Making racial demands: tracing the struggle over public safety in Minneapolis

Abstract In May 2020, the world erupted in protest after officers with the Minneapolis Police Department murdered George Floyd. In response, abolitionist activists pushed forward a ballot initiative that would “end” the police department by creating a new Department of Public Safety. This proposal sparked fierce debate. While both sides staked their claims on what would make Black residents feel safe, their understandings of safety diverged, with charter supporters arguing for a move away from the “police-only model” and opponents arguing for “real” police reform. Bridging racial formation theory and work on social movements, we argue that the charter debate in Minneapolis illustrates how social movement organizations work to construct public perceptions of what is in minoritized groups’ interests, a process we conceptualize as making racial demands. Analyzing campaign flyers, debates, and op-eds, we trace three steps in this process: (1) supporters and opponents positioned their side as the authentic representatives of the community; (2) each side deployed diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational frames to support their conceptualization of safety; and (3) both campaigns envisioned a speculative future constrained by the boundaries of racial redress. The results demonstrate the importance of considering movement, racialization, and policy development processes in tandem.