How did a third of the City’s Budget get designated to the GRPD: The Safety 95 Campaign and White fear in Grand Rapids
The Clinton crime bill of 1994 introduced mandatory life imprisonment for persons convicted of a third felony in certain categories. It maintained the 100-to-1 disproportion in sentencing for crimes involving powder and crack cocaine, even though the US Sentencing Commission had concluded that the disparity was racist. It expanded to fifty the number of crimes that could draw the death penalty in a federal court, reaching even to crimes that did not include murders–the largest expansion of the death penalty in history. Pell grants giving prisoners an avenue to higher education were cut off. Federal judges were stripped of their powers to enforce the constitutional rights of prisoners and the power of states to set sentencing standards for drug crimes was greatly diminished.
The above comment is a summary of the 1994 Crime Bill, more formally known as the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. This legislation, which was written by Senator Joe Biden, led to the massive incarceration of black and brown people, so much so that the US became the country with the highest percentage of civilians incarcerated in the world.
The Crime Bill passed under a Democratic Party leadership, using white supremacist fear-mongering as a tactic to get public support for the legislation. Not surprisingly, Grand Rapids took a page from the Crime Bill’s playbook, to not only get 95 more police officers added to the GRPD, they got voters to support a change to the City’s Charter to guarantee that 32% of the annual budget would be allocated to the Grand Rapids Police Department.
With the help of the wonderful people at the Grand Rapids Public Library, I was able to access much of the news coverage and material that was produced by the Safety 95 Campaign Committee, all of which you can view on the Grand Rapids People’s History Project site.
The Safety 95 Campaign Committee, was made up of 32 people, even though we have been unable to find out who most of them were. We do know that former Grand Rapids Mayor, Gerald Helmholdt and Ella Ramirez, who lost two sons to murder, were the Safety 95 Campaign Committee’s co-chairs, based on a story in the GR Press (page 7 of the 44 pages we have on the Safety 95 Campaign Committee) The campaign also hired David Doyle, who has run numerous ballot initiatives over the years in Grand Rapids and was the former director of Silent Observer in Grand Rapids.
Looking at the GR Press coverage, one can see that then Police Chief William Hegarty was a major source cited throughout the campaign. Rarely do we hear the voices of residents in Grand Rapids and even less from black and brown residents, even though the Chief Hegarty often cited urban crime as a major problem. There is included in the documentation (on page 14), a copy of a flyer that was in the Afro American Gazette, published in late February of 1995. This flyer, with the headline No Means No, dismantles the argument that the city needs more cops.
On page 8 of the collected documents, there is a GR Press article with the headline that reads, Crime drops as city asks for more police. The article also includes data showing that crime, particularly violent crimes had declined.
There was also an instructive article on page 16/17, which provided some information on who had made financial contributions to the Safety 95 Campaign. The article reveals that the Michigan Consolidated Gas Co. contributed $5,000 to the campaign, and Butterworth Hospital donated another $1,500. Other notable contributors to the campaign to get more cops and change the City’s charter to guarantee that one-third of the City’s budget automatically goes to the GRPD, were Mayor John Logie, City Manager Kurt Kimball and City Commissioners Linda Samuelson, Roy Schmidt and George Heartwell. Members of the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) also contributed, along with David Frey, one of the co-chairs of Grand Action.
On pages 18/19, there is a GR Press article about six former city officials who opposed the need to add more cops to the GRPD. In addition, these six former city officials took out a paid ad (page 35) in the GR Press expressing their opposition to more police and to the change in the city charter, seen here below.
On page 20, the GR Press writes that the Grand Rapids police union was endorsing the tax increase, which would be used for an additional 95 cops.
Then on pages 37 – 41, there are examples of what the Safety 95 Campaign Committee were distributing, along with what the City of Grand Rapids was sending out to voters before the March 28, 1995 vote. So, not only did the Mayor of Grand Rapids and half of the City Commissioners contribute to the Safety 95 Campaign, the City used public money to encourage residents to vote for more police and to change the City Charter to solidify a third of the budget for the GRPD. Part of the language in the pamphlet that the City sent out before the vote included this:
The Grand Rapids Police Department plans to assign officers to all of our neighborhoods all of the time. Police officers will be able to more promptly respond to calls; prevent and control neighborhood problems such as property thefts, disorderly youth, gang activity, drug violations, and traffic complaints; and work directly with neighborhood associations, block clubs, and neighborhood schools.
