Law enforcement in a stateless society (if thats not an oxymoron)

[AK]

When and if the ideal of pure communism is reached, emergency services - being a branch of the state - would cease to exist. Many volunteer ambulance and fire protection services exist today so they wouldn't be a problem. But what of the Police? Under a stateless society there would be no law system. How do we stop people from killing other people or stealing someone else's PERSONAL property. Would there be some sort of vigilante militia going on or some weird new Police force?

[yuon]

This is actually a topic that has been raised a few times before. I'll try and find some threads for you in a bit.

But anyway, the basic answer is simple. There would be no police in the sense understood today. :D

Instead, when, and if, needed, there would be a non-uniformed, rotating (i.e. non-permanent) organisation of people from the area, who could help deal with breaking up fights, or whatever. :confused:

Because many of the crimes that currently exist could not exist in a (for example, communist) society (all sorts of financial crimes for example), there would be a lot less need for a "crime fighting" force. :drool:

Anyway, I'll find some threads in a bit. :cool:

(Oh, and it's not really for us to blueprint future society. But whatever. :drool:)

[yuon]

A list of possibly relevant threads that maybe of interest.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/workers-militia-t108496/index.html
http://www.revleft.com/vb/police-anarchist-society-t70732/index.html
http://www.revleft.com/vb/police-anarchist-society-t64367/index.html
:cool::glare:

Reading those threads makes me annoyed at some people. Honestly, police in an anarchist society? :laugh: Crazy idea. :scared: What makes them think it would be good?:confused:
Anyway, hopefully those threads will help you. :)

[AK]

I mean a pure communist society, not anarchist. For crimes such as murder and theft of PERSONAL property.

EDIT: I can rule out the 'no crimes cos of no need for money' problem addressed in the third link because of HATE CRIMES and MENTAL DISORDERS.

[yuon]

I mean a pure communist society, not anarchist. For crimes such as murder and theft of PERSONAL property.

EDIT: I can rule out the 'no crimes cos of no need for money' problem addressed in the third link because of HATE CRIMES and MENTAL DISORDERS.

Err, it has been suggested that a communist society is a type of anarchist society. Anyway, it is def. the case that an anarchist society is a state-less society.

Murder? Addressed in at least one of those threads I'm sure.

Theft of personal property? Well, I don't know, what do you think? Maybe we ask such people to piss off, because they are too disruptive?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

A workers militia will be put in place. Members will rotate and be recalled. Professional law enforcers would not exist.

[Manifesto]

Murder would barely even happen anyways as money usually is at the root of it.

[red cat]

I think that all crimes that exist today are due to the cultural aspects of class oppression. It is unlikely that any crime will exist in a communist society at all.

[Durruti's Ghost]

I wouldn't go so far as to say that crime wouldn't exist at all. However, the vast majority of crimes are victimless crimes, which wouldn't be considered crimes at all. For all crimes with victims, about nine-tenths are property crimes (which wouldn't exist for obvious reasons). Of the last tenth--the violent crimes--a majority are committed in the process of committing a property crime, so we could expect many of those to disappear as well. The remnant can be explained by mental disorders (including, IMO, hate crimes--antisocial personality disorder anyone?) and should be treated as what they are--ILLNESSES.

[Manifesto]

Speaking of which would it be an oxymoron for an anarchist to be a police officer?

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Speaking of which would it be an oxymoron for an anarchist to be a police officer?

I would say so yes. Anarchism opposed to the state. The police force is the extension of state rule, which is by nature coercive and violent.

[mikelepore]

I consider a classless society having a police department to be a much better idea that a "workers' militia." It's a job that should be done by people who have years of education in the fields of psychology, sociology, social work, the philosophy of civil liberties, etc. They will also need to know how to use their specialized computers and other tools. They must be trained to study empirical evidence, including what may be seen on microscope slides. They will need to know, like the people who today are trained to work in mental hospitals, when someone goes violently berserk, how to restrain them with compassion and patience, not out of anger. All this points to the necessity to be have a specialized career, no less than that of the doctor, the engineer, etc.

[AK]

A workers militia will be put in place. Members will rotate and be recalled. Professional law enforcers would not exist.

You cannot always rely on the goodwill of people. And whos gonna do this recalling? The member's surely aren't, they're the ones being recalled. It requires some sort of higher authority, an authority that will administrate the actions of the militia. Militia's aren't exactly known for good organisational skills. This does require specialist training. I would go so far as if to say there needs to be some sort of higher authority that would act only for the wellbeing and safety of people. A government, limited in capabilities. This would control actions previously controlled by the former government. Such as education and health. Sounds a bit authoritarian to me though. As much as I love freedom there needs to be some sort of authority.


