8 ms·

The accusation that the police are surveilling union organizers is extremely troubling, and harkens back to the early 20th century when cops killed union organi

The accusation that the police are surveilling union organizers is extremely troubling, and harkens back to the early 20th century when cops killed union organizers. The police should stay out of such political matters; especially if they expect their continued funding to be above political reproach.

stefco_ 6y ago
Given how prevalent police unions are, and how incredibly quick they are to raise complaints, you'd hope for more self-awareness/solidarity and less hypocrisy.
- frabbit 6y ago
  Police unions have always been used to bust other unions. Expecting solidarity from them is madness. The police were created and exist for one role: stopping democracy because democracy implies socialism.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - smabie 6y ago
    Police have existed long before democracy (and socialism). Also I don't follow on how democracy implies socialism.
    - glenda 6y ago
      The first police force was created in the early 1800s, the concept of democracy pre-dates that by thousands of years.
      - smabie 6y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#Ancient_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#Ancient_policing
        glenda 6y ago
        I’m aware, but that’s pretty different from the purpose and structure of modern police departments. Edit: After reading about the Romans a bit more, it does sound similar. I still hesitate to agree with the assertion that police predate democracy though.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > Also I don't follow on how democracy implies socialism. Political and economic power are different names for the same thing; pretending they are different and one can be distributed equally when the other is intensely concentrated is self-delusion.
      - fallingfrog 6y ago
        +1 exactly
- badRNG 6y ago
  There has always seemed to be an antagonistic relationship between police unions and trade unions. Police unions are often disallowed membership in so-called "big tent" unions due to their perceived past and alleged ongoing role in union-busting. Since the early 20th century, there hasn't been a meaningful reconciliation between the movements (and often, the role of police in general is perceived to be inherently antagonistic to the goals of labor activists.) It might be worth reading about how police performed aerial bombardment and gunned down union workers during the labor movement (late 19th, early 20th centuries) in the US, notably the Battle of Blair Mountain [1]. Even though this nears over a hundred years worth of distance, the effects ripple through today. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
  - rhizome 6y ago
    I challenge you to find a sector of society to whom police (and their unions) are not antagonistic.
    - smnrchrds 6y ago
      The 1%
      - jacobush 6y ago
        Yeah, but the 0.01% is where the clout is.
    - dvtrn 6y ago
      Other police officers
      - glenda 6y ago
        As long as they stay quiet about any internal issues.
      - sidewndr46 6y ago
        I don't think you've spoken with actual police officers much, there is huge divide between state police and local police in the US.
- geofft 6y ago
  If a police union demands too much, they don't threaten their employer with going out of business the way private sector unions do. The private sector union is naturally constrained to saying, "We want to help you build a reliable business for the long term; treat us fairly and we will do good work." Sometimes, of course, they do better at this than other times, but it is never in a union's interest to impair the business to the point where the jobs no longer exist. There is no such pressure on the police union. No demand for higher pay will cause their employer to shut down - it will at most go deeper into debt. No demand to put up with worse work (be it worse quality or simply more illegal) will cause the market to find a different supplier - there is no market. No overreach by the old guard will risk losing newer folks to an un-unionized competitor - there are no competitors. And so forth. So I don't think this is even hypocrisy - effective police union leaders have very different approaches from effective private sector union leaders.
  - smabie 6y ago
    Aren't police unions similar to other government unions, like teachers unions then?
    - geofft 6y ago
      Yes, I think this argument applies to public sector unions as a whole. I think empirically, teachers' unions (and the postal worker's union, and so forth) have not been so, well, inclined to defend illegal and unconstitutional activity as police unions, so I'm not going to advocate as urgently for getting rid of them, but definitely they're also not quite like private sector unions for similar reasons. (That said, both public schools and the post office have meaningful private-sector competitors, in the sense that the government can decide that they just don't need to fund so many teachers or postal workers anymore, and systems like vouchers for private schools make it look even more like a private-sector market.)
    - crooked-v 6y ago
      I think the major distinction there is that no other union is composed of members who hold the legal monopoly on violence.
burfog 6y ago
That goes the other way too, if not more so: The union should stay out of such political matters; especially if they expect their continued funding to be above political reproach. That funding is a private tax, backed by force of law, imposed on the income of the workers. Via political "donation" a large part of it goes to politicians, ensuring that the politicians continue to allow it. This is deeply corrupt. We have here a money pipeline from the worker's paycheck to the politician, with the union and politician splitting the ill-gotten cut of the paycheck.
- dsr_ 6y ago
  Err, no. A union is inherently a political entity.
- ahelwer 6y ago
  Senseless. Money governs access to political power in this country. You would take away nearly the only alternative tool regular working people have to make their voices heard with impact and call it "deeply corrupt" - how do you reason yourself into this place?
  - barry-cotter 6y ago
    > Money governs access to political power in this country. Billionaires who failed to get anywhere in the Democratic primary: Bloomberg, Steyer. Remember, all political campaign funding plus all think tank funding plus all media funding is less than the US spends on almonds each year. Money doesn’t buy political influence in the US, it flows to it. > (in case you’re keeping track: all donations to all candidates, all lobbying, all think tanks, all advocacy organizations, the Washington Post, Vox, Mic, Mashable, Gawker, and Tumblr, combined, are still worth a little bit less than the almond industry. And Musk could buy them all.) https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in-almonds/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in...
    - OpieCunningham 6y ago
      Money will only get you so far in your public facing political ambitions if you are politically incompetent (Bloomberg) or devoid of charisma (Steyer). But money got both of them to the stage.
Natsu 6y ago
The Twitter that exposed pics of this linked elsewhere on HN claims it's related to Operation Legend, which has nothing to do with union organizing per se - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Legend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Legend
IncRnd 6y ago
My understanding is that this was a SkyCop camera, which is what has been used in Memphis. Those cameras are requested by the neighborhood, and the neighborhood raises the money for the camera. Then, the MPD purchases the camera, installs it, then hooks it up to the RTCC feed. If this installation went according to that same format, this activist may know full well why the camera is there - assuming he attends neighborhood meetings. If this installation didn't go according to tbat format, I am completely against people being specifically surveiled without a warrant. Volunyary video of the place where people live is one thing, the other is completely against the foundational principles of this country and the natural order that should be followed by our government.
- throwanem 6y ago
  SkyCop cameras are anything but covert. They are meant to present an obvious police presence. https://www.skycopinc.com/ https://www.skycopinc.com/ https://www.google.com/search?q=skycop+camera&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&biw=1315&bih=903 https://www.google.com/search?q=skycop+camera&source=lnms&tb...
  - IncRnd 6y ago
    Thanks. I'm well aware of how Skycop cameras appear, as well as their website address. The MPD has over 2,000 of them deployed. Did you consider, if this camera box existed and was covert, how it was located immediately after it was placed? Who was it that climbed the pole to open a box that said, "High Voltage," and take pictures of the inside? If the actual box looked nothing like a Skycop deployment, why was the finger of blame pointed at MPD? There is more to this story than the blurb that was reported in this article.
    - cycomanic 6y ago
      You seem to imply that the activist/article is lying. Apart from the video and that there being no good reason for him to lie (too easily exposed) This is not the first time that these high voltage boxes show up in the news about surveillance. So if you're someone aware of theses issues you would certainly not fear opening up a high voltage box (also what would be in the box if it actually was something high voltage, they don't appear overnight). Your assertion that this is likely a skycop seems to however not based on any evidence.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