According to a GR Press story from March 29 (page 43-44), 18.9% of the City’s voting population turned out, with the income tax increase passing by more than 2,000 votes, but the charter change barely passing by a margin of 804 votes. One of the reasons that these two ballot initiatives passed, especially the income tax increase initiative, was because property taxes would be reduced by 2 mills over two years. We know that home owners vote at a higher percentage than those who rent, which is what the Safety 95 Campaign Committee was banking on.
Therefore, it seems that Safety 95 Campaign Committee was using the same fear tactics that got the Crime Bill pass just a few short months before Grand Rapids was asked to vote. Add to that the financial incentives offered to home owners, along with City officials endorsing the campaign and using public money to turn out the vote, and you have a solid formula. White fear, white privilege and white liberals were used to solidify more cops and more funding for the GRPD, so they could primarily patrol black and brown neighborhoods, thus protecting white lives. This is how it is done in Grand Rapids.
The Movement for Black Lives has recently created a wonderful toolkit for communities that are considering a campaign to defund their police.
This is a powerful resource, which not only provides very practical and useful tactics and strategies for actually defunding police departments, it provides great examples of what other communities are doing. In addition, their analysis is rooted in the lived experience of the black community, which is reflected in the introduction of the toolkit:
#DefundPolice is a demand that has gained popularity in response to recent police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Tony McDade. It is rooted in the failure of decades of commissions, investigations, police reforms, and oversight to prevent their deaths.
It is also a response to the fact that, in the face of a pandemic and the most devastating economic crisis of a generation, in which cities, counties, and states are experiencing drastic losses in revenues, many life-saving programs are on the chopping block while o cials increase or maintain police budgets.
It is a demand to #DefendBlackLives by shutting o resources to institutions that harm Black people and redirecting them to meeting Black communities’ needs and increasing our collective safety.
#DefundPolice is a demand to cut funding and resources from police departments and other law enforcement and invest in things that actually make our communities safer: quality, affordable, and accessible housing, universal quality health care, including community- based mental health services, income support to stay safe during the pandemic, safe living wage employment, education, and youth programming. It is rooted in a larger Invest/Divest framework articulated in the Movement for Black Lives’ Vision for Black Lives.
#DefundPolice is a strategy that goes beyond dollars and cents—it is not just about decreasing police budgets, it is about reducing the power, scope, and size of police departments. It is about delegitimizing institutions of surveillance, policing and punishment, and these strategies, no matter who is deploying them, to produce safety. It is a strategy (part of the HOW) to advance a long term vision of abolition of police through divestment from policing as a practice, dismantling policing institutions, and building community-based responses to harm, need, and conflict that do not rely on surveillance, policing and punishment.
Please, share this toolkit as a valuable resource in your community and help us to Defund the GRPD!
In the past week, Together We Are Safe, along with partner groups Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE, have initiated a Defund the GRPD campaign.
As of this writing we have had 1,200 people send letters to Grand Rapids City officials, thus demonstrating that Defunding the GRPD has significant support as a political goal.
Of course, it is important to note that the Defund the GRPD campaign consists of three major components:
- First, to do away funding the GRPD, which in 2019 received $54 million, roughly 37% of the City’s budget
- Second, by defunding we mean the abolition of the GRPD, which is fundamentally different than a reformist position
- Third, redirecting an equivalent amount of Grand Rapids taxpayer that goes to the GRPD, to fund those most affected by GRPD intimidation, harassment and violence, where those most affected would make the decisions about how this money would be used.
While there has been significant support for the Defund the GRPD campaign in the first week, there are also plenty of people who have trouble imagining a world without the GRPD. This is understandable, since none of us have ever experienced Grand Rapids without the police. So what would Grand Rapids look like without the GRPD and what needs to happen in order to achieve that goal?
