The new Spokane Jail Bond and Challenging the Politics of Small Things”

In class, we've just finished reading the Politics of Small Thingsby Jeffrey C. Goldfarb. In this book, I found a summation of one of the main themes that I consider to be a flawed premise, and I wish to examine how it relates to the Jail Bond that is going to be on our ballots next year.

According to Goldfarb:

“Education and journalism both discipline, both prepare people to serve the existing order. Schools, from kindergartens to universities, prepare students to serve the powers, and they place students into positions that reflect the existing injustices of the social order. Similarly, journalists at major newspapers and magazines make it appear that the existing historical order is the natural order. They may be critical at the edges, but overwhelmingly are supportive of the status quo... These gross generalizations are not, to my mind, even half truths. .. The real promise and meaning of free institutions of higher learning and journalism is in the details: what goes on between and among students and teachers, journalists and readers.(119-120)

I have a real problem with this theory: this emphasis on the process of creation and not the end result neglects to account for the effects that the process will have on later processes. An example of this theory is the pending bond issue in Spokane County in relation to its recent history and my (liberal) assumptions regarding what it will mean for the future.

If anyone cares to follow what I'm talking about better, then I'd suggest reading the story that was on all of the local news channels last night. Basically, the commissioners have said that they're going to introduce a bond to fund construction of a new jail and improvements on the Geiger facility, and they've told the Police Commissioner to go out and sell the idea to the public. The counter argument is that massively increasing spending on jails without addressing preexisting shortages in job skill training, prevention, and rehabilitation will only hurt the community more.

A few starting facts for this study. First, a recent follow up to a study done ten years ago was conducted through Whitworth University that charted the community's feelings about local police, and the results were dismal, both compared to national rates and the study done previously. Second, there are currently charges pending against the last Police Commissioner (who resigned) accusing him of covering up police brutality. Third, the Spokane media is nationally acclaimed as one of the most biased news machines in the nation, and they LOVE to talk about local crime.

For the purposes of my argument, the people who are arguing either side of the case are educators, trying to share their views with the population. However, the local media has historically been known to cast local governmentin a good light, and even if they didn't have that reputation, they're still responsible for their “fear sells” emphasis. The point is that one side of the argument is on the same side as the media, and has been for a long time. This constant stream of violent information, combined with increasing illegal police activity, has developed a culture of fear in the local community.

This culture of fear limits the ability to carry on a productive dialogue about the points and structure of the debate. First off, both sides agree that crime is a huge problem in our community and merits a large tax increase. Second, the police commissioner's words count for extra because, while they aren't being given any extra weight right this moment, they have still been given a lot of air time for a very long time. It doesn't matter whether people think the police are scared so they respond brutally or they think the police are responding appropriately and well: the result is the same. People want to spend more money on the crime problem, and the Police know best about fixing crime problems (according to local media).

And what will happen if the bond measure is passed? Five years in the future, if we are still facing a crime problem (because let's face it, building jails or hiring cops DOESN'T WORK TO CONTROL CRIME), who are we going to listen to again when we look to fix the problem? Judging by the past, I'd say it'll be the person we've been listening to and about in the intervening time again.

“It is not the political coloration of institutions that is most significant. It is rather that they establish a field for free public interaction, which exists, or does not, in the details of the social interactions.” (121) What the book misses here, and what this local political issue shows, is the effect of time and the shaping of our selves by our experiences and culture that heavily and directly influences the details of social interaction. While both sides of the political spectrum may have an equal say at that specific moment in history, the community at large and the individual in specific is always, always being affected by both past and present, not just the heat of the moment.