November. Super excited about that and i cannot tell you everything we have coming up because i want to leave room for the people we have invited to speak tonight but i want to put one thing on your radar, which is our annual radical book fair pavilion at the baltimore book festival coming up november 1 through november 3 and its an incredible lineup of people both from baltimore and from outside of the city who are coming to present their work and talk about their book and be in conversation together somberly incredible folks some really incredible folks plus a whole bunch of really awesome critical engaged scholar activists from baltimore. We will do two panels on the book baltimore revisited which is amazing contribution contribution to Baltimore City so i definitely encourage you to come down to the inner harbor even if you dont normally do come check us out in a big tent all weekend. Tonight, im excited to be introducing stuart schrader. Someone who has been a relatively recent transplant to baltimore, but who has quickly taken hold as someone to be reckoned with in terms of Critical Thinking and also someone whos incredible generous and helping to connect us with authors and conversations going on. I think his book is incredibly important. Its one that i think challenges us, not just to recognize the thing we already knew was bad was bad, but challenges us to think about the combinations of imperialism and policing into new ways, in ways that trouble our categories and in some ways that gives us battle critical purchase rather than think about that thing we are trying to fight i think stewart does a remarkable job of unpacking an archive that honestly the bureaucracys man wanted to keep hidden at least unacknowledged and i also am thrilled to welcome you to the space i actually think this is truly one of the sharpest people writing about policy and contemporary Politics Today and is a staff writer at the new republic and before that was writing for the new yorker and before that for a host of publications in chicago. Im thrilled to have both of them here tonight to take us through stuarts book. I hope you stick around and listen to the top, ask a lot of questions and then by a lot of books afterwards. Join me in welcoming stuart schrader. [applause]. Its great to be here im new to town as well, but i know its a model for working across the city and around the country and the gratis [inaudible] its good to be here to deduce stuarts book. Badges without borders i want to start by mentioning a couple of weeks going video that went viral on twitter, actually video that is a few years old, but as these things happen it resurfaced couple of weeks ago and the title was how to fix the world [inaudible] it featured Bret Stephens formally of the wall street journal and basically in the video he is making the case for applying the broken windows policing to american foreignpolicy. That stability could be restored to order an american dominance could be reestablished through what he called Short Mission specific police action. There was a proven model it has nothing to do with foreignpolicy and has to do with policing are tough center cities. We are here today because that statement is untrue and theres a deeper relationship between foreignpolicy and policing here and abroad that stuart has unearthed. Think about the phrase war on crime. Another phrase that seems used, police action. Think the way our cities [inaudible] the kind of rhetoric a couple of months ago in President Trump made comments about multiple or. None of that is really an accident. Stewart writes understood as primarily police projects historically becomes possible not simply linkages across borders but vision that is the singular set of repertoires [inaudible] it was a single mediating factor, police in other words talk about waging a war on crime and it wasnt an accident military vehicles appeared in the streets of ferguson five years ago. That was one event that expanded our conscious on policing. This is a book that should expanded even further so good to be here with you, stuart. think a good place to start would be to research the incidence. You pick up this book like half of it is like acknowledgment of a lot of obscure material and memos, but you mentioned that it was brought about by your encounter in particular footnote about policing lockdown america by christian [inaudible] what was that for now and what with those senses . Before i begin i want to thank everyone for coming. It is great to be here. I was here last night or a different effect, so its a place i feel very much at home in baltimore and im so glad to see all of you here. So, yeah, the book started with this kind of question which was you know in some sense what is the connection between the war on crime that the us launched in the 1960s and the wars happening overseas in that moment and i saw that really kind of 1 cents in this book by christian that came out almost two decades ago where he pointed out a quotation from a guy who was a colonel in the army and i have this quote and i will read it to you. The quote is, the value of an Effective Police organization both civil and military in maintaining law and order is saying the value is strong, whether in california, pennsylvania, mississippi or the rice paddies and jungles of vietnam, so this quote from this army colonel was publishing a magazine called the police chief, a monthly magazine still publish to this day by the International Association of chiefs of policeand so i wanted to kind of