Those of us who have been promoting the Defund the GRPD campaign are not naive and we recognize how hard it will be to not have the GRPD. However, we also believe in radical praxis and radical imagination.
Together We Are Safe already encourages people to not call the GRPD when there is a conflict or a problem in the community. They distribute a two-page document that provides reasons why not to call the GRPD and then provides other valuable resources in the community that would more effectively respond to the conflicts in our community. When the GRPD becomes involved in conflicts, it only increases the possibility that the conflict will escalate.
So what are alternatives to having heavily armed cops in our neighborhoods, which often result in a disproportionately large number of black and brown residents going to jail?
One major alternative is an integral part of the Defund the GRPD campaign, which is the divestment/investment component. If the $54 million a year were to go to uplift residents most impacted by the harm the GRPD does, imagine how much those residents/neighborhoods could benefit from that kind of funding. With $54 million infused into communities harmed by the GRPD, the result would almost certainly result in reducing conflict and crime, thus reducing the need to have cops.
However, a divestment/investment strategy is not enough. In Zach Morris’s book, We Keep Us Safe: Building Secure, Just and Inclusive Communities, he acknowledges that we live in a failed state. What Morris means by a failed state, is that too many people do not have their basic human needs met – housing, health care, food, transportation, child care, employment/wages. The result is the Prison Industrial Complex, the War on Drugs, Gentrification, a health care system based on profits over human needs, a dysfunctional transportation system and employment that is based on exploitation. One powerful example of how the failed state impacts black people, is this statement from Prison Abolition group Critical Resistance.
What We Keep Us Safe advocates, in the face of a failed state, is a care-based strategy for public safety that overturns more than 200 years of fear-based discrimination, othering, and punishment. In addition, the book:
“We Keep Us Safe is a blueprint of how to hold people accountable while still holding them in community. The result reinstates full humanity and agency for everyone who has been dehumanized and traumatized so they can participate fully in life, in society, and in the fabric of our democracy.”
In addition to ideas and examples provided in We Keep Us Safe, there are other very practical ways that people can practice community safety. One solid resource is an anti-racist neighborhood watch manual that was developed by people in Portland Oregon. This 31 page manual provides great practical resources and application around community safety, specifically that are anti-racist. In some ways, this manual builds on the work of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense, which was essentially about responding to the ongoing police harassment and violence directed at black communities across the country.
Another great resource, which was produced by the Women of Color group, INCITE!, is a 121-page toolkit that focuses on why calling the police is especially problematic for women of color and trans people of color. This toolkit also covers the following areas:
- Gender Policing
- Immigration Enforcement
- Cops in Schools
- Policing Sex Work
- The War on Drugs
- Police Violence and Domestic Violence
- Law Enforcement Violence and Disaster
A second major section of the toolkit, provides great examples of practicing community safety from several organizations. This toolkit is a must read and resource for people who want to practice community safety, plus it is a great resource to help us all radically imagine how life could be without the cops.
Lastly, I think it is worth quoting from the final page of the book, We Keep Us Safe:
“Real safety happens when we bridge the divides and build relationships with each other, overcoming suspicion and distrust. Real safety comes from strategic, smart investment – meaning resources directed towards our stability and well-being. Real safety addresses harms that the current system is failing to tackle, and holds people accountable for those harms while still holding them in community. Real safety results from reinstating full humanity and agency for everyone who has been dehumanized and traumatized, so they can participate fully in society. If we are able to transform our old system and create a culture of caring and healing in its place, we may have an actual shot at creating real democracy for the first time.”
Transparency is rare with the members of the Capitalist Class, and the DeVos family is one family that doesn’t like to share it personal wealth.
However, when one of the members of your family happens to be part of the federal government, then there are some requirements about divulging your personal wealth. Based on the documentation that Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos was legally required to submit, we get a closer understanding of how much her wealth grew in 2019.
According to research by the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Betsy DeVos expanded her personal wealth by at least $50 million in 2019, but quite like by more than $100 million. According to CREW:
It is possible that DeVos earned significantly more than $100 million in 2019 because she is not required to specify amounts received from particular assets above $1 million for her spouse or amounts above $5 million for herself. In her most recent disclosure, DeVos reported income from 11 sources that exceeded $1 million or $5 million without specifying the actual amount received.
