3 ms·

> Why the FUCK are we protecting these criminals? Why do we want this as a society? The police are the foot soldiers of the ruling class. Insofar as the police

> Why the FUCK are we protecting these criminals? Why do we want this as a society? The police are the foot soldiers of the ruling class. Insofar as the police may serve certain interests of working people, the aggregate sum of the police's influence on our society serves to protect the interests of the rich, which are usually at odds with the interests of working people.

Delento 4y ago
They are not. The criminals who do this like doing this and get protection from them.
dsfyu404ed 4y ago
>The police are the foot soldiers of the ruling class. While they will certainly side with the "rulers" over anyone else when there is a conflict on the day to day the are also the foot soldiers of you the hypothetical average HNer reading this comment. The people with real power DGAF about the sort of petty "annoyance or minor risk to the public" behavior that the police spend the bulk of their time enforcing. You think Musk is worried about fentanyl in his weed? You think Gates cares if you are drunk and disorderly alcohol in public? You think the Kochs give a crap about some kid doing a burnout at a stop light? You think Murdoch cares whether some restaurant is staying open in defiance of a health department? Of course not. They're above that kind of stuff. Ditto for any list of powerful politicians you feel like coming up with. When the police initiate an interaction they are almost always doing it to enforcing the laws that you the average "well enough paid to give a crap about issues not related to your economic survival in the short/medium term" American want them to enforce (revenue policing notwithstanding).
- yunwal 4y ago
  I’d rather not arrest people for marijuana possession, but owners of private prisons and the alcohol lobbies sure as hell would like that
rayiner 4y ago
Incorrect. As we are seeing all over the country, the "ruling class" has been voting to reduce policing--because what the f--k do they care? They have private security, or live in exclusive enclaves. The bulwark of support for the police is middle class parents and property owners. They're the people who, unlike the wealthy, can't rely on private security and geographic barriers to protect themselves from criminals. Look at who voted for Eric Adams and Curtis Sliwa in New York City, who both ran on a pro-police platform.
- whitemary 4y ago
  100% wrong. Those votes were to reduce public policing, in favor of private policing. In other words, it was members of the ruling class voting to drop the facade altogether and abandon any remaining semblance of a police that serves the public.
  - whitemary 4y ago
    You're wrong and you aren't supporting your argument. Those votes were to reduce public policing, in favor of private policing. That is nothing new, and it is in no way a reduction of police. This was simply members of the ruling class voting to drop the facade altogether and abandon any remaining semblance of a police that serves the public. Again, nothing new. The ruling class does have to maintain its own legitimacy. That's all you're describing.
- tptacek 4y ago
  This is cable news poisoning. In reality, reduction in policing (or "defunding") has no support in either party --- for a poignant example, look at Brandon Johnson's runoff race against Paul Vallas for Chicago mayor, where he's frantically distancing himself from 2020 rhetoric. There are activists pursuing defunding, and even abolition, and to a first approximation none of them live in enclaves or gated communities with private security; defund activists universally live in dense urban areas.

Delento 4y ago

They are not. The criminals who do this like doing this and get protection from them.

dsfyu404ed 4y ago

>The police are the foot soldiers of the ruling class. While they will certainly side with the "rulers" over anyone else when there is a conflict on the day to day the are also the foot soldiers of you the hypothetical average HNer reading this comment. The people with real power DGAF about the sort of petty "annoyance or minor risk to the public" behavior that the police spend the bulk of their time enforcing. You think Musk is worried about fentanyl in his weed? You think Gates cares if you are drunk and disorderly alcohol in public? You think the Kochs give a crap about some kid doing a burnout at a stop light? You think Murdoch cares whether some restaurant is staying open in defiance of a health department? Of course not. They're above that kind of stuff. Ditto for any list of powerful politicians you feel like coming up with. When the police initiate an interaction they are almost always doing it to enforcing the laws that you the average "well enough paid to give a crap about issues not related to your economic survival in the short/medium term" American want them to enforce (revenue policing notwithstanding).

yunwal 4y ago
I’d rather not arrest people for marijuana possession, but owners of private prisons and the alcohol lobbies sure as hell would like that

rayiner 4y ago

Incorrect. As we are seeing all over the country, the "ruling class" has been voting to reduce policing--because what the f--k do they care? They have private security, or live in exclusive enclaves. The bulwark of support for the police is middle class parents and property owners. They're the people who, unlike the wealthy, can't rely on private security and geographic barriers to protect themselves from criminals. Look at who voted for Eric Adams and Curtis Sliwa in New York City, who both ran on a pro-police platform.

whitemary 4y ago
100% wrong. Those votes were to reduce public policing, in favor of private policing. In other words, it was members of the ruling class voting to drop the facade altogether and abandon any remaining semblance of a police that serves the public.
- whitemary 4y ago
  You're wrong and you aren't supporting your argument. Those votes were to reduce public policing, in favor of private policing. That is nothing new, and it is in no way a reduction of police. This was simply members of the ruling class voting to drop the facade altogether and abandon any remaining semblance of a police that serves the public. Again, nothing new. The ruling class does have to maintain its own legitimacy. That's all you're describing.
tptacek 4y ago
This is cable news poisoning. In reality, reduction in policing (or "defunding") has no support in either party --- for a poignant example, look at Brandon Johnson's runoff race against Paul Vallas for Chicago mayor, where he's frantically distancing himself from 2020 rhetoric. There are activists pursuing defunding, and even abolition, and to a first approximation none of them live in enclaves or gated communities with private security; defund activists universally live in dense urban areas.