The masses have a voice in proportion to the degree to which they control where their taxes go. The power of the purse is remarkable, because you can destroy (almost) any instutition by simply defunding it (which is also why any attempt to circumvent that power, e.g. Executive re-purposing of funds, should set off huge blaring alarms.)

And when it comes to "what congress can do" I'd argue that it's 90% about allocation of funds -- because it doesn't matter what the law is if there is no money to enforce it.

You could argue the US has a debt as large as it does because it has the strongest military on Earth. Who is going to enforce the debt collection?

Using this logic and the destabilization of US military the natural answer is another highly militarized government.

So where there is lawlessness there is opportunity for authoritarianism whether that’s a gang, police, US military, or foreign adversary.

We need to be smart about change and boil the frog, not get into a fight we cannot win, otherwise society will descend into authoritarianism likely ran by the most experienced and powerful authoritarian.

The fact that the debt is deliniated in US controlled currency is what protects us. Now, our stability, partially due to our military allows that to happen. But it isn't necessary to avoid being collected on.

I agree. It’s worth a try to try a systematically different approach since the current policing practices are not working. People are afraid of change but it’s clear that maintaining the status quo is detrimental so it’s time to figure out alternative solutions.

It doesn't matter if this is the right solution, what matters is that they're willing to substantially change things to improve them. If they're wrong, they can change it again.

It very much matters if this is the right solution. If it's not, they could make things substantially worse than they already are. This is a serious decision whose consequences should not be taken lightly. Lives and livelyhoods are on the line.

Whether this really is the right solution... I don't know. We'll find out in time. I sincerely hope it is for the sake of all citizens of Minneappolis and the surrounding area.

It will play out quite predictably: more crime, organized and otherwise.

Nope.

Camden disbanded their police department and has seen crime drop: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/01/what-happened-to-crim...

Disbanding the police doesn't mean no public safety measures. It means disbanding the department and rebuilding a new approach to public safety.

Oh you mean replacing the police with... The police. Got it.

That's a trite dismissal.

Nobody actually thinks that we can have no law enforcement. That doesn't mean that disbanding systematically corrupt departments and rebuilding from scratch isn't a good idea.

Sure. When an organisation is totally broken, ripping up and replacing isn’t alway the worst solution. See the Stasi, for instance, or for a less dramatic shakeup, the RUC.

From the article @citylab:

"Other cities are still struggling. Kansas City, Columbus, Phoenix, and Birmingham saw homicide rates reach new highs in 2017. In Baltimore, homicides hit a new per-capita peak."

If I have to place bet, the fate of Minneapolis will be similar to that of Baltimore.

Why? None of those cities have reformed or rebuilt their police departments.

You're just spreading FUD.

The trajectory of cities following riots is well documented.