If you look at the 77-page document submitted by Betsy DeVos, you can see exactly what the researchers at CREW were talking about in regard to the vagueness surrounding assets that Betsy and her husband Dick DeVos have.
Many of us who have followed the DeVos family closely over the years are aware of assets such as Alitcor, RDV Corporation, The Windquest Group, RDV Sports, The Stow Company, Boxed Water and Neurocore, but there are dozens of asset entries that are not as familiar.
Betsy DeVos has assets in numerous Grand Rapids and Holland real estate entities, such as DBD Properties LLC, Ada Holdings LLC, 130 Central Avenue LLC, 139 River Avenue LLC and Holland Property Holdings LLC, just to name a few.
Then there are some assets that she has investments in, such as CWD 111 Lyon LLC and DWD Urban Fund, both of which show that she has over $1 million in assets. Again, this is rather vague, because it could mean multiple millions in those assets.
Betsy DeVos also lists assets with GR Michigan Street Holdings, 50 Monroe II LLC, Northside Entertainment Holdings and the Bridge Street Capital Fund.
Now, it should come as no surprise that people who are part of the federal government are personally worth a disgusting amount of money. OpenSecrets.org provides us with the personal wealth of those in Congress, where we find that the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is worth $114 Million.
However, the personal wealth of those who claim to be working for the public, should be a major issue and a major concern, especially in light of the fact that the wealth gap between the super rich and everyone else has grown at a staggering rate over the past 20 years.
Lastly, it is rather troubling that none of the West Michigan news outlets have reported on the matter of the growth of Betsy DeVos’ personal wealth while serving as Secretary of Education, especially since so much of her wealth is tied to this community. We need the kind of journalism that will not hesitate to provide a detailed accounting of those who are members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, in order to be able to effectively organize against those with tremendous economic and political power in West Michigan.
If Grand Rapids really wanted to promote anti-racism and equity, then they would embrace Defund the GRPD
Grand Rapids has a population of 201,013 in 2020, based on current census data, with African Americans making up 19%, which is just under 40,000.
So, what would it mean if 40,000 African Americans could decide what to do with the annual GRPD budget of $54 million? Now, that is completely up to those in the African American community. However, that doesn’t prevent us from looking at numbers, just to provide some idea of what kind of impact the current GRPD budget money could do to benefit the black community.
One could call this is a form of reparations to the black community or we could call it what the Vision for Black Lives calls a strategy of Divestment/Investment. Whatever, we call it, this amount of money, which is just one year of the current GRPD budget, would actually go a long way to creating racial justice and equity in a city that constantly claims to promote racial and economic equity.
If we distributed $54 million equally amongst the black community, that would mean that every black person, of the 40,000 in Grand Rapids, would receive $1,350. What about housing. How many new homes could $54 million build? Ok, so lets say that a new house would cost $250,000, it would translate into 216 brand new homes for black families. How about $50,000 to every black family to use as a down payment for a home? This would allow 1,080 black families a chance to purchase a home.
What about food? $54 million could buy a lot of food, but it could also create opportunities for black people to create thriving fresh food dynamics in neighborhoods where Food Apartheid exists. This could mean dynamic community gardens, robust farmers markets, community based grocery stores or food co-ops, and it could mean creating community based kitchens, where food can be prepared collectively, shared collectively and preserved collectively.
Then there is the issue of re-directing funding from the GRPD that the black community could be used to start local businesses. $30,000 for a business start up is significant, and $54 million would provide 1,800 people will $30,000 to start their own business.
The City of Grand Rapids says they want to work with the business community to “increase summer job opportunities for youth.” This is a rather vague notion, but if the $54 million was redirected to create jobs for black you, that could mean providing summer jobs to black youth – at $20 an hour & 40 hours a week, for 12 weeks, which is $9,600. The annual GRPD budget of $54 million could provide 5,625 black youth summer jobs making $20 an hour.
