Harvey Milk's murder is a stark reminder of the persistence of police brutality
Like millions around the world, last May the image of the Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin killing George Floyd sickened and angered me and drove me to the streets to demonstrate in support of Black Lives Matter. It also reminded me of events that occurred in my hometown of San Francisco 42 years ago on Friday.
Many people know who Harvey Milk was, are familiar with his contributions to the LGBTQ+ civil rights movement and remember that he was assassinated on 27 November 1978 after being in office for less than a year. Fewer people are aware that one of the proximate reasons why Milk and San Francisco’s progressive mayor George Moscone were killed was because of their opposition to police violence and abuse.
The line from Derek Chauvin back to Dan White, the former San Francisco supervisor, fireman and policeman who murdered George Moscone and Harvey Milk, may encompass 42 years of urban history, but it is clear and a stark reminder of the persistence of police brutality and the efforts to which some will go to resist any reform.
Dan White was a bigot who, in 1977, had gotten elected on a reactionary platform that included promises to “eradicate malignancies that blight our city”, but his actions were motivated in substantial part by a toxic mix of that bigotry along with anger and loyalty to the parochial interests of the racist factions within the San Francisco police department (SFPD).
White resigned from the board of supervisors, the equivalent of the city council, in early November 1978, citing the need to make more money to support his young family. He then wanted his job back, but when Moscone refused to reappoint him, he killed Moscone and Milk, who he believed had urged Moscone towards his decision.
But there’s another component to Moscone and Milk’s deaths that is directly relevant to the Black Lives Matter movement today. White was being aggressively encouraged to get back on the board by the police unions and others around the SFPD who needed White’s vote to ensure the failure of a federal consent decree order before the board. That decree, if passed, would have accelerated the integration of the force and been a major step toward limiting the ability of the SFPD to abuse racial minority and LGBTQ+ San Franciscans. The vote was deadlocked at five. White’s return to the board would have meant a 6-5 majority against it. If White were replaced by somebody chosen by the progressive mayor George Moscone, the decree would have passed by one vote.
Moscone had been elected in 1975 with huge margins among African Americans and in the neighborhoods with high concentrations of LGBTQ+ voters. Part of his platform was to curtail police brutality and to support civil rights for gay San Franciscans and San Franciscans of color. This made him a radical in the mid-1970s, even in San Francisco.
White’s resignation gave Moscone an opportunity to get a progressive majority on the board for the consent decree and other issues. A smart and experienced politician, the mayor was not going to pass that chance up.
After White assassinated San Francisco’s mayor and the supervisor he believed, falsely, had persuaded the mayor not to reappoint him, much of the city was overcome with shock and grief. But in some parts, the assassinations were celebrated, not least in police headquarters, where police radio channels played the song Danny Boy in honor of their former colleague who had carried out their dirty work. Some took to wearing T-shirts with the slogan “Free Dan White” under their uniforms.
The police unions today that minimize the crimes of police offic