understand in some sense the quotation of this, this line set me on this journey of looking into okay why is this guy writing this article four it comes out 1966, why is he writing it, who is he, what is the conversation is cn, who is he citing in his footnotes. This kind of opens up a whole range of literature that i think most people maybe if you thought about it you would assume sure, please publish lots of text that they circulate only within themselves how they have conversations themselves, but i wasnt really aware of the scale of it before i started looking into it and parenti and a few other folks actually before december 11, 2001, were thinking that these connections and i think that it didnt exactly grab peoples attention because before september 11, it seems like there were other pieces that came out at the time that i was also , you know, starting to look at like people by Forrest Helton and some people who i think were in dialogue so there was a conversation happening in the late 90s, early 2000s were some people were beginning to touch on some connections between what was happening overseas and in the us, you know, looking historically but no one was really digging all that deeply and what ended up happening for me when i started looking at the police chief magazine i realized that this article that i just quoted to you by this army colonel was not an isolated kind of splash in the pan. There were lots and lots of lots of articles along these lines published in the policing literature where people were making these connections are compilations between pennsylvania, mississippi and vietnam and also really drawing from a wide range of sources so that this article bibliography or footnote include army text and include more civilian text and they dont really draw strong distinctions between these two fields, so i really wanted to try to understand that and in that and i ended up reading basically maybe reading is not the right word, but at least glancing at the page every single page of the police chief magazine. Its published monthly and i think i looked at every single page from life the 40s until the 80s. I dont recommend anyone do that. Thousands and thousands of pages. All kinds of really tiny pieces of evidence of the connection i was looking for between the foreignpolicy domain and the domestic policy domain and some of them, in the most kind of seemingly insignificant ways but when you add up the secretion it becomes significant so for example the National Association of chief of police in the magazine will publish the addresses of every member. I dont think it still does this, but in the 60s and 70s and of the addresses of the members would be, of course, police in all 50 states and puerto rico or whatever, but also vietnam, guatemala, congo you know you name it and in every year there were more and more and more us addresses that were like you know the Contact Address for people actually stationed overseas, so this kind of opens up this question of, okay who are these people, whats a binding them together, what is the work they are doing and thats what i tried to answer in this book. One of the central concepts is that counterinsurgency and as you write there is a push world war ii decolonization happen and modernizing economy all of the world, call unionism. Start recognizing all of this destabilization may produce a claim of resistance, maybe to capitalism and so there is this conversation about countering that through different needs and within the american foreignpolicy weather that should be an active military project or something more preemptive and settle, so how does policing into that conversation . So, the wheat enters the conversation in the way i analyze it is that theres a real intense debates in the us format for establishment during the cold war about communism typically we think of the cold war of being this kind of static you know nuclear arms a standoff between the soviet union in the United States where theres kind of missiles pointed at each other and everyone is just kind of stuck and certainly there is a wall in germany, so it seems like a kind of fixed situation. Actually, when you look at the third world, you find there is a whole lot of action and not a lot of fixity. Theres a lot of battles going on across the third world, but theres also the battles in a sense within the National Security bureaucracy of how to fight those battles in the third world so take for example the coup in guatemala, which im sure many of you heard of in 1954. Cia backs a coup in guatemala. To lessen the cia and other people in National Security establishment take from the crew in guatemala is the wrong lesson for today dont realize if the wrong lesson until they try to replicate it in the bay of pigs in the early 1960s in cuba when they tried to send basically mercenaries and gorillas to attack with the hope that people in the country will also take up arms and overthrow the government. The Labor Movement and other movements in guatemala. On the one hand, you have the people who are procoup. After the bay of pigs when it doesnt work, the people who are advocating the Guerrilla Forces model get sidelined and the people who remain are the people in favor of using police to maintain internal security. This model ends up becoming the one is much more widely adopted when it becomes clear the active guerrilla model is not going to work. Thats not to say it doesnt still occur. Whereas now, the police model, the idea is to keep insurgency from breaking out. Counterinsurgency