Of course, these are just a few examples, based on looking at the numbers. Equally important would be how this amount of money could radical improve the lives of the black community – physically, emotionally and psychologically. If Grand Rapids is truly committed to racial and economic equity, then there doesn’t seem to be a strong argument for NOT Defunding the GRPD.
They are going to do what they want: Grand Rapids, the GRPD and the illusion of Democracy
Over the past few years, many of us who have been involved with Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE, have attended many city and county commission meetings. One thing has been clear at those meetings, that despite our collective efforts to demand clear policy changes, the city and county commissioners have refused to not only take us seriously, they have been unwilling to adopt the policy demands we have worked on.
In many ways, these commission meetings are a facade and a shallow form of democracy. I have never left these meetings feeling like the system works. Fortunately, many of us do not put much faith that these systems of power will do what we are asking, but they do respond to lots of public pressure, disruption and direct action.
This brings us to the most recent Digital TownHall on Policing, which was hosted by the City of Grand Rapids on Wednesday. However, before discussing that forum, it is important to provide some context.
The actions of the GRPD have been under constant public scrutiny, especially from the black and latinx communities, for numerous years. The City of Grand Rapids likes to think that they are progressive on community/police relations, but this has not been the experience of many who continue to witness or be the targets of harassment, intimidation and harm at the hands of the GRPD.
Over the past few weeks, hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets to protest police brutality, in light of the murders of several black people, the most recent being George Floyd. On May 30, there was a large rally/march in Grand Rapids centering on the lived experience of black lives and police violence. Despite the commercial media coverage and the claims of the City of Grand Rapids, the GRPD has been on the offensive, attempting to limit public dissent, using tear gas, physical force and even bringing in the National Guard at one point.
Over the past two weeks there have been actions in the streets demanding everything from the demilitarization of the GRPD, greater mechanisms of accountability for the GRPD and a call to abolish the GRPD, specifically through the Defund the GRPD campaign.
In fact, the DeFund the GRPD campaign, which began on Monday, is fast approaching 1,000 signatures. Yesterday, I received the following message from a staff member from Mayor Bliss’s office, stating:
Thank you for your email to Mayor Bliss’ office. We appreciate your engagement as the Mayor does appreciate hearing your thoughts and recommendations. As you can likely imagine, we are hearing from hundreds of people throughout the community about ways to move forward and how best to implement police reform and eliminate systemic racism. I assure you that the Mayor is committed to closely examining each idea and recommendation and then moving forward with meaningful action.
This vague and weak response has been indicative of what many who have been organizing to expose and fight the actions of the GRPD have experienced. On Wednesday, the City of Grand Rapids held a Press Conference in the afternoon, where the City Manager, the Office of Oversight & Accountability, and the Chief of Police, all presented information on what the City is doing to address what they referred to as equity, racial justice and police reforms.
You can read the list of things that the City said they would be doing, most of which set a rather low bar for any substantive changes. For example, the GRPD will no longer shoot at moving vehicles or engage in the practice of chokeholds. Gee, thanks. This list also includes lots of vague language or language that provides plenty of wiggle room for the GRPD to do whatever they want. For example, one point states, “Require officers to exhaust all other reasonable alternatives, including non-force and less-lethal force options, before resorting to deadly force.” Who exactly gets to determine when deadly force can be used? We have all seen this dynamic before. The police pull their guns, people react, then the police brutalize someone because they “felt threatened,” etc. It all comes down to the word of the GRPD vs the public, and how many times in this dynamic has the GRPD got off without any real consequences?
The Press Conference, along with the pre-determined “changes” were designed to undermine real public input. In fact, the Digital TownHall on Policing began with City Manager Mark Washington providing an overview of these “changes.” Now, people could call in or post comments on the Facebook and Youtube pages, but did people who called really feel like their voice was heard? This was especially the case when people were directly challenging the City and the GRPD about police actions since May 30 or on larger issues, such as the amount of the City’s budget is dedicated to the GRPD or the Defund the GRPD campaign. Everyone from the City, the City Manager, the Office of Oversight & Accountability, and the Chief of Police, all of them had the power to respond to comments, to minimize them, or to ignore them. They even had a slide up saying that the City Charter requires that 32% of the City’s budget be allocated for the GRPD. However, they failed to mention that the City Commission could vote to amend the City Charter on this matter, if they wanted to.