I consider a classless society having a police department to be a much better idea that a "workers' militia." It's a job that should be done by people who have years of education in the fields of psychology, sociology, social work, the philosophy of civil liberties, etc. They will also need to know how to use their specialized computers and other tools. They must be trained to study empirical evidence, including what may be seen on microscope slides. They will need to know, like the people who today are trained to work in mental hospitals, when someone goes violently berserk, how to restrian them with compassion and patience, not out of anger. All this points to the necessity to be have a specialized career, no less than that of the doctor, the engineer, etc.

^^ You read my mind.

EDIT: Oh dear, I think I'm on the verge of advocating statism.

[AK]

Hmm...
:sleep:
I've been re-reading the links I've been sent and I've decided to retract most of my statements. I agree that the workers' militia is a good idea, it will protect workers and their interests and it should be a non-permanent force put in use only when the threat occurs.

[DenisDenis]

A very interresting link is this one:ww w.urkommunismus.de/catalhueyuek_en.html it's about an ancient society situated in modern day turkey, which looked like a form of communism, they had no personal possesions, everything was shared, and most importantly they didn't find one skeleton which had been killed or murdered by violent actions, theft was also not really possible as everything was owned by everyone. :thumbup1:

[Stranger Than Paradise]

You cannot always rely on the goodwill of people. And whos gonna do this recalling? The member's surely aren't, they're the ones being recalled. It requires some sort of higher authority, an authority that will administrate the actions of the militia. Militia's aren't exactly known for good organisational skills. This does require specialist training. I would go so far as if to say there needs to be some sort of higher authority that would act only for the wellbeing and safety of people. A government, limited in capabilities. This would control actions previously controlled by the former government. Such as education and health. Sounds a bit authoritarian to me though. As much as I love freedom there needs to be some sort of authority.

Only allowing the police force to be recalled and rotating this duty avoids it devolving into state-enforced authority forcing it's will upon the people. Authority enforced by a government will be the downfall of worker self-managed society, only through this society can Anarchism/Communism be ensured.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Hmm...
:sleep:
I've been re-reading the links I've been sent and I've decided to retract most of my statements. I agree that the workers' militia is a good idea, it will protect workers and their interests and it should be a non-permanent force put in use only when the threat occurs.

Sorry for arguing with you then hadn't read this when I wrote it. I'm sure you understand my point though?

[AK]

Yeah

[AK]

A very interresting link is this one:ww w.urkommunismus.de/catalhueyuek_en.html it's about an ancient society situated in modern day turkey, which looked like a form of communism, they had no personal possesions, everything was shared, and most importantly they didn't find one skeleton which had been killed or murdered by violent actions, theft was also not really possible as everything was owned by everyone. :thumbup1:

Interesting stuff. How did ancients get it and not the majority of modern society?

[DenisDenis]

Interesting stuff. How did ancients get it and not the majority of modern society?

Well it's a mystery really, they don't know how thess cities (there were more than one) ceased to exist.

but in the article they state that they had a lower standard of living than neighbouring "states",( but were living life with a lot of joy and fun, I quote "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the people of Çatal Hüyük did not see things in our way; they concentrated instead on ... the continuity of life ... and the ways of achieving it. It seems that they understood the importance of continuity, that 'life must go on', a fundamental truth which we tend to miss." (Mellaart 1989: 11).")

so i think they didn't had enough military knowledge to repel enemies, but that's just my thought really...

[BabylonHoruv]

I think that all crimes that exist today are due to the cultural aspects of class oppression. It is unlikely that any crime will exist in a communist society at all.

Assuming that is a good way to set yourself up for failures. People are still going to get angry enough to kill each other. People are still going to want something that someone else has and take it in ways which are not acceptable.

Yes, a communist society will eliminate need based thefts and murder, as well as a great deal of greed based ones, but not all of the greed based ones, and need and greed are not the only reasons people steal and kill.

A professional police force in an Anarchist society however is idiotic. people who are a threat to the community will be dealt with in the same way that the state was dealt with.

[AK]

I think that 'life must go on' attitude is what is the main problem with the workers of today. They don't dare stand up to those in the upper class and just say it can't be helped.

[AK]

Hmm I found an interesting article
http://mises.org/story/2701

[chebol]

Comrade_Giggle wrote:


Hmm I found an interesting article
http://mises.org/story/2701I would warn fiercely against relying upon anything with the words "Mises" and "Austrian School" in it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_school

On topic, yes, it is an oxymoron. Law, and *crime* most specifically, requires a state in order to be created, not to mention enforced.

So, the question is the wrong one. What is really under question here is the ability of humanity to live harmoniously *without* a state and its violent enforcers. And the answer is "yes", we can live without a police force.

However, for a fully stateless communist to come into existence will require a considerable amount of time, the total restructuring and democratisation of the economic order, an abundance of material goods and services so as to abolish the needs that often cause crime, and a cultural, social and psychological evolution which will eradicate those other urges and impulses to commit those acts which might be frowned upon as "antisocial".

Of course, from the present we can't predict the nature of those changes, or the specific timeframe.

[AK]

Well spoken, and I can't belive what I used as a source. That Austrian School's completely in the wrong direction to what we believe.