3 ms·

And a reminder that the police have never been on the side of the people. They are they muscle of the state.

matkoniecz 1y ago
> police have never been on the side of the people that is a remarkable generalization, that overstates things to the point of being misleading > They are they muscle of the state. still, there are better and worse states if you go fully pacifist and disempower yourself and your state it will not result in peace - it will result in someone else, likely worse, taking over Police in my country did some bad things (and far more bad things when we were a Russian puppet state) but last time I had an actual contact with police it was on railway station when they have cordoned off a group of aggressive football hooligans. I assure you that I preferred policeman over group of drunk abusive hooligans. And some kind of "muscle of the state" is needed to keep such people in check. (at the same time, police power should be kept on a leash)
- monkaiju 1y ago
  Its only a generalization in so far as that is and always has been their direct purpose. The history of policing is, regionally, either rooted in slave catchers or as muscle to disrupt labor organizing.
  - matkoniecz 1y ago
    > The history of policing is, regionally, either rooted in slave catchers or as muscle to disrupt labor organizing. Not really? It may apply in some very specific area but it does NOT generalize worldwide. And for direct purpose: even taking maximally cynical view and seeing police as muscle power existing to enforce tax payments by threat of force and to disrupt threats to state... Then I, as a citizen (and many other people) would agree that gangs should be disrupted and that they prefer to pay taxes over every lowlife able to steal all their stuff and burn down their home. Sadly, it takes only few people to make area terrible for others. Some do it with no benefit for themselves and there is no way to reason with them. Taking out such people (for whatever reason) by police is an useful service. That - even with quite badly managed police - is overall beneficial.
kergonath 1y ago
Ideally, the interests of the state and of the people coincide (otherwise you cannot have a democracy). It is very unhelpful to say that the police is by nature hostile to the people. It does not have to be that way, and we should demand that it is not. The police is the enforcement arm of the State, true, but we are the State.

> police have never been on the side of the people that is a remarkable generalization, that overstates things to the point of being misleading > They are they muscle of the state. still, there are better and worse states if you go fully pacifist and disempower yourself and your state it will not result in peace - it will result in someone else, likely worse, taking over Police in my country did some bad things (and far more bad things when we were a Russian puppet state) but last time I had an actual contact with police it was on railway station when they have cordoned off a group of aggressive football hooligans. I assure you that I preferred policeman over group of drunk abusive hooligans. And some kind of "muscle of the state" is needed to keep such people in check. (at the same time, police power should be kept on a leash)

monkaiju 1y ago
Its only a generalization in so far as that is and always has been their direct purpose. The history of policing is, regionally, either rooted in slave catchers or as muscle to disrupt labor organizing.
- matkoniecz 1y ago
  > The history of policing is, regionally, either rooted in slave catchers or as muscle to disrupt labor organizing. Not really? It may apply in some very specific area but it does NOT generalize worldwide. And for direct purpose: even taking maximally cynical view and seeing police as muscle power existing to enforce tax payments by threat of force and to disrupt threats to state... Then I, as a citizen (and many other people) would agree that gangs should be disrupted and that they prefer to pay taxes over every lowlife able to steal all their stuff and burn down their home. Sadly, it takes only few people to make area terrible for others. Some do it with no benefit for themselves and there is no way to reason with them. Taking out such people (for whatever reason) by police is an useful service. That - even with quite badly managed police - is overall beneficial.

kergonath 1y ago

Ideally, the interests of the state and of the people coincide (otherwise you cannot have a democracy). It is very unhelpful to say that the police is by nature hostile to the people. It does not have to be that way, and we should demand that it is not. The police is the enforcement arm of the State, true, but we are the State.