In addition, the City Manager, when responding to the Defund the GRPD position, made the case that the City needed to increase funding for the GRPD because of all of the overtime that cops have been logging. In many ways, this response was a way of giving the public a big middle finger.
I sat through both the Press Conference and the Digital TownHall on Policing with an empty feeling in my stomach. Once again, people who challenged the system were dismissed, minimized or ignored. However, we have seen this kind of response before, which means that our resistance to the White Supremacist practices of the GRPD and the City of Grand Rapids will need to escalate. There is important work to be done and lots of groups doing the work on the ground. As in any struggle, the question we always ask is, which side are you on?
Last week, we wrote about the importance of having a Defund the GRPD campaign.
This week a Defund the GRPD campaign was begun by the group Together We Are Safe, with support from Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE.
The push to defund police departments is part of a larger conversation around the role of policing in the US. There is tremendous potential and lots of political openings right now, allowing for more radical imagination and revolutionary praxis.
The Defund the GRPD campaign is gaining lots of traction, especially since the campaign is not only calling for Defunding the GRPD, but for black and brown communities to decide how the money that has been going to the GRPD can be used to benefit their communities. This strategy of Divest/Invest, is exactly what the Movement for Black Lives has been calling for since 2014.
Another component of Defunding the GRPD campaign should also include information about how the police union in Grand Rapids, the Grand Rapids Police Officers Association PAC, has been working to influence public policy, by making financial contributions to Grand Rapids area elected officials and candidates.
It is critical that we Defund the GRPD, but it is also important to pressure candidates to NOT take money from the Grand Rapids Police Officers Association PAC and to NOT vote for candidates that accept money from the Grand Rapids Police Officers Association PAC.
What follows below is a list of candidates that the Grand Rapids Police Officers Association PAC has contributed to and the amount, based on campaign finance data from the Michigan Secretary of State’s office.
One thing that is interesting about this list is that, for all of the partisan candidates, all of them, except Kevin Green and Robert Regan, are Democrats.
October 2019
- Wendy Falb $5,000
July 2019
- Wendy Falb $5,000
April 2019
- Jon O’Conner $5,000
- Winnie Brinks $500
- Carol Hennessy $250
October 2018
- Alida Bryant $2,000
- Blair Lachman $1,500
- Phil Skaggs $500
- Carol Hennessy $250
July 2018
- Blair Lachman $2,000
- Winnie Brinks $1,500
January 2018
- Winnie Brinks $1,000
October 2017
- Kurt Reppart $1,500
April 2017
- Phil Skaggs $250
January 2017
- David Allen $1,000
- Jon O’Connor $1,000
October 2016
- David LaGrand $500
- Deb McNab $250
April 2016
- Winnie Brinks $1,000
- Chris Becker $1,000
October 2015
- David Allen $2,500
- Winnie Brinks $500
- David LaGrand $500
- Rosalynn Bliss $500
July 2015
- David Allen $2,500
- David LaGrand $1,000
April 2015
- Rosalynn Bliss $2,500
- Brandon Dillion $250
February 2015
- Jon O’Connor $1,000
October 2014
- Winnie Brinks $500
July 2014
- Kevin Green $250
- Robert Regan $250
- Brandon Dillon $200
April 2014
- Brandon Dillon $500
- Dan Morse $250
February 2014
- Matthew Janiskee $1,000
For those interested in finding out which politicians in other communities have taken money from police unions, check out the resource, No More Cop Money.
Politicians have made all sorts of public comments over the past week, as the country has erupted into mass protests against the police murder of black people.
In Michigan, the comments from elected officials has been fairly consistent with those across the country. State Rep. Thomas Albert (R), who represents the 86th District, which includes part of Kent and Ionia Counties, stated the following:
“The death of George Floyd was a horrific tragedy and justice must be served. While I understand and respect anyone who wants to demonstrate peacefully to bring attention to this injustice, it is discouraging that what was clearly intended to be a peaceful protest quickly devolved into a riot instigated by extremists with an anarchist ideology.”