meaning countering it before it happens. Keeping subversion at Breakthrough Police work. This becomes a popular model. The people behind it rise in stature in the National Security bureaucracy. That leads into what becomes the program that i focus on. One of the reasons why this idea of internal security and using policing thinking about crime as a kind of social evolution. Why does that idea of what crime is become compelling . Thats a really good question. I think theres multiple ways that this discourse of the relationship between crime and social revolution unfold. On the one hand, you have this long tradition of people who are thinking about what revolution looks like. Were trying to understand, okay, how do revolutionaries gain hold. How do they kind of convince the population to support them. What means to they use to maintain their campaigns. So theres a long line of thinkers and are not exclusively on the right. Theyre saying okay, revolutionaries, gorillas, they need support of the people. And wanting to gain that support, they might have to steal from the people. And they might commit whats called banditry, a word that she is quite a lot in this literature. So the idea becomes okay, these revolutionaries, these subversives are engaging what we would consider criminal activities. And people maybe have a passive approval to these activities. So it becomes blurry for these thinkers. Okay, wheres the line between simple crime, theft and so forth to support an insurgency and the concentrated political activity that goes into it. Thats one side of it. On the other side, you do have particularly in the 60s and the 70s. You have people on the left who are trying to activate and organized and politically for debate the most dispossessed populations in the United States. Some of that rhetoric we want to organized and turn into revolutionaries, people who might otherwise be petty street criminals. So these two discourses, i wouldnt say they mirror each other about people on the right get real nervous when they hear people on the radical left saying this stuff because they been reading stories about revolution in china and around the globe for good decades saying theres not much of a clear distinction so the result is kind of like a lightbulb goes off and they say, we were right all along. Revolutionaries are criminals. Lets treat them as such and apply harsh policing methods to keep them in control. And the way we talk about crime and foreign policy. Sections you mention, as juvenile delinquents. Police know guerrilla warfare because they fight it day in and day out. He should have a great deal of sympathy with the troops in vietnam. You can see actual political discourse, that kind of rhetoric mirroring each other. There are a couple figures that are central. I focus on byron angle in part because he has appeared in some other books but theres no biography of him. He left behind no papers of his own. And yet the people who work for him thought really highly of him. So i wanted to figure out, who is this guy . And why does he keep popping up in so many interesting places in the history of the cold war overseas and the war on crime. So byron angle was a Police Officer in the 1930s. He came in when the Police Department in kansas city is undergoing a period of reform. He was rehired in part of a whole crop of new officers when the old guard was fired because they were too corrupt. So he was hired as somebody would be incorruptible. And there were many officers like him but he stood out for reasons that are somewhat unknowable. But he advance through the ranks quickly. And became the head of Police Training in kansas city. So he had some kind of genius at Training Police. This garnered him notice other Police Reform experts around the midwest. What i discovered in my research. I never thought about kansas city four i started this research. When i looked in the municipal archives and found interesting stuff about byron angle. So hes this figure who quickly expands beyond kansas city and kansas city is one of a number of cities. So theyre all talking to each other in this period of the late 1930s and early 1940s. One or two happens. The planning for the peace after the war begins and theres this notion that one keys to the peace would be to reform the police institutions. Principally germany and japan. So angle, because hes prominent in Police Training in the midwest, gets tapped to go to japan. After the end of the war. Basically, hes been living in kansas city, doing quite well in the police force. He was even named as somebody who could potentially become a police chief. But he goes and never looks back. He becomes basically an international figure. And he spent the next 23 decades traveling the globe. 