Reasons to hate cops

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I know this may be a topic some of you are sick of, but I would like some thoughts.

I found out about an upcoming march, and I was very excited for it. I then found out that the march is an FTP march. I was a little disappointed, because I don't necessarily hate the cops. There are good reasons in support and against them. I've never heard a good reason though, to outright hate them. If anyone has any reasons why cops are bad, please share.

[Art Vandelay]

They protect the bourgeois order? That is all the reason I need, although there are plenty and plenty of more if you really want to get into it.

[Comrades Unite!]

Do I personally hate every cop to step in uniform?Of course not
Do I hate the fact they stand for Capitalistic justice?Yes,Of course.
Do I hate those police radicals who believe they can do as they please due to their badge and uniform OR get off lightly in court for assault,rape or murder because of the badge and uniform?YES!

I strongly dislike the law(Not Law in general but 'The' Law)and so it is fit I dislike those who protect such injustice and at times even practice it, then again that goes for a given number of policemen.

Has anybody on here ever felt pressure by Police for political tendency?

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

They protect the bourgeois order? That is all the reason I need, although there are plenty and plenty of more if you really want to get into it.

Well couldn't they be changed? I mean they're system is flawed now, but should they be completely abolished?

If you don't mind, could you list a few more reasons? If I go to this, I want to have a good understanding of what I'm talking about. Thanks!

[Art Vandelay]

Has anybody on here ever felt pressure by Police for political tendency?

Yes, although not all that seriously; just slight different treatment since they knew I was an anarchist (which I was at the time).

Anyways, just to clarify, I hate all cops (sure they might be nice dudes outside of work or whatever, but that is not the point).

ACAB. End of discussion.

[Comrades Unite!]

TheMza, We speak of the current police force in the first world.
As Law develops with time, so will the police, they will then defend laborer law and not Capitalistic law after the laborer abolishes the State and sets up the workers state.

[Art Vandelay]

Since you were the first person to ever quote me, I'll indulge you. :D


Well couldn't they be changed? I mean they're system is flawed now,

No. Simply put, they are apart of the bourgeois state. A state is an instrument of class rule and is the mechanism through which the dominant class in society exerts it hegemony. The bourgeois state cannot be changed and used in the interests of the proletarian class (this actually seems to me to be fundamentally the same argument used to justify reformism), for this to happen (the state being used in the interests of the proletarian class) the bourgeois state must be smashed and the proletarian class must institute and exert its own hegemony (dotp).


but should they be completely abolished?

There will still be some form of "law enforcement" (if you need to call it that) in socialist society; but it will not resemble the current police force.


If you don't mind, could you list a few more reasons? If I go to this, I want to have a good understanding of what I'm talking about. Thanks!

Off of the top of my head:

Crackdown on protests
Institutional racism
Protecting the bourgeois state
The fact that they are not held up to the same standards of justice as proles
Murder, Rape, Torture, Assault, Intimidation
The fact that if you go to protests you see them do the most fucked up shit.

This is a rather shitty list, but perhaps some others will chime in. Jimmie Higgins has struck me as someone who could probably lace together a much more eloquent and comprehensive response than my own, so maybe he'll see it.

I guess it would make sense to ask you, what reservations do you have about hating the police?

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

TheMza, We speak of the current police force in the first world.
As Law develops with time, so will the police, they will then defend laborer law and not Capitalistic law after the laborer abolishes the State and sets up the workers state.

That definitely clears things up a lot.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

Since you were the first person to ever quote me, I'll indulge you. :D



No. Simply put, they are apart of the bourgeois state. A state is an instrument of class rule and is the mechanism through which the dominant class in society exerts it hegemony. The bourgeois state cannot be changed and used in the interests of the proletarian class (this actually seems to me to be fundamentally the same argument used to justify reformism), for this to happen (the state being used in the interests of the proletarian class) the bourgeois state must be smashed and the proletarian class must institute and exert its own hegemony (dotp).



There will still be some form of "law enforcement" (if you need to call it that) in socialist society; but it will not resemble the current police force.



Off of the top of my head:

Crackdown on protests
Institutional racism
Protecting the bourgeois state
The fact that they are not held up to the same standards of justice as proles
Murder, Rape, Torture, Assault, Intimidation
The fact that if you go to protests you see them do the most fucked up shit.

This is a rather shitty list, but perhaps some others will chime in. Jimmie Higgins has struck me as someone who could probably lace together a much more eloquent and comprehensive response than my own, so maybe he'll see it.

I guess it would make sense to ask you, what reservations do you have about hating the police?

I didn't even realize that was you! I'll have to change my signature to your new name.