First, it is instructive that Rep. Albert did not state that George Floyd was murdered by a police officer. However, the more revealing comment from the Republican legislator was his comment that he can respect people if they protest peacefully, but that those who instigated the riot were “extremists with an anarchist ideology.” Albert is doing the exact same thing that we wrote about yesterday, by trying to create a dichotomy about how people should respond when the police murder black people. Albert then adds that the riot was instigated by those with an anarchist ideology. I seriously doubt that Rep. Albert has any real understanding of anarchist principles and practices, but for the State Representative, that doesn’t matter, since he just wanted ton associate rioting with anarchism, thus marginalizing those who embrace anarchist values.
On the same day, Michigan Senator Gary Peters, made a similar statement, along with fellow Senator, Ron Johnson, from Wisconsin. Both Senators stated:
Over the past few days, we have witnessed widespread protests across the country. The vast majority of protestors are exercising their First Amendment rights to protest systemic injustice and demand change. Unfortunately, a small number of violent actors—reportedly anarchists and other violent opportunists—have taken advantage of the moment to commit violence and destroy property.
Both Peters and Johnson make the same link as Rep. Albert, by linking anarchism with violence. In this case, the statement isn’t just about Grand Rapids, but protests that have taken place across the country.
One significant difference between the statement from State Rep. Albert and Senator Gary Peters, is that Peters sits on the Armed Services and Homeland Security & Government Affairs Committees. Senator Peters has also consistently voted to approve the annual US Department of Defense Budgets, which means he supports US Militarism and Imperialism abroad.
It seems a bit hypocritical to condemn property destruction in protests directed at the police killings of black people and then approve a $750 billion US military budget (2019), which we know is used to destroy communities and villages all around the world. However, the public is not likely to see Senator Peters called out for this kind of hypocrisy, since most commercial news outlets believe that the US military is a force for good, much the same way they associate police departments and public safety.
Over the past week, Grand Rapids, like many cities around the country, has seen an incredible outpouring of collective anger directed at the state and in particular, police departments.
The most resistance started in Minneapolis, after someone filmed a cop murder George Floyd. The collective anger in Minneapolis took on many forms, with a growing critique of police brutality, White Supremacy, State violence and the Neo-Liberal Capitalism.
This collective rage then spread across the country, in dozens of cities, even in Grand Rapids. Last Saturday, thousands of people converged on Grand Rapids, demonstrating against state violence, first with an informal rally, then a march and later an uprising that resulted in property destruction and an escalation of GRPD violence.
The City of Grand Rapids then responded by imposing a curfew and bringing in heavily armed soldiers in the form of the National Guard. Since then, the commercial news media and the City of Grand Rapids has hijacked the public narrative to the police murder of George Floyd and so many other black people.
The narrative is now framed around whether or not the resistance or the protest is peaceful or not. This re-framing of the collective rage against police violence was highlighted last week, when the Grand Rapids Police Chief and other local law enforcement officials took a knee during one of the protests, even going as far as saying, “Black Lives Matter.”
Over the past week, the most common reference in both the general narrative and often in news headlines was the phrase “peaceful protest.” But what exactly does such a phrase mean? It is important for us to us-pack what peaceful protest means and why it is such a problematic phrase.
First, it is important to come to terms with the use of the word peace, which for many people means the absence of conflict. If we think about peace in terms of a protest, then we have to ask ourselves if there is no conflict. The very nature of a protest, whether we are talking about climate change, US militarism or police violence against black people, there is always an inherent conflict. People protest because some injustice has occurred, because they want to express some grievances, grievances often directed at the very institutions were are at the heart of the conflict. Therefore, we can conclude that a protest cannot be peaceful, since there indeed is a conflict.
