file first alongside all the other Police recruits, not separately as Military Officers are. As a result, Police supervisors are trained to be more Amber first and foremost while Military Officers are trained to be more Orange in separate training than the rank and file.
    Note the rank and file in the Military often resent this - which is why it is not up to them, lol. The Orange Officer Corps establishes the policy and the Amber enlisted Corps follows that policy.

  4. I’m not sure if you didn’t understand what I wrote with regards to USA vs Pakistani police violence or if you are intentionally just ignoring one set of facts that are inconvenient for you and only look at facts that support what you already want to believe.

    It’s a convenient story to make up about thousands of people you don’t know hardly anything about - again to fit in with what you already believe. I myself know for a fact that lots of people get into these areas after great struggles in life.
    I agree with the last point:

    What we actually have to do is really look at it as it is - if red is red, then plainly say it’s red and don’t try to distract from it being red. And I say that the Police in the United States are far, far, far too red for a wealthy democracy.
    The rest is just trying to spin it way and not look at this for how red it really is.
    Oh, crime statistics are down ? The Police are still too red
    Oh, you haven’t been the victim of police brutality? The police are still too red
    Oh, rape is high in Pakistan? The Police in the United States are still too red
    Oh, you believe people at Integral Life are caricature Green types who are all wealthy trust fund babies? The Police in the United States are still too red.

    lol

  5. I think to look at this we really have to recognize that this isn’t something that was inevitable to happen, because no other wealthy democracy has this problem.

    Here are the main problems I see:
    Us vs them - Police training should be assessed and changed wherever it stresses the public in general as always having to be treated as dangerous.
    The thin blue line - Internal affairs investigations have to be conducted and reviewed by a body outside the City’s organization structure.
    Homeland security - Police should be peace officers, not warfighters trained to treat protestors as terrorists.
    Creating criminals - All drugs should be treated as medications and be issued under supervision of a Dr. with a prescription. The police should not be killing people over drugs. The whole war on drugs was a complete waste and made all the problems worse.

    Most of this can be accomplished with new accountability and organizational structures and training. For example, a federal group of investigators who investigate police shootings rather than the same Police Department. Or a federal professional license like TSA Officers are required to have and cannot keep if they are fired for cause or ever had it revoked. Basically, anything to have any kind of accountability over officers that cannot be corrupted by Municipal politics or threats by police to not follow their oaths.
    The Federal government does the with all kinds of things already - here are the rules and you have to follow them if you want federal funding. The problem of the last 20 years is the federal government has done this and their guidance has been to treat the population as an inevitable security threat, and given them military equipment to do a “police action” on the population.

    https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/04/law-enforcements-warrior-problem/

    https://civilrights.org/edfund/resource/the-war-on-drugs-has-failed-commission-says/#:~:text=The%20global%20war%20on%20drugs,Global%20Commission%20on%20Drug%20Policy.

Continue the discussion at community.integrallife.com

25 more replies

Participants