Well, until "Comrades Unite!"s last post, I didn know we were talking about current policing. My reservations were mainly from a point of all policing, even after the revolution.

When you say institutional racism, do you mean the Broken Windows theory? And when you say they aren't held up to the same standards of justice, do you have any examples? I feel like cops are often punished for their brutality.

[Art Vandelay]

When you say institutional racism, do you mean the Broken Windows theory?

No more referring to the fact that it has been statistically proven that minorities are way way way more likely to be randomly stopped and searched (I don't have the numbers in front of me, but its ridiculous). Also, you live in the states, so I know that it is probably no surprise to you that african americains make a disproportional amount of the U.S. prison population.


And when you say they aren't held up to the same standards of justice, do you have any examples? I feel like cops are often punished for their brutality.

Cops get away with murder constantly. I mean I could scrounge for links if you want, but revleft is usually pretty well updated with the latest of police brutality.

[Os Cangaceiros]

And when you say they aren't held up to the same standards of justice, do you have any examples?

Just read this website on a regular basis:

http://www.theagitator.com/

[Ostrinski]

As a general rule, the police (armed wing of the bourgeois state) have a higher bourgeois class consciousness than the bourgeoisie do.

They are uncompromisingly the enemy.

[#FF0000]

And when you say they aren't held up to the same standards of justice, do you have any examples? I feel like cops are often punished for their brutality.

The common punishment is paid suspension. It is basically a vacation until they are reinstated when media heat dies down.

(Copblock took down all their useful flyers and posters that had actual stats and numbers unfortunately)

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I remember there was a whole thread one time just devoted to stories of bad encounters with the police. It lasted a few pages long. Anyways as it has been stated the cops are basically the armed wing of the bourgeois State, therefore making them natural enemies by that alone. An example of what that translates to in the real world: Recently in Modesto, California, the police department proposed laws to the city council which makes "outdoor camping" illegal. Now it has passed which means Occupy Modesto is essentially banned. But more importantly it cracks down on the local homeless population who businesses and developers have been complaining about for a long time.

And there have been sooo many times the police get away with murder. Just last year a man was killed in my city. He was unarmed with hands raised in the air and stumbling to the ground as his foot got caught in his seat belt. They shot him in the head even after he'd already been hit a few times and was on the ground. What did the bastard get? Nothing at all, I don't think they even suspended him. Look at the murder of Oscar Grant, the pig got what? A little less than two years I think. Anehiem, Oakland, Stockton, Modesto, Fresno, left and right, they're killing us and most of the time getting away with it, and you don't think it happens in Chicago?

[ВАЛТЕР]

They gave me a ticket once.


Avenge me comrades! Avenge me!

[Jimmie Higgins]

My reservations were mainly from a point of all policing, even after the revolution.For most of human history there have been no real police. In Rome all citizens were supposed to report and try and prevent a crime and the police really only existed to guard judges and sometimes bring someone who'd been sentenced. The police as we know them today are pretty recent and came about with industrialization. Specifically they were developed to control crowds of the new working class people who were being concentrated in industrial cities. So even then the reason was not to stop crime or even necessarily to stop crimes. This concept came later in the Victorian period as popularized in culture with detective and true crime novels in the late 1800s and then in pulp form in the 20th.

So as a modern organization they are directly linked to the needs of capital and controlling the working class population. In past major strikes as well as the policing of urban ghettos after WWII, we can see specifically how cops controlling of "crowds" of workers has a political purpose.

But even putting aside these bigger issues, do we need police? No. They rarely ever actually see and prevent a violent crime, at best they respond well after the fact. Violence in daily life is not the result of "bad people" but of conditions which produce anti-social or violent behavior, so to try and stop crime by stopping the individuals rather than the cause is like trying to cure small-pox with an ointment for the sores.

Finally, and what gets to some of your other questions, the vast majority of contemporary policing in the US (and what has contributed the greatest to the huge prison system in the US) involves pretext stops. That is pulling someone over for a minor infraction and then using that as a pretext to search their car for drugs or other contraband. They also do this in the street and stop people they say they have "cause" to stop - they look like some suspect or fit a profile. They can even use dogs and in they interpret that the dog has reacted to someone, they can search them. Or, as in New York's Stop-and-frisk tactics... stopping people for no reason other than the cop's suspicion. The vast majority of stops (and I mean like in the 90%s) lead to no arrest or citation and nothing is found. But in a society like they US where people like their drugs, sometimes they do find some drugs, or a concealed weapon, or even on the rare occasion a drug trafficer with lots of drugs.