Second, it is important that we frame the issue of racism, White Supremacy and the police murder of black people through the lens of power. Systems of power, like police departments, have the backing of the legal system, the political system and propaganda systems like news media, popular culture and schooling, all of which present a general narrative that police are necessary and most of them are “good.” All of these systems of power protect and legitimize police and policing. However, police departments are one clear example of structural violence, which we are conditioned to not think about. As Alex Vitale, author of the book, The End of Policing, states:
Well-trained police following proper procedure are still going to be arresting people for mostly low-level offenses, and the burden will continue to fall primarily on communities of color because that is how the system is designed to operate – not because of the biases or misunderstandings of officers.
Third, the presence of police at a protest, means there are people with guns, tasers, mace, clubs, tear gas, rubber bullets and a whole range of other high tech weapons. As anyone who has ever participated in a protest knows, it doesn’t take much for the police to use any number of these weapons. In fact, one could argue that the police are looking for a reason to use such weapons. However, even if they don’t use these weapons, there is always the threat of their use, which means that whenever cops are at a protest it CANNOT be peaceful.
Fourth, calling a protest peaceful, when protests are anything but peaceful, is a way for the system(s) to dictate the narrative about what is happening. When the police say a protest was peaceful, they mean that those protesting obey their orders, did nothing to disrupt business as usual and often it means that protest organizers cooperate and even collaborate with the police. In fact, one could argue that if this happens, then it is not really a protest, instead it becomes a performance. Such forms of “protests” are almost always organized by white liberals to make other white people feel good about themselves, without having to interrogate systems of power and oppression.
Lastly, the GRPD Chief of Police taking a knee during a protest against police killings of black people does nothing more than make a mockery of the countless number of people who are now in the streets, AND, it insults the memory of the black people who have been murdered by cops.
Protest, Tactics and Strategies
Peter Gelderloos, in his important book, How Non-Violence Protects the State, makes this observation:
“Non-violence in the hands of white people has been and continues to be a colonial enterprise.”
Now, it is important that we think about the phrase, “non-violence in hands of white people.” White people have the luxury of organizing peaceful protests, because they generally don’t have to worry about suffering the full force of the state – cops, courts, prisons, etc. White people can preach non-violence, because they often don’t want to disrupt business as usual, since they are the primary beneficiaries of law and order.
At this point, some people will say, but didn’t Dr. King advocate non-violence? Yes, he did, but Dr. King understand the tactical and strategic value of using non-violence to disrupt business as usual – whether it was a boycott, a strike, shutting down roads or engaging in civil disobedience.
However, it is equally important for us to come to terms with the fact that using force, property destruction or armed self-defense can also be employed as tactics and strategies in the struggle for freedom. There have been numerous insurrectionary movements, both in the US and around the world, that have used insurrectionary tactics and strategies to obtain their goals, such as the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, the Deacons for Defense, the American Indian Movement, the Zapatistas or the African National Congress. The point here is that all forms of protest should be examined and people should not be judged based upon the tactics and strategies that they use.
The State will always use force and violence to maintain order, to maintain business as usual, which really means they will use force or the threat of force to maintain White Supremacy, Capitalism, homophobia, Patriarchy and ecological destruction. What we have to decide is how we will resist such injustices and what tactics/strategies we will use in the process.
New Zines for the current political climate
Just wanted to let people know about a couple of new zines that have been produced, one is specific to Grand Rapids, while the other one addresses an issue that has been raised over and over again in the past week as a result of the national uprising over police killings of black people.
The first zine, entitled, The Monsters We Know: A Brief overview of the racism and abuse of power of the GRPD, is a great 2-page zine that provides a quick overview of some recent cases where the GRPD abused their power, particularly with black and brown people in Grand Rapids. The zine was produced by the West Michigan Anarchist Federation and can be downloaded at this link.
The other zine, entitled, The Outside Agitator Myth, is a 31-page zine that provides excellent analysis and history around this idea that protests only “get out of hand” because of outside agitators. Such a claim is always meant to discredit actions or uprisings, and this myth can be used to diminish solidarity amongst those engaged in dissent. This zine can be downloaded at this link.
Zines are a great way to share information and radical ideas. For people who want help spread the word about radical zines, we encourage everyone to check out Sprout Distro, which has an excellent collection of zines, covering a wide range of topics.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 