1,000,000 and a half miles over his career which is a lot. Particularly in the 1950s. So hes in japan reforming the police force in japan. Among a group of other police experts. And all of these folks and of having basically internationalist careers. They dont leave japan and forget the global picture. It becomes part of how they self identify and understand what they have to be doing. They want to make sure the emperor doesnt return to become a new authoritarian figure. They dont want japan to have an expensive foreignpolicy and they argue the way to prevent this is to make sure the police force is more like an American Space force. You can already see theres paradoxically the way to prevent authoritarianism is to install u. S. Style policing. Angle joins the cia and goes to turkey. And develop leadership with a number of powerful figures. This is key to understanding why hes so crucial. Hes developed a relationship with j edgar hoover. With allen dulles was in charge of the cia. In charge of narcotics as well as Police Chiefs powerful in the United States. Orlando wilson. If this is kind of a wheel, angle is at the hub of this oil. These powerful men hate each others guts. They wont be in the same room although all committed to the same project which is defeating communism. Angle manages to be friendly or have a professional working relationship with all of them and that allows him to have such longevity in the bureaucracy. Over the three decades which he continues to work he started in japan, now in more than 50 countries around the globe of reforming and Training Police. I want to quote you, your writing angle in japan in 1946. I think it captures what this book is about. The right angle described the work of police as essentially the regulation of human conduct the work depends on Police Legitimacy which depends on the willingness to accept regulation and the willing notes to recognize the need of such regulation. [indiscernible] angle admitted 95 percent of people were not criminals. Police by eliminating conditions conducive to crime. Bigoted in conduct [indiscernible]. There are obvious circularity. If you are not talking about the social and economic conditions. Youre talking about dealing with policies of policing. What youre saying is your way of eliminating crime is to create another crime where police can apprehend someone to prevent a worse crime down the road. Its ballooning and ends up justifying further police power. Yeah. Thanks. If you like you put it quite well. I think one of the takeaways of the book is to the degree we tend to recognize these discourses as being present today. Or maybe in the 1980s with the rise of the right and a turn toward more punitive forms of policing. Under the broken windows theory or other rationale. What ive discovered in my research is that you could go quite far back and find these exact discourses and the conscious effort to build an apparatus to realize the ideas behind these discourses. So he goes from kansas city to tokyo and basically enunciates an idea about policing that james wilson and George Kelling would annunciate in the article. Its not to say theres nothing new under the sun but certainly these trajectories are long and they have wide curse. The idea that there are people that came in and looked at local Police Department. So what we will do is create this bureaucracy. We will have multiple levels of accountability and put people for hundreds of hours of training. One of the things and the right thing is this ends up sort of building a level of confidence where the police expand their power and makes them less accountable. The police have now been fixed. Tell me about the professionalization in the United States and how that translated to people then moving to professionalizing other Police Departments. Professionalization is the language that police themselves use in the middle part of the 20th century. To describe their goals. They want to be seen as professional. Now, if you want to be seen as professional who is a doctor, what that would mean is you have a certain degree. You belong to a Certain Organization and you are accountable to other people where members of your organization who have the same degree. Youre not really accountable to a layman. Police want to be afforded that same respect and they think that professionalization is the route to it. Politically, as you indicated. The problem is that it means police dont want to be accountable to anybody but themselves. So professionalization through upgrading hiring standards. Increasing the amount of Training Police have to go through to become officers and throughout the course of their time as officers. Upgrading the pay grade. Standardizing uniforms. Lots of things we think about as totally normal and standard for policing. These had to be advocated for and funded. The way to win that funding was to say look, police are going to be better at their jobs of controlling crime, preventing revolution and so forth. If they are wellfunded so they can be professionals. At the same time, the way that police were able leaders were able to get the rankandfile on board. Is to say what this means is you wont have pesky voters, citizens looking over your shoulder. You will be accountable to the standards we offer you the professional requirements we come up with ourselves. Professionalization, i think in the literature on policing, there are some people who say professionalization is a mirage. An illusion that is use to cover up the way the police try to maintain. I think its nonetheless true. It does not look the way it did under years ago. On the other hand, to say police have been able to win legitimacy through professionalization is a little bit harder for me to support. Certainly they wanted to achieve legitimacy. I think thats an open question. The answer for police when they encounter crises of their own making is to say, give us more money we will increase our training. Increase our use of technology. Reform and further professionalize and that will solve the problem. It becomes this feedback loop in a sense whatever problem summons the same solution over and over again. You mentioned five years before technology is adopted. Also Public Safety which is doing this advisory work. Distribute thousands of radios. Manufacturers of radios, saying