This paper is an essay that explores the sociological significance of the police shooting of a young West African immigrant Amadou Diallo by imagining the explanations of people from various political persuasions.
Abstract This paper explains that the shooting of Amadou Diallo on the streets of the Bronx, has become the epicenter of a national debate on New York City police misconduct and the racial divide between urban officers and the minority communities they patrol. The author presents the possible reaction of radical leftists, moderate leftists partially committed to relativism, centrists, moderate conservatives partially committed to absolutism and extreme conservatives properly known as racists and absolutely committed to absolutism. The paper admits that, perhaps traversing the political spectrum to explain delinquent minority behavior was a mistake, because political views naturally rely upon generalizations contradicted by real world phenomena; but real world phenomena, manifested in our personal experiences, are potentially misleading, too.
From the Paper "Moreover, liberals rely upon potentially inaccurate generalizations in deeming America a racist society: Of all encounters between African Americans and New York City police, a small fraction result in the evils visited upon Abner Louima or Amadou Diallo. For every cab driver who purposefully neglects prospective African American passengers, another, perhaps several, pull over. For every store clerk who follows, physically or visually, African American shoppers, many greet their customers with a smile. Yet liberals judge the NYPD a racist institution, and cite cab driver and store clerk prejudices as evidence of a chronically racist society. Again, if the conservative view is wrong because of its reliance on generalizations and stereotypes, fine. So too is the liberal view for precisely the same reasons."
