5 ms·

I think to a large part this is a consequence of the racist policies the country had for a long time creating a permanent underclass. This will probably take so

I think to a large part this is a consequence of the racist policies the country had for a long time creating a permanent underclass. This will probably take some more generations to heal. I also think that the US in general celebrates violence much more than other developed countries (on TV nudity->bad, violence->good). I am always horrified when even very liberal people seem to be OK with people being raped in prisons "because they deserve it". And I think a lot of people are totally OK with rough treatment by police.

TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
> racist policies the country had for a long time The US still has racist policies, they just usually can't be overtly racist now. > This will probably take some more generations to heal. Will it ever heal without affirmative action? Even if racism and racist structures magically disappear tomorrow, there will still be segregation and significant wealth and power gaps that capitalism has no interest in alleviating.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
wpietri 6y ago
I think that's reasonable. I strongly recommend Kendi's booked "Stamped from the Beginning", which is basically a history of racist ideas. One of the things that's really striking about it is the extent to which the ideas commonly in circulation are ones useful to the powerful. One clear example from the book is the various theories of natural inferiority. During long periods when white slavery of Africans was common, Europeans claimed that Africans were naturally inferior because of the much hotter climate. But earlier, Greeks thought that northern peoples like the Slavs (from whom we get the term "slave") were inferior because they were from a cold climate. The US had a lot of that going on, with different ideas about religion, culture, biology, and society shifting to be what was convenient for the rich. Given how much US wealth came from chattel slavery and after that labor exploitation, it's not a stretch to suspect that police, whose basic job is using violence to enforce the status quo, would have a lot of ideas and habits that match.
- groby_b 6y ago
  The history of the US police is firmly rooted in slave patrols, so your suspicion is pretty much spot on.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    That is wrong. Police forces originated in North, where slavery was outlawed. Slave patrols were not formed until nearly 70 years later. https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united-states-part-1 https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united...
    - groby_b 6y ago
      Did you bother to actually, you know, READ the article you shared? "It was not until the 1830s that the idea of a centralized municipal police department first emerged in the United States" vs. ". The first formal slave patrol was created in the Carolina colonies in 1704" Slave patrols predate municipal police departments by 100+ years. And for additional clarity, let's draw the link: " Following the Civil War, these vigilante-style organizations evolved in modern Southern police departments primarily as a means of controlling freed slaves who were now laborers working in an agricultural caste system, and enforcing "Jim Crow" segregation laws, designed to deny freed slaves equal rights and access to the political system." You're right in that northern police forces were more interested in protecting mercantile interests. And that's where we get the core functions of our police system: Protect the interests of the moneyed class (north) and suppress minorities (south) But citing this article as evidence that US police isn't rooted in slave patrols is... bold choice, Cotton.
      - gamblor956 6y ago
        Yes, especially the part where it states that private police organizations were formed in multiple Northeastern colonies in the 1630s...or more than 70 years before the first slave patrols. (See also https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/ https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/ which does a better job with its terminology.) Unlike slave patrols, the Northeastern police organizations were the model for the formal police organizations formed in the 1800s. If you're going to make an argument about timing, you need to get a better grasp on how time flows. (Hint: 1704 is a bigger number than 1630, so it comes later in the progression of time.)

TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago

> racist policies the country had for a long time The US still has racist policies, they just usually can't be overtly racist now. > This will probably take some more generations to heal. Will it ever heal without affirmative action? Even if racism and racist structures magically disappear tomorrow, there will still be segregation and significant wealth and power gaps that capitalism has no interest in alleviating.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

wpietri 6y ago

I think that's reasonable. I strongly recommend Kendi's booked "Stamped from the Beginning", which is basically a history of racist ideas. One of the things that's really striking about it is the extent to which the ideas commonly in circulation are ones useful to the powerful. One clear example from the book is the various theories of natural inferiority. During long periods when white slavery of Africans was common, Europeans claimed that Africans were naturally inferior because of the much hotter climate. But earlier, Greeks thought that northern peoples like the Slavs (from whom we get the term "slave") were inferior because they were from a cold climate. The US had a lot of that going on, with different ideas about religion, culture, biology, and society shifting to be what was convenient for the rich. Given how much US wealth came from chattel slavery and after that labor exploitation, it's not a stretch to suspect that police, whose basic job is using violence to enforce the status quo, would have a lot of ideas and habits that match.

groby_b 6y ago
The history of the US police is firmly rooted in slave patrols, so your suspicion is pretty much spot on.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  That is wrong. Police forces originated in North, where slavery was outlawed. Slave patrols were not formed until nearly 70 years later. https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united-states-part-1 https://plsonline.eku.edu/insidelook/history-policing-united...
  - groby_b 6y ago
    Did you bother to actually, you know, READ the article you shared? "It was not until the 1830s that the idea of a centralized municipal police department first emerged in the United States" vs. ". The first formal slave patrol was created in the Carolina colonies in 1704" Slave patrols predate municipal police departments by 100+ years. And for additional clarity, let's draw the link: " Following the Civil War, these vigilante-style organizations evolved in modern Southern police departments primarily as a means of controlling freed slaves who were now laborers working in an agricultural caste system, and enforcing "Jim Crow" segregation laws, designed to deny freed slaves equal rights and access to the political system." You're right in that northern police forces were more interested in protecting mercantile interests. And that's where we get the core functions of our police system: Protect the interests of the moneyed class (north) and suppress minorities (south) But citing this article as evidence that US police isn't rooted in slave patrols is... bold choice, Cotton.
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      Yes, especially the part where it states that private police organizations were formed in multiple Northeastern colonies in the 1630s...or more than 70 years before the first slave patrols. (See also https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/ https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/ which does a better job with its terminology.) Unlike slave patrols, the Northeastern police organizations were the model for the formal police organizations formed in the 1800s. If you're going to make an argument about timing, you need to get a better grasp on how time flows. (Hint: 1704 is a bigger number than 1630, so it comes later in the progression of time.)