these have been used in extreme violence abroad. So they get picked up by police here. One of the most fascinating circuits. Is the adoption of teargas as a nonlethal policing technology. Can you talk about teargas and how it emerges in the 1960s. Yeah. So, in the 1960s, new form of teargas becomes adopted. This new compound comes on the market and its called cs is much more intense than the existing forms of teargas. Its adoption in the United States for purposes of riot control depended on a kind of twoway argument. One argument was that it was used in places like vietnam. And that was true. In order for it to be used in places like vietnam by the u. S. Army. They also we can use in vietnam because we are using it back at home. The thing was it wasnt true that cs had been used in cities. When it does get used in cities, the argument is in effect, we tried it overseas and it worked well for if you get teargas in the United States, its probably cs. By the South Vietnamese military. It was not generally used unquote riot control. It was generally used as a way to force people out of hiding. The problem in guerrilla warfare is how do you find the guerrillas to capture or kill them . How do you force them out of hiding. In a forest of some kind the u. S. Army said we will use this extremely powerful chemical, tear gas. Teargas is a misnomer, to force people out. What ends up happening is yes it is true that after 1968, in part because of the recommendation of people like byron engle. Police forces in the United States started adopting cs to use this chemical to a large degree unquote riot control but they also start using it in the method that the us military have been using in South Vietnam which was to force people out of hiding so they could be captured or shot. Know [indiscernible]. Theres a similar dynamic with Police People saying there is too many people being hurt severely. [indiscernible] but, if you tell yourself the police now have these nonlethal tools at their disposal, as you said, the way for these knowledge to be used. To this point, more people are killed after 1967. This move towards using nonlethal technologies like teargas that we were being told before. In part because activists in this country start responding to the way the police come in during riots. And start organizing differently. I think thats an argument that public protests start to become really unpleasant. People stop protesting. There are reasons of course people stop protesting on the scale they had in the early 1970s. But the one is certainly that the use of teargas. New types of underground activity and sabotage and so forth. What you end up having is you know, a discourse because its helpful in controlling protests in the third world. And then in a couple years, protests died down and you start seeing quote on quote terrorism. You know how to deal with this. Dealing with terrorism overseas. The cycle just keeps continuing and kind of being a self reinforcing cycle. But also ratcheting up the intensity. Even as police are trying to gain hold over political protests and militancy. I think they are fostering it through their particular tactics. I think one more question and then questions from the audience. We should talk a little bit about broken windows policing specifically and the trend toward what you call order maintenance policing. The argument you make about the shift in policing is that it mirrors and assigns a new kind of economy. You write that emerges out of a rational choice in thinking about incentives. The police primarily protect or profit from symbols of urban order two areas [indiscernible]. Can you talk about the connection between the economy and broken windows policing . Yeah, so, theres two things going on. One is that theres a debate among counterinsurgency experts about on the one hand, the hearts and mind. The one term one group uses. And then a rational choice framework. One of the arguments i make, what i think today we would consider neoconservatism although at the time that term may not have existed. A lot of neoconservatives who engage in arguments about crime in the 1980s and beyond. Sort of cut their teeth on this argument with counterinsurgency circles with hearts and minds versus rational choice. I explained how these two positions are not quite as different as they appear to be. Then when you get to the 80s and 90s, a lot of the arguments about broken windows replicate what had they have been saying about counterinsurgency. To put it very briefly, what they say is like look, if you want to extend insurgency, the way to do it is not to afford assistance to third world countries. But to clampdown hard on insurgents. Similarly, when you get to arguments about crime, the conservative say, the way to stop crime is not to afford social services and Welfare Benefits to poor people the way it is to just crackdown really harshly on crime. Not only are there analogies across these two discourses but it attacks the same people who reoccur. And the point about the shift in the kind of political, broad political economy when it comes to broken windows. The theory is a theory really at some level about aesthetics. What is a symbol of disorder or a signal to people they might be able to engage in disorder and not get caught. I argue, this is where the book ends. Most of the book is before 1975. I argue that a shift toward urban Economic Vitality being premised on aesthetics. Premised on tourism. Premised on collecting rent rather than a more kind of traditional productive