Charles M. Blow, an Op- Ed columnist for the New York Times, in his article “Police Abuse Is a Form of Terrorism”(August 12, 2015), claims that terrorism in the setting of Jihadists and extremists is no different than police officers attacking black citizens for no reason. He supports this by discussing the difference between state and community violence in regards to blacks fighting blacks and cops fighting blacks, depicting the feeling of nakedness due to lack of protection, and calling on the black community to respond to the violence like America responded to terrorism. His purpose of discussing the different types of violence is in order to explain how terrorism is synonymous with unfair black treatment. His logical approach to end the police attacks reach out to the black community giving them the right to protect themselves.
Charles M. Blow made many points about how similar terrorism is to black injustice, but I disagree with his solution to the problem. He seems to be suggesting that just like we as a country fought against the terrorists of 9/11, blacks should be able to defend against the police. This idea seems to be fighting violence with violence, which results in more violence. His answer to Americans killing Americans is simply unrealistic and irrational. Peaceful lobbying and other forms of peaceful government participation are better options. Cops are still in the fault for assuming that people of a certain race are guilty without attempting a crime. They have to be put in their place, but not with violence. The problem of police attacking blacks has to be stopped, but there are better ways of going about this.
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/13/opinion/police-abuse-is-a-form-of-terror.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fcharles-m-blow&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=8&pgtype=collection&_r=0
I find no issues with your first sentence. It is well written.
ReplyDeleteThe second sentence needs slight reworking. The third example, "calling on the black community to respond to the violence like America responded to terrorism," isn't a support of his thesis, it's something he want's the black community to do. The third sentence isn't structured properly. You say his purpose "is in order to." Is what in order to? Is his purpose to "explain how terrorism is synonymous with unfair black treatment."? If so, what goal is he trying to achieve by doing that?
The fourth sentence doesn't state what kind of relationship Blow is trying to establish with his audience. Also, the sentence seems to be missing words? Did you mean to say his approach reaches out to the black community? Over all, the last sentence doesn't tell me what it needs to, and feels inconcise.
Your personal response on the other hand, rings true with my thoughts on the subject. Riots and violence are not the way to go about solving issues. There may be a problem in the police force of America, but it will not be solved through the creation of chaos. I agree that peaceful protest is the best way to solve the issue.
I agree with Nathan.
ReplyDelete