"The truth always really matters, but it's important to recognize that past experience to stereotypes also influences the perception of hands being raised," Brondolo said.
Ultimately, however, for some, it doesn't matter whether Brown's hands were raised or not.
"Even if you don't find that it's true, it's a valid rallying cry," Ferguson protester Taylor Gruenloh told the AP. "It's just a metaphor."
A Seattle protester, Evan Chakroff, said the gesture is symbolic, not literal.
"My sense is that it's totally symbolic and a way of representing powerlessness" in the face of inequality and militarized police, he told the AP.
Others have gone so far as to say that focusing on the exact circumstances of Brown's shooting misses the point of the slogan.
"This is not about one boy getting shot in the street, but about the hundreds just like him who have received the same callous and racially influenced treatment," Oakland, California, protester Gabe Johnson, told the AP. "So ultimately, no, it doesn't matter at all if somehow we can say for sure whether this one young man really said these words or had his hands up."
There are two points especially worth noting here. One is that, when the other side gets caught -- not merely in a lie, but in the central lie of the whole encounter -- the previously talismanic importance of their factual narrative simply vanishes.
The second is the utter deliciousness of psychology Professor Elizabeth Brondolo's statement that, "The truth always really matters, but it's important to recognize that past experience to stereotypes also influences the perception of hands being raised."
Well, ummm, no. What "influences the perception of hands being raised" is where the friggin' hands are. They're "raised" if they're above his shoulders. If not, they aren't. But one way or the other, "experience" of "stereotypes" has zip to do with whether Michael Brown had his hands up. The whole psychologist's shake-and-jive is just a slightly more convoluted way of saying that reality doesn't matter; it's our grievances that matter, and if you say otherwise, you're a Klansman.
I agree, Bill, truth matters. And "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" was a concocted lie designed to fit the narrative of race-baiting charletons.
But I am interested in your opinion on the "I Can't Breath" rallying cry regarding the death of Eric Gardner?
In my mind, the death of Gardner raises some very serious issues regarding the functioning of the criminal justice system.
I'm planning a post on the Garner case. In the meantime, I think it's risky to say that Case X raises questions about the entire system.
First, "questions" can always be raised, and have been raised, about "the system." But questions are not answers, and the things that turn out to be answers always and ever involve trade-off's that tend to be obscured, or just shouted over, in any one case.
For example, one could say that the acquittals of OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony raise the "question" whether the system's burden of proof is too high. But the answer, regardless of how outrageous those particular outcomes were, depends on the package of bad stuff (making it too easy to convict the innocent) that we'd get by making a change. The system operates as it does for reasons that often get lost in the heat of a particularly bad outcome (or what seems like a particularly bad outcome).
Second, experience tells me that, if one wants to know what went wrong in Case X, you have to look at the nitty-gritty details of Case X before jumping to the conclusion that "the system" has collapsed.
Third, whatever one makes of the present trade-off's, over the last generation, the number of murders and other violent crimes -- numbers that disproportionately affect blacks -- is way, way down.
No system, past, present or future, is going to be beyond question. Can't happen. The realistic issue is whether what we have now works better for our citizens than what we had then, and the answer -- with murder rates down by so much for all races -- is, you bet.
Yes, but when you have Cases X, Y, Z, and had previously had Cases A, B, C ... I think it is worthwhile to at least look into the possibility that the "system" can be improved.
I agree that, just like the adage that "there are no perfect trials," there is no perfect system. But that doesn't mean that open-minded, fair and reasonable people (yes, they do exist) shouldn't always strive for improvement.
The problem with the whole Ferguson situation was the initial story - white cop guns down unarmed black youth who was trying to surrender - was too good to be true for those who already fervently believe that the police in the United States are routinely committing acts of violence against blacks. Despite the fact, the story wasn't true at all, they still cling to the hope it is - as IF it was true, it'd be the perfect vehicle to convince the rest of the country they are correct.
Exact same thing unfolded this week regarding the Rolling Stone article about an alleged gang rape at a UVA fraternity. The story if true is the perfect vehicle for those who believe that fraternities are solely a vehicle for white male power and are loaded with members who are sexual predators.
It almost worked - UVA suspended all fraternity activities for the rest of the year. But, it turns out the story wasn't true at all.
Full disclosure - I was in a fraternity in college (not the one accused in the story) and strongly disagree that fraternities are evil white men organizations who train pledges into sexual predators. I could rant more, but it is Friday so I won't.
You can rant anytime.
I was a dorm rat and was so much of a loss at social life that I could only envy frat parties from a distance.
No fair-minded person thinks we can't make improvements. But we should be leery about making them under the gun.
Matt's comment is right on point as to that. There was a story about a gang rape at UVA. The University President responded by shutting down fraternities for the rest of the year -- obviously something she viewed as an improvement.
But her thought is hogwash, and this is true even if the story were not a hoax (which it very likely is). Fraternities will simply move off campus and re-assemble themselves under different names. To the extent there is any "rape culture" -- about which I have more than a few doubts -- it won't end, it will just move.
Yes, we need to look at arrest procedures. But we should do so in a fair and reflective way, not to satisfy the outrage of the moment. Nor should we be intimidated in the face of what is plainly a blunderbuss attack on all cops (or all white cops, I'm not sure which). The attack is false, and -- equally important -- giving ground to it will prove dangerous.
I am skeptical of the "rape culture" because from age 18 - 26, I was in a fraternity, then an officer in the Army, two organizations accused of having a rape culture and during my experience with both, I observed nothing remotely resembling a "rape culture".
In order for a "rape culture" to exist, one has to believe there is this abnormally high level of sexual predators in the aforementioned organizations and a much large group of persons who function as enablers by looking the other way or covering it up. It is too extraordinary of a claim to believe absent significant evidence to the contrary.
The simpler answer is that some people do not like fraternities because they believe they are elitist groups that solely exist to perpetuate white male power. As to the military, it is viewed as an institution (by the same people) as an organization that inflicts death and destruction on the rest of the hapless (see non-white) world in order to preserve American power. Somewhere along the way, they decided both have a rape culture and are using this claim to discredit the organizations and since it has gotten a bit of traction in the mainstream media they keep sticking to the storyline.
Last point - I am always skeptical when I read/hear stories in the news that seem implausible - whether it is Ferguson, UVA, or the pending execution of a guy who represented himself in a purple cowboy suit. I'm not saying Panetti isn't crazy, but I've yet to read a first hand account of his trial. Just pointing that out.
It shouldn't raise serious questions about the criminal justice system. It should raise serious questions about the laws our representatives promulgate, and the enforcement that follows as carried out by their (the state's) enforcement arm: the police.