manufacturing economy. Baltimore is a case study in this transformation as you know. The broken windows theory with its focused on aesthetics lends itself quite well to this kind of Economic Situation where people in power are really concerned about making sure the city has an aesthetic presentation and the way to ensure that presentation is actually going to lead to good returns on capital is to police intensively. I do this big connection between counterinsurgency debates in the 60s and a shift toward liberalization via how policing operates. All right. I dont know how we want to manage questions. In order for everybody to hear and to get it on the visual record. If you can come of an lineup at this microphone, that would be perfect. Hows it going . When i got the book, i immediately looked up baltimore in the index. Before getting the chance to read it all, i thought it would be cool to talk about the training exercise. The map of baltimore as a country being invaded from how bad was if you know anything about that and if there were further repercussions from that. I will briefly tell you the story. The agency that byron engle directs, open the foreign Training Academy in washington d. C. It was called the International Police academy and it was in a building in georgetown that exist till this day and is occupied by George Washington university. It was the most technologically advanced Police Training facility in the world. One of the aspects advanced aspects was the kind of situation room. Visiting police could engage in simulations of what it would be like to manage a crisis. Whether a riot or an earthquake or other types of emergency situations. And one wall of the room was a big map. And the map and right in the center was the monuments just down the road. It was a map of this part of baltimore we are in right now the reason for that, honestly, i was never able to figure out the exact reasons. One reason was they certainly didnt want it be a map of washington d. C. They wanted to find another location. I think it just kind of illustrated useful things if you look at the map because as a grid of streets and trees but dont conform to the grid as is the case in baltimore. So they used this map. That becomes the representation of this city they use in their simulation. Its called fan martin. San martin. Its being destabilized by sub subversives coming over the border from a place called mao land. They wanted to make it clear what was going on. So these police from around the globe would engage in the simulations that they would use a map of baltimore. There arent a ton of baltimore connections in this history i tell but there are a few they have to do with the level of personnel. There were people who went overseas and then returned to the maryland area or the vicinity of baltimore. They were connections in those ways. And also, as some of you may know, in baltimore during this period of the 50s and 60s, all of military intelligence for the entire country was based in baltimore at a military base that no longer exists. Certainly, there were connections among the police actors who were traveling the globe and gathering intelligence on subversive movements around the globe and the kind of funneling of information to military intelligence. A lot of that would have come through a facility basically just down the road. Theres probably other baltimore connections that i could excavate. When i started writing, i didnt know i would end up working baltimore. I think this is research i want to keep engaging in. Thanks for this. I think one of the themes in the book is the question about Police Reform. Enter the idea that many of the ways in which police are organized today is the result of previous rounds of reform. So given the conversation we are having now about Law Enforcement in the United States, i wonder if you can talk about the lessons you draw from the way in which sort of struggles over fights for Police Reform in the past. What the results of that have been . Yeah, so, in a sense Police Professionalization and reform go hand in hand. Professionalization is kind of internally imposed. Police leaders advocate for it. Police reform, if there is a distinction, it stored as externally imposed. Demanded by people who are feeling as though policing is inadequate in some way or unjust. And it is certainly the case that all of the actors in my book or the vast majority of actors in my book are on board with Police Reform as long as it further endows police with resources. Further loosens any kind of external oversight on them. And thats not what people generally or calling for reform necessary think is going to happen for that police will get more resources. Become less accountable. But i think the history ive analyzed shows us that this is an almost inevitable recurring situation. That calls for reform coming from outside. And they get rewritten internally within the institution as calls for more power. Calls for more resources. Calls for more technological advances. And in some sense, one thing to some degree i was surprised to find in my research was how frequently this cycle has occurred over and over and over again. The 1960s was a period defined by demands for Police Reform. It gave us the war on crime. It initiated by the Johnson Administration was meant to Reform Police with the acknowledgment that police have been to brutal, too racist. Of course Lyndon Johnson didnt put it in those terms. But that was the subtext. Everybody knew it. And what do they do to fix the problem. They