Roots of the Dissent

Disclaimer: I am in favor and have advocated for either an EM or a Consent Agreement.

I had the rare occasion of reading a persuasive column explaining very succinctly the rationale behind political resistance to state intervention.

http://michronicleonline.com/index.p...ritical-factor

Here is the conclusion to which I've come. For any community leaders, influential citizens, or future leaders out there...the effectiveness of militant behavior and militant speech has reached the point of diminishing returns.

If the JoAnn Watson's, Kwame Kenyatta's, and Malik Shabazz's of the world simply argued the above concepts in the public debate, not only would they be taken more seriously...but many of their concrete concerns could and would have been seriously addressed.

Of course, instead, they've chosen to be ornery, obstinate, uncooperative, argumentative, and hostile.

Perhaps there was a time and place where such behavior was a necessary component of getting things done in politics. The "By Any Means Necessary" strategy certainly has had its place...though my position is that this strategy should be reserved only until all other strategies have been exhausted. Adding fuel to the fire is this notion that our current struggles are political, when the reality is that they are no different from the struggles of GM, Ford, and almost any other institution whose structure was solidified 60 years ago, in a time where the world was different and different financial rules apply.

As I've said before...this is not a political battle. It's a battle against math.

The tragedy is that the unnecessary hostility coming from this most vocal segment is actually counterproductive to them achieving their REAL goals...which is to find a way to restructure our city government into an organization which better serves our citizens in a more sustainable way.

Or, a more blunt political analysis, "You wanted financial help from the state? Storming into Lansing, attacking everyone in sight, and then making demands is probably not the best way to do it."

I was not around during the civil rights era, and my family didn't immigrate to Detroit until the late 70s. So you'll have to forgive my ignorance to some of the events that pre-dated my awareness. But this isn't a story of Detroiters to go sit at the back of the bus. Hell, our people don't just ride the bus...they RUN THE BUS COMPANY.

Detroiters are reasonable to be skeptic. It will take real leadership, real communication, real trust building in order for us to find solutions. I think that Lansing and most of Detroit's civic leaders are on board. But we still have a handful of people that are sitting, looking away, arms crossed in denial.

That may have been the leadership we needed in 1963. We need to step up our game and do better than that in 2012.

CorktownYuppie, very well stated, fair, and reasonable.

Quote:

---

Plain and simple, the average person, Black or White, and businesses in this city want services delivered quickly and consistently. And the city has been deligent . There are people who literary live in fear that in the event there is crime at their home or they need EMS service, they have no option but to get on their knees to pray until whenever that service arrives.

---

Does the Chronicle have an editor? DPS shines again!

Good editorial, right on point.

I think that race is the elephant in the room in this region, and will be for a long time. It's very important that this takeover or whatever happens, is respectful of everyday people. If it's focused completely on the bottom line with no regard for the people's daily lives, it SHOULD get messy, and I will be on the streets.

I think we don't realize how easily this is going so far...when Greece passed austerity measures there were riots in the streets.

Excellent and very thoughtful post CY.

Quote:

---

As I've said before...this is not a political battle. It's a battle against math.

---

I differ with you here in that think that ^ is not an either / or situation. I believe it is an 'and' proposition and reminiscent of another old saying that 'war is simply politics by other means.'

There are strong arguments to be made for acquiescence and good math as you just have. Yet if the outcome, or even the proposed remedy, is perceived as unfair or condescending there will be resistance. If improvements in services and relief from burdens of insurance, crime, blight and so much more are not immediate and apparent should docility be expected to continue?

To the average person the current remedies can appear to be all pain and no gain, more sacrifice for citizens who already suffer far more than any others in our metro while creditors get paid, nothing essentially changes in their lives and all that happens is the loss of self-governance.

If we want to use math, I would propose a simple measure for the success of a state takeover [either by EMF or consent]. Show population growth for three consecutive years starting from day one of the takeover.

"If we want to use math, I would propose a simple measure for the success of a state takeover [either by EMF or consent]. Show population growth for three consecutive years starting from day one of the takeover."

That seems awfully optimistic. I would say a solid trend of decreasing population loss would be a success over the short term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

If the JoAnn Watson's, Kwame Kenyatta's, and Malik Shabazz's of the world simply argued the above concepts in the public debate, not only would they be taken more seriously...but many of their concrete concerns could and would have been seriously addressed.

---

I'm past the point of simply believing that those folks have the best interest of anyone but themselves in mind. Because of the poverty, resentment, overall lack of education in Detroit you can build a pretty successful political career by simply being angry and militant all the time. By appealing to the base fears and prejudices of the least-educated and most xenophobic of the city you can go a long way. On the flip side, we see this in the same way with the far right's incomprehensible position that everything that foreign-born Muslim-Obama does is Marxist.

