moorhosj wrote:League Circles wrote:Indeed you could. That's why it's controversial. People have all sorts of opinions on how much money should be spent and on what.
And my entire point was that there is often no consistency across those beliefs, which is why I made the education example. In that case, "the right" wants to give citizens more options and limit government control over the entire process. They have even had Presidential candidates call to abolish the Department of Education. They disparage the profession of teaching and actively call for the end of their union.
I don't know what to tell you if you want to group people into monolithic left and right. I've voted probably 90% for democrats in my life if not more, and I want increased funding for police. I don't have strong views on educational freedom or funding. I certainly don't disparage the profession of teaching. One of my best friends is a teacher's union rep and I certainly respect that. Though there is a reasonable philosophical objection to public employee unions which I don't necessarily agree with but respect as legit, which is that, unlike in private industry, public employees are not subject to the profit-incentive that can lead private companies to have excessive leverage over their workers, and, more importantly, that the collective bargaining has essentially already been undertaken on behalf of the public employees by virtue of the democratic process.
When it comes to policing, the answer (from the exact same people) is always more spending. More training, higher salaries, more support, more equipment, etc. Police officers are "heroes" and "Blue Lives Matter".
I'm sure there are plenty of hypocrites out there. Would it be equally hypocritical for a person on the "left", to use your dichotomy, to always pine for more and more spending for social programs and education, yet less for police? I don't think either fictional person is necessarily a hypocrite. I think reasonable people can draw different conclusions on where increased funding will help improve a problem and where it won't, and especially in terms of priorities. I don't think it's inherently flawed to think that security (police) is more important than education.
Maybe the demographics of each profession are a factor?
For some people they surely are. Some people make decisions based on group identity, whether it be race, sex, class, political affiliation, etc. What you're implying about "the right" is of course equally valid or invalid, depending on your perspective, of "the left". As if those are two monolithic groups. BLM the organization isn't a vaguely defined societal group that is incredibly diverse, such as "the right", or "the left". They are an organization with a website, an agenda, policy positions, and publicly declared leadership ideology. Those
specific things can be reasonable critiqued or reacted to by anyone of any persuasion or group IMO. All I said was that such people may exist who find the entertainment value of the NBA, for them personally, lowered by promotion of an agenda they oppose. Actually all I said was that they may have their entertainment value lowered by a reminder of the significant ills of the world (such as police brutality, especially of racial motivation).
League Circles wrote:The devil in always in the details. I want more money spent on body cams and mics, on salaries (to draw better applicants), and maybe on stuff like training, more frequent evaluation, internal investigations, etc. I think that would help things.
All things that we have increased funding for in the past 5-10 years. What is the ROI? Why isn't the problem solved? "The right" should be demanding answers to these questions before calling for more funding or even keeping today's funding levels. Meanwhile, we expect our teachers to buy their own classroom supplies.
Well, not all cops have full time body cams and mics that can't be turned off (I actually don't know if any do), and that's what I advocate. ROI on existing investments? I don't know. I'm not in a position to do a study of whether police brutality is going up or down, and obviously there would be many many variables. But I didn't advocate for part time body cam investments or whatever, and you shouldn't presume that people who may prefer to see the player's name on the back of their jersey did either.
I sure as hell have never expected a teacher to buy classroom supplies and frankly I think it's crazy that any of them would consider it (as an obligation as opposed to a charitable act).
Are you sure that funding has increased for internal investigations and more frequent psychological evaluation of officers? Where? Are you sure police brutality hasn't decreased in those jurisdictions?
Why isn't the problem solved? Because we're apes. We can't solve any problems. Same reason people keep murdering each other, being rude to each other, cheating each other, etc. Hopefully we can reduce the severity of the problem drastically. But to "solve" the problem requires a suspension of belief in a scientific perspective of biological systems IMO. It requires, if you will, the unconstrained vision:
at the notion that people who support social justice equality are tuning out athletes openly supporting social justice equality, because being reminded of social justice inequality makes them too bummed to watch basketball. 