threw resources at police on an otherwise never seen before scale. If anything, i would just say that the kind of script for what happens with these calls for reform was written and we know how its going to lead. Its quite predictable. History shows, the history i write about shows how frequently it recurs. Thank you for this talk. What i found interesting is the first push for policing other countries came out of world war ii and needing to step into japan and germany. I would be interested in sort of what your take is on whether or not, this sort of model of exporting police work to other countries has itself been a model that other countries have adopted. For example, i know the German Police forces are Training Police and other countries as well and how other countries who have historically a larger presence. An imperialistic presence has been used this model as well. In the. I look at during the cold war, the United States figures like byron engle and people in his orbit. They got very anxious at other countries trying to also give Police Assistance abroad. Other countries did do it but not to the degree the United States did. Basically, the worry was these other countries were not even allied countries were not trustworthy and considered reliable in terms of giving a type of assistance the United States would give. Which was guaranteed to be directed at prevented comments revolution in other countries. Even allied countries, there was a question whether they could be trusted to achieve those goals. In the middle of the 1970s when the office of Public Safety shuts down, that position basically comes to an end. So that you get to contemporary situation which as you mentioned, many other countries are engaged in this work. And United States decided germany wasnt doing a good enough job so they use their own, they hired a corporation. The corporation didnt do a good job so they used the military. The point is, in the present moment, theres many actors on the scene doing this. The United States is doing it in a whole variety of different ways using lots of different agencies. State department, dea, homeland security, pentagon and down the list. As well as hiring private corporations and working with other european government, other multilateral organizations. And theyre all operating on the ground in places like iraq, afghanistan, places in Central America and so forth. I was able to do the research. Even though it goes in many directions. I could look at one particular agency and figure out how they were central node. Its widely dispersed. It means that congress has no control over it the president has no control over it. If they wanted to rein it in , it would be really challenging. Not only would you, if youre in congress, not only would you have to shut down the state department from doing it, you would have to shut down the defense department. Its very complicated. That doesnt mean we shouldnt perhaps be asking our members of congress to shut it down. But its more compensated than it looks. I guess i got two questions. One kind of from the Book Research point how are these police, International Police foreign officials thinking about exporting kind of american policing with federalism and english commonwealth. Countries with different political structures. And extracted from the book, have you found evidence of protesters and international protest culture successfully sharing tactics and strategies against the counterinsurgency policing . Or have police been successful at shutting down an international sharing, in terms of that antipolice those are good questions. On the question of the u. S. Policing tradition. Understanding itself as different from other policing. This was 100 percent the case. Some of the people who worked for byron engle would go to a place like South Vietnam which had a Different Police tradition inherited from french colonialism. They would sit in a room, perhaps a little like this where there is police talking to an audience of Police Officers. And give a long speech about the traditions of anglosaxon policing. You can imagine that these vietnamese Police Officers were like, okay, we already learned the french tradition of policing. And weve been doing it for decades and now we have to learn the anglosaxon tradition. They probably rolled their eyes and they were like okay, hurry up. Finish the speech and give a gun. The u. S. Nevertheless, tried over and over again to make these types of distinctions. Even if the recipients were not all that willing to listen to the dramatic importance of the difference between anglosaxon tradition versus the continental european tradition but they insisted on it over and over again. It definitely was true that one of the real huge obstacles for them in transforming the Police Agencies of other countries was that they had inherited traditions and bureaucratic organizations. So the u. S. Would say, in the United States, our military and police are totally separate. They would go to another country and that distinction didnt exist. So they would try to instill the distinction. But they never really had the ability to force the distinction. The idea was that the countries that received this aid, this assistance, they had signed a contract. Two equal parties. Two sovereign nations signing a contract for international assistance. Where the u. S. Cant go in and just a, youve got to do it the way we tell you to do it. So they had challenges and difficulties even as they held on to this belief that they were trying to replicate