stefco_ 6y ago

Given how prevalent police unions are, and how incredibly quick they are to raise complaints, you'd hope for more self-awareness/solidarity and less hypocrisy.

frabbit 6y ago
Police unions have always been used to bust other unions. Expecting solidarity from them is madness. The police were created and exist for one role: stopping democracy because democracy implies socialism.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- smabie 6y ago
  Police have existed long before democracy (and socialism). Also I don't follow on how democracy implies socialism.
  - glenda 6y ago
    The first police force was created in the early 1800s, the concept of democracy pre-dates that by thousands of years.
    - smabie 6y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#Ancient_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#Ancient_policing
      - glenda 6y ago
        I’m aware, but that’s pretty different from the purpose and structure of modern police departments. Edit: After reading about the Romans a bit more, it does sound similar. I still hesitate to agree with the assertion that police predate democracy though.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > Also I don't follow on how democracy implies socialism. Political and economic power are different names for the same thing; pretending they are different and one can be distributed equally when the other is intensely concentrated is self-delusion.
    - fallingfrog 6y ago
      +1 exactly
badRNG 6y ago
There has always seemed to be an antagonistic relationship between police unions and trade unions. Police unions are often disallowed membership in so-called "big tent" unions due to their perceived past and alleged ongoing role in union-busting. Since the early 20th century, there hasn't been a meaningful reconciliation between the movements (and often, the role of police in general is perceived to be inherently antagonistic to the goals of labor activists.) It might be worth reading about how police performed aerial bombardment and gunned down union workers during the labor movement (late 19th, early 20th centuries) in the US, notably the Battle of Blair Mountain [1]. Even though this nears over a hundred years worth of distance, the effects ripple through today. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
- rhizome 6y ago
  I challenge you to find a sector of society to whom police (and their unions) are not antagonistic.
  - smnrchrds 6y ago
    The 1%
    - jacobush 6y ago
      Yeah, but the 0.01% is where the clout is.
  - dvtrn 6y ago
    Other police officers
    - glenda 6y ago
      As long as they stay quiet about any internal issues.
    - sidewndr46 6y ago
      I don't think you've spoken with actual police officers much, there is huge divide between state police and local police in the US.
geofft 6y ago
If a police union demands too much, they don't threaten their employer with going out of business the way private sector unions do. The private sector union is naturally constrained to saying, "We want to help you build a reliable business for the long term; treat us fairly and we will do good work." Sometimes, of course, they do better at this than other times, but it is never in a union's interest to impair the business to the point where the jobs no longer exist. There is no such pressure on the police union. No demand for higher pay will cause their employer to shut down - it will at most go deeper into debt. No demand to put up with worse work (be it worse quality or simply more illegal) will cause the market to find a different supplier - there is no market. No overreach by the old guard will risk losing newer folks to an un-unionized competitor - there are no competitors. And so forth. So I don't think this is even hypocrisy - effective police union leaders have very different approaches from effective private sector union leaders.
- smabie 6y ago
  Aren't police unions similar to other government unions, like teachers unions then?
  - geofft 6y ago
    Yes, I think this argument applies to public sector unions as a whole. I think empirically, teachers' unions (and the postal worker's union, and so forth) have not been so, well, inclined to defend illegal and unconstitutional activity as police unions, so I'm not going to advocate as urgently for getting rid of them, but definitely they're also not quite like private sector unions for similar reasons. (That said, both public schools and the post office have meaningful private-sector competitors, in the sense that the government can decide that they just don't need to fund so many teachers or postal workers anymore, and systems like vouchers for private schools make it look even more like a private-sector market.)
  - crooked-v 6y ago
    I think the major distinction there is that no other union is composed of members who hold the legal monopoly on violence.

