3 ms·

Policing in America is a mostly modern invention, and the first public full-time police force is less than 200 years old: before the police, towns would typical

Policing in America is a mostly modern invention, and the first public full-time police force is less than 200 years old: before the police, towns would typically have a night watch made up of citizens who volunteered for certain nights and certain times, and industry would pay other citizens to protect property and commodities. These paotection jobs typically didn't pay well, and mainly employed a segment of the population who might otherwise be criminal. The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism, the first public police force was created in Boston only when merchants convinced the public that the expense should be born by all for the common good, and in the South the public police force evolved from slave patrols as a necessity of maintaining the slavery system. The public police force continued to spread throughout America, particularly in the West, in 19th century only as businessmen began to fear labour activism and required a militant police force to end strikes. The public police force before the 1930s was not only a new idea, but it was entirely a weapon of political power and terror: police forces were chosen by the leader of the ward's winning political party, and would ignore that political leader's own street gangs as they intimidated rival voters. It wasn't until 1929, after the Wickersham Commission, which noted such gems as "the inflicting of pain, physical or mental, to extract confessions or statements... is widespread throughout the country", that a push for professionalism and the independence of the police force began in America. The consent the average citizen has given to be policed and the satisfaction she should have with the current system is very debatable. Would the night watch have enforced the war on drugs to such a violent end? Do we really need to have squad cars looking for speeders, or can citizens just report dangerous drivers to the DMV? Was it not easier to pay off erstwhile thieves a wage to 'guard the property'? Perhaps our consent to the police is just a manufactured consent, as our economic system was only able to survive by creating a force capable of quelling our collective dissent?

cbnotfromthere 7y ago
I understand you're a marxist, feel free to interpret facts any way you want, but please do not make claims which are factually untrue. Policing in America is a mostly modern invention Policing as we know it is EVERYWHERE a "mostly modern invention". USA has no difference in policing history than other Western countries (but I guess that undermines your Marxist interpretations). The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism Not at all. The rise of modern policing is related to the apparition of modern nation-states, which had no interest in quasi-feudal policing. That's why it started in France in the 18th century (not exactly capitalist paradise but certainly centralized nation-state). Then Britain mixed the French police system with the Common Law, focusing on preventative policing (see 1829 Metropolitan Police Act). The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism, the first public police force was created in Boston Literally not true, as the first public police force was created in 1626 in New York. The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism, [...] and in the South the public police force evolved from slave patrols as a necessity of maintaining the slavery system Literally not true, as slave patrols were ad-hoc and not really common. The public police force continued to spread throughout America, particularly in the West, in 19th century only as businessmen began to fear labour activism and required a militant police force to end strikes. Literally not true, as policing the West was mainly related to handling both the barely-pacified Native Americans and neverending waves of fresh settlers. public police force before the 1930s was not only a new idea, but it was entirely a weapon of political power and terror Entirely? Really? They didn't do any real policing at all, just being weapon of political power and terror? And you want to be taken seriously? The consent the average citizen has given to be policed and the satisfaction she should have with the current system is very debatable. Only by you and Noam Chomsky. Everyone else understands that USA is a democracy and voting, being free, expresses consent for the system.

cbnotfromthere 7y ago

I understand you're a marxist, feel free to interpret facts any way you want, but please do not make claims which are factually untrue. Policing in America is a mostly modern invention Policing as we know it is EVERYWHERE a "mostly modern invention". USA has no difference in policing history than other Western countries (but I guess that undermines your Marxist interpretations). The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism Not at all. The rise of modern policing is related to the apparition of modern nation-states, which had no interest in quasi-feudal policing. That's why it started in France in the 18th century (not exactly capitalist paradise but certainly centralized nation-state). Then Britain mixed the French police system with the Common Law, focusing on preventative policing (see 1829 Metropolitan Police Act). The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism, the first public police force was created in Boston Literally not true, as the first public police force was created in 1626 in New York. The rise of the police was a consequence of economics peculiar to 19th century capitalism, [...] and in the South the public police force evolved from slave patrols as a necessity of maintaining the slavery system Literally not true, as slave patrols were ad-hoc and not really common. The public police force continued to spread throughout America, particularly in the West, in 19th century only as businessmen began to fear labour activism and required a militant police force to end strikes. Literally not true, as policing the West was mainly related to handling both the barely-pacified Native Americans and neverending waves of fresh settlers. public police force before the 1930s was not only a new idea, but it was entirely a weapon of political power and terror Entirely? Really? They didn't do any real policing at all, just being weapon of political power and terror? And you want to be taken seriously? The consent the average citizen has given to be policed and the satisfaction she should have with the current system is very debatable. Only by you and Noam Chomsky. Everyone else understands that USA is a democracy and voting, being free, expresses consent for the system.