u. S. Tradition. The other question about resistance. One key point in this history is that the office of Public Safety gets shut down in 1974. The Police Academy gets shut down in 1975. The reason it gets shut down is because of social movement protests. Social movements became aware of what was going on with office of Public Safety and made a big deal out of it. The way they became aware was that there were two big news stories that came out in 1978 about the office of Public Safety. The first was that the office of Public Safety was advising presence in South Vietnam and they were Holding People in a foreign conditions, including teenaged girls. L conditions. The other incident that happened was that a Public Safety advisor in uruguay was kidnapped and eventually assassinated by leftwing militants. They definitely were internationalists in orientation. They were working in tandem with militants from across the globe to share information. Information sharing about what Public Safety was doing was going on. To such a degree that when congress eventually shut down the office of Public Safety, one of the arguments against shutting it down was that this was an International Communist conspiracy to discredit the government. People in congress would read statements and the supporters of Public Safety would say that statement was written by Fidel Castros henchmen or whatever. So the story is the story of the closure of the office of Public Safety. Is very much a story of the objects of the office of publicsafetys interests , defeating it. Its interested in internationalists leftwing militancy. Its a really powerful Success Story of the antiimperialist movement. The Peace Movement of the 1960s and 70s. With one important caveat, which is that even though it did get the office of Public Safety shut down. As i mentioned, Police Assistance resumes in other guises in the polls written into the legislation that allowed the assistant to take on new forms, subsequently. We will have one more question and then i will make closing announcements and give you all a big round of applause. Last question. Thank you. When i think of broken windows both from the media perspective of policing and the sociological history. When you stay the importance of aesthetics and how that came into play during that time. I think about the american tradition of policing and race. That being a big part of broken windows kind of philosophy and its historical underpinnings. Im wondering if you saw messages of extorting american racism as part of this process or howdid that play out in other contexts . What other symbolic meanings or aesthetics did the United States use in this context . This is something i spend a lot of time analyzing in this book. I think to put it simply, what i would say is the people who produce the Public Safety program overseas are on the whole, racial liberals. Meaning that they are quite cautious about appearing to be openly racist. Thats one aspect of it. And what we find, as clear visual evidence of it is there are lots of photos of people like byron engle standing alongside training counterparts from subsaharan africa. So the agency would distribute photo saying these are our advisors. They are standing next to officers from other parts of the globe with other skin color. They can all sort of see i to i have something in common. Theres no need, the message the picture is trying to convey. No need to worry that what these Police Advisors is doing is conveying traditional forms of american racism that have been encoded in policing. As you would imagine, it was not so easy to let go of those traditional forms of racism encoded in policing. Many of these are recipients themselves, knew. They were able to see the newspapers. They knew. I have some quotes in my book from Police Officers who say we are Police Officers but we worry we will be on the receiving end of these beliefs from the people coming to train us. Its not only tactics and procedures of policing that we understand to produce racial differentiation. Even in the very institution of itself where some of this contestation around race and racism occurs. These figures want to be really clear that they are not racist. But they keep running over and over and over again into on the one hand, u. S. Police officers with a higher who say bigoted things. Who talk up practices or recommend practices that is associated with racial inequality in policing. Its this constant battle. Its almost a battle that i would argue in the book is impossible for it to ever be won. On the other hand, the practices never disappear. The other hand, the dream that policing can be fixed and racism can be eradicated from it so that it can be a good vehicle for the spread of American Values locally and containing of communist. That dream never goes away. Theres always intention throughout the project. But i would say that one thing i found in the research that i think is was somewhat surprising and powerful to me is actually how aware of this these actors are. Theyre not ignorant of how policing is received. They know that a lot of people have suspicion that they are racist. And as they travel the globe, they try to do their best to rebrand and reframe. The problem is that the actual activity they are Training Police to do is necessarily going to be used for repressio. For undermining political movements and so on. They can never get out of this paradox. Arguably, i would say this paradox outlasts the period i am talking about in the book and persists into the present