Intelligent, thoughtful people dedicated to their constituents and/or city pay their fair share in taxes and don't advocate scorched earth of their hometown, for example. They're charlatans and opportunists, and while they may have been convincing in the past, their apparent position of "just let the city run out of money" exposes the idiocy of their position. And that's what it's about, their positions. If they can sit at their desks in the City County Building or at their whatever acronym activist group headquarters until the very last and get out with a suitcase full of money, then that works just fine for them, regardless of what happens to anyone else.

I'll roll out the red carpet when the state comes in. They can stay at my house.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

It's a battle against math.

---

AMEN! Not race. Not Democrat or Republican. Simple math.

The idea that this is an issue about simple math seems naïve to me. Little involving human beings can be simply about math. People ignore the human element: perception, motivation, quality of life issues, the need to feel in control of one’s destiny, etc., at their own peril.

If it’s just about the math, I know a 6-year-old who is very good at subtraction. If you are reluctant to hire the 6-year-old, then bankruptcy courts handle math very well too. But obviously it’s about more than math. That’s why we’re talking consent agreements and EMs, both with political and social ramifications.

Besides, each version of an agreement that comes out is the best one in most people’s minds and the city leaders should just shut up and sign it. Then, when the next version comes out it is the best one and city leaders should just shut up and sign it. Then, when the next one comes out…

Hilarious – if the situation wasn’t so sad.

That was a very well written column, thanks for posting it. I can ignore a few typos and misspellings on the way to a decent argument.

People are dismissive about the references to "math", but it is incredibly relevant. The only reason we are where we are is that the City has been spending beyond its means for a long time, and over the past several months, when the long-brewing fiscal crisis has been in the public eye, the City leadership has shown its inability to contain costs enough to create a sustainable financial future.

If it weren't for that "math", none of this would be going on. But with the numbers being what they are, the City is facing a certain municipal bankruptcy unless one of the lesser evils works out well. And if Detroiters felt they'd lose power and control during a consent agreement or an EM, wait until you see how much power and control the voters would have in a bankruptcy.

The consent agreement is simply, from the point of view of Detroit controlling its own destiny, least bad among a bunch of bad options. But Detroit - and nobody else - put it where it is today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corktownyuppie

Hell, our people don't just ride the bus...they RUN THE BUS COMPANY.

---

Obviously you haven't been following the Envisurage story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowell

Excellent and very thoughtful post CY.



I differ with you here in that think that ^ is not an either / or situation. I believe it is an 'and' proposition and reminiscent of another old saying that 'war is simply politics by other means.'

There are strong arguments to be made for acquiescence and good math as you just have. Yet if the outcome, or even the proposed remedy, is perceived as unfair or condescending there will be resistance. If improvements in services and relief from burdens of insurance, crime, blight and so much more are not immediate and apparent should docility be expected to continue?

To the average person the current remedies can appear to be all pain and no gain, more sacrifice for citizens who already suffer far more than any others in our metro while creditors get paid, nothing essentially changes in their lives and all that happens is the loss of self-governance.

If we want to use math, I would propose a simple measure for the success of a state takeover [either by EMF or consent]. Show population growth for three consecutive years starting from day one of the takeover.

---

I see what you're saying, and I can understand how difficult it is, especially with so much unknown. I agree with you proposing a simple measure. I would have asked for it with the City Council, and I think it's fair/necessary to have it with the consent agreement.

Population growth for first 3 years probably not doable. My uneducated opinion is that 3 years from now population stabilizes...that is to say that it stops the bleeding. First goal...stop the population loss, and if we can do that in 3 years, I'll call that a victory. Once we're there, then we can rebuild in a manner that's financially viable.

And I wouldn't rule out money from the state either. Remember, even if one doesn't like the state involvement, the state now has skin in the game and a responsibility as well. If we're doing everything they ask and we still can't turn it around, then they'll HAVE to inject money in order to avoid bankruptcy.

Let's face it. If Andy Dillon and Rick Snyder go to the public and say, "look...we're running the show now, and it's either a cash infusion, or every municipality will suffer", that's a whole lot different than when Watson, Kenyatta, and Co. ask for it.

It wouldn't have to be that way, but you can only bring up slavery and Martin Luther King so many times before all your credibility is gone.

I said it before and I'll say it again. I trust a bankruptcy judge to be reasonable, fair and objective. I don't trust municipal and state government at all.