burfog 6y ago

That goes the other way too, if not more so: The union should stay out of such political matters; especially if they expect their continued funding to be above political reproach. That funding is a private tax, backed by force of law, imposed on the income of the workers. Via political "donation" a large part of it goes to politicians, ensuring that the politicians continue to allow it. This is deeply corrupt. We have here a money pipeline from the worker's paycheck to the politician, with the union and politician splitting the ill-gotten cut of the paycheck.

dsr_ 6y ago
Err, no. A union is inherently a political entity.
ahelwer 6y ago
Senseless. Money governs access to political power in this country. You would take away nearly the only alternative tool regular working people have to make their voices heard with impact and call it "deeply corrupt" - how do you reason yourself into this place?
- barry-cotter 6y ago
  > Money governs access to political power in this country. Billionaires who failed to get anywhere in the Democratic primary: Bloomberg, Steyer. Remember, all political campaign funding plus all think tank funding plus all media funding is less than the US spends on almonds each year. Money doesn’t buy political influence in the US, it flows to it. > (in case you’re keeping track: all donations to all candidates, all lobbying, all think tanks, all advocacy organizations, the Washington Post, Vox, Mic, Mashable, Gawker, and Tumblr, combined, are still worth a little bit less than the almond industry. And Musk could buy them all.) https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in-almonds/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in...
  - OpieCunningham 6y ago
    Money will only get you so far in your public facing political ambitions if you are politically incompetent (Bloomberg) or devoid of charisma (Steyer). But money got both of them to the stage.

Natsu 6y ago

The Twitter that exposed pics of this linked elsewhere on HN claims it's related to Operation Legend, which has nothing to do with union organizing per se - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Legend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Legend

IncRnd 6y ago

My understanding is that this was a SkyCop camera, which is what has been used in Memphis. Those cameras are requested by the neighborhood, and the neighborhood raises the money for the camera. Then, the MPD purchases the camera, installs it, then hooks it up to the RTCC feed. If this installation went according to that same format, this activist may know full well why the camera is there - assuming he attends neighborhood meetings. If this installation didn't go according to tbat format, I am completely against people being specifically surveiled without a warrant. Volunyary video of the place where people live is one thing, the other is completely against the foundational principles of this country and the natural order that should be followed by our government.

throwanem 6y ago
SkyCop cameras are anything but covert. They are meant to present an obvious police presence. https://www.skycopinc.com/ https://www.skycopinc.com/ https://www.google.com/search?q=skycop+camera&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&biw=1315&bih=903 https://www.google.com/search?q=skycop+camera&source=lnms&tb...
- IncRnd 6y ago
  Thanks. I'm well aware of how Skycop cameras appear, as well as their website address. The MPD has over 2,000 of them deployed. Did you consider, if this camera box existed and was covert, how it was located immediately after it was placed? Who was it that climbed the pole to open a box that said, "High Voltage," and take pictures of the inside? If the actual box looked nothing like a Skycop deployment, why was the finger of blame pointed at MPD? There is more to this story than the blurb that was reported in this article.
  - cycomanic 6y ago
    You seem to imply that the activist/article is lying. Apart from the video and that there being no good reason for him to lie (too easily exposed) This is not the first time that these high voltage boxes show up in the news about surveillance. So if you're someone aware of theses issues you would certainly not fear opening up a high voltage box (also what would be in the box if it actually was something high voltage, they don't appear overnight). Your assertion that this is likely a skycop seems to however not based on any evidence.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]