Analysis of Civil Society: Progressive Boston Mayor Takes a Softer Stance on Crime

Race-obsessed, woke progressives (read: Marxists) have a nightmarish vision for their communities that they can only realize through demonic duplicity.

For example, in 2021, Democratic Mayor Michelle Wu of Boston, Massachusetts, then a mayoral candidate, expressed support for criminal justice-related policies shaped by the toxic racial ideology of modern-day Marxism.

Whereas their Leninist and Maoist forbears regarded economic class as the basis for sorting human beings into categories of oppressors and victims, today’s Marxists — often affluent elites themselves — use skin color, ethnicity and other factors associated with historical prejudices in order to create new oppressor and victim categories, stoke animosities that have long since dissipated and then impose their favorite authoritarian remedies for the imaginary aggression of one racial or ethnic group against another.

Worst of all, policies that result in enslavement to Marxist authoritarianism come cloaked in the language of compassion. Indeed, demons have often worked that way.

As a mayoral candidate in 2021, Wu completed a questionnaire from Progressive Massachusetts, which has described itself as a “statewide, member-driven grassroots organization committed to fighting for a vision of shared prosperity, racial and social justice, good government, and environmental sustainability in Massachusetts.”

On the subject of “public safety,” the questionnaire asked whether candidates “support the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office’s do-not-prosecute list and expanded approach to dealing with such low-level offenses.” Wu answered “yes.”

In 2019, Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins drafted a policy memo that included this “do-not-prosecute list.”

For instance, Rollins identified 17 “non-violent driving, drug and property crimes” among her office’s most frequently filed charges since 2013. These included trespassing, disorderly conduct, larceny, destruction of property, and different classes of drug possession.

She also argued against prison time for such offenses. Hence the “do-not-prosecute” list.

“Data show that a carceral approach to low-level, non-violent offenses can do more harm than good,” she wrote.

With this in mind, Rollins preferred “innovative, evidence-driven diversionary alternatives” to incarceration.

It sounds compassionate. After all, Christianity calls us to be merciful.

Moreover, conservatives who distrust government agents cannot pretend that the justice system always or even usually produces justice. Innocent people do go to prison while the guilty sometimes act as their judges.

The Rollins-Wu approach to criminal justice, however, has nothing to do with mercy or civil liberties. Instead, it stems from a sinister oppressor-victim worldview.

“A large number of criminal convictions secured by prosecutors nationally are for drug, property, and public order offenses, which are often driven by economic, mental health, and social needs,” Rollins wrote.

In other words, “economic” or “social” factors — mental health is a different category — often explain why people commit such offenses. This distorted perspective allows prosecutors and judges, acting from faux compassion, to classify those offenses as what the U.K.’s Daily Mail called “‘quality of life’ crimes.”

Thus, when supposed victims of an unjust system commit “quality of life” crimes, for instance, against property and public order, the actual victims of those crimes have no recourse, for those actual order-loving and property-holding victims, according to the Marxist view, are oppressors by definition.

In her questionnaire answers, Wu made it clear that she endorsed that view.

For instance, she identified “[c]losing the racial wealth gap” and “securing our future through climate justice as racial and economic justice” among her major campaign priorities.

Worst of all, perhaps, she pledged race-based political purges from the Boston Police Department.

In fact, when asked whether “affiliation or sympathies with white supremacist organizations among officers” constituted a problem, Wu delivered a chilling reply.

“Yes. I have advocated for terminating any BPD employees who were involved with the January 6th Capitol insurrection. Under the new police contract, any officers who have been found to have affiliation with white supremacist organizations should be terminated,” she wrote.

If the Capitol incursion of Jan. 6, 2021, leapt to Wu’s mind when answering a question of this nature, then one can easily imagine what sort of “organizations” she would define as “white supremacist.”

Furthermore, Wu showcased her race-obsessed Marxist worldview last year when she hosted an “electeds-of-color”-only holiday party for city council members, Fox reported. The party caused controversy when a staffer accidentally sent council members a mass email invitation intended for non-whites only. Wu apologized for the email but not for the racially segregated party — a favored tradition of Democrats for 200 years.

Happily, Wu will face an electoral challenge in 2025.

According to Boston.com, North End restaurant owner Jorge Mendoza-Iturralde will look to unseat the Marxist, segregationist mayor.

Mendoza-Iturralde and his brother Patrick Mendoza made headlines in the summer of 2023 when they appeared, along with 13 other names, on a list of the mayor’s critics that her office submitted — ironically — to the BPD. Many of those critics dared to challenge Wu’s COVID-19 policies, among other things.

In short, Wu’s race-obsessed worldview and authoritarian disposition constitute two sides of the same Marxist coin. She has endorsed Rollins “do-not-prosecute” list of low-level offenses not because she believes in mercy or civil liberties — both of which she would deny to her political opponents — but because that particular approach to crime and punishment surreptitiously advances the Marxist narrative.