6 ms·

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.

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.