But this system of casting a wide net results in most of the people going to trial (or actually more likely taking a plea) on these things being actually guilty - this gives the statistics and the courts the impression that cops do a fine job and "always get the right people" since the 1 out of 100 that they end up bringing in is actually guilty of some non-violent offense. Though, honestly, I doubt the courts and prosecuters would even care if they know that their statistics come from harassing huge chunks of the population.


When you say institutional racism, do you mean the Broken Windows theory?The institutional racism stems from where and how policing is done. The methods I described above simply can't be evenly applied to the whole population even if they wanted to - so they target "high crime" areas. But "high crime" areas might have more violent crime, but the people being arrested are mostly for drugs and drug use and dealing rates are the same in almost all racial and class demographics... college kids get drugs from college kids, people in poor areas get it from other people in their neighborhood, rich kids get it from their rich friends and so on. But it's problematic if cops bust the college-age children of lawyers... or bust rich people and confiscate their stuff. On the other hand poor people likely won't be able to contest seized property and most likely won't even go to trial and will be willing to take whatever the prosecutor offers.

There are many other aspects of the system that I could go into, but the net result is a huge class and specifically racial bias inherent in the system. The results is disproportionate arrests of black people most of all but also latinos, and native americans. Of course poor white people are also brought in through this system, but just not quite as high in rates as black people... though more than before the "war on drugs".


And when you say they aren't held up to the same standards of justice, do you have any examples? I feel like cops are often punished for their brutality.

No, it is EXTREMELY rare for police to be punished at all for the simple reason that they hardly ever get charged and even then if they are convicted (which is 80% of the time compared to 90% of the time with non-police trials) they almost never get the treatment that most people get. Prosecutors have a lot of discretion in charges and charging a cop is like going after a co-worker essentially because they also rely on the police the 99.9999% of the time they aren't charging cops. Then even if a prosecutor is just amazingly fair and legal-minded, he is unlikely to put cops on trial because the police unions generally have really tough lawyers and so it would be a hard case to win just based on that. So this is why generally when cops are even charged, it has to be either just an incredibly obvious case with no chance of innocence or there is mass protests or anger which forces the system to put the cops on trial for fear of just loosing total legitimacy.

In my neighborhood, a cop shot someone to death in the back while he was on the ground. First the subway system claimed they didn't have tape of the incident and the police did nothing - then cell-phone video was brought to the media showing the shooting and then they suddenly found the subway footage. Then did the cops fire or arrest the cop? No, he told them he was going to go to Nevada for a while and they didn't ask where. Only after some large protests outside city hall and a week of the video playing on the evening news did the city call for charges to be brought. In the end, he was CONVICTED but served less than a year.

Now, imagine if a black kid shot a cop in the back.

The anecdotal list goes on... the cops in Anehiem, paid leave. The cops in the Rodney King beating? Innocent.

Going back the they systemic nature of the injustice and your question about why we just can't use the legal system to balance out the cops... well the major thing right now and since the Clinton years is that the Supreme Court has sanctified all these things and made it incredibly difficult to challenge racial bias or police brutality. The Supreme Court has even acknowledged the statistics which show that policing is racially targeted and results in disproportionate arrests of blacks... but the court has ruled that unless a cop or prosecutor says: "I'm doing this because they are black" then there is no racial bias.

So as with Jim-Crow, a system of "separate justice" has been implemented at the ground level while made untouchable from the top of the system. The result is that really this system of "justice" can only be challenged from without, not from within.


I was a little disappointed, because I don't necessarily hate the cops. There are good reasons in support and against them. I've never heard a good reason though, to outright hate them. If anyone has any reasons why cops are bad, please share.I have problems with the local FTP marches here - mostly just because I don't think the key to challenging the cops comes from direct confrontation by a small self-selected group of activists. I went on many of them here and while I think it's fine as propaganda and a way to attract people who are angry about mistreatment of police, I think really the way to go is to try and help people organize their own neighborhoods and try and build a movement, rather than just march in hopes of some hide-and-seek with the police.

Anyway, as others have said, ultimately it's political and not about "hating the police" personally. However, I think the hatred comes in anyway after someone's been politically active a while and fuck over once or twice or had cops try and intimidate them or illegally try and prevent them from handing out fliers (as happened to me on Thursday:sneaky:). It's a lesson all working class movements will learn at some point - Occupy learned it first hand, any bitter strike will mean that the rank and file learn this first hand, and so on.

So while I don't think "hatred" is a good political reason for anything, I also don't blame anyone whose been mistreated from hating cops, I more than understand.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Off of the top of my head:

Crackdown on protests
Institutional racism
Protecting the bourgeois state
The fact that they are not held up to the same standards of justice as proles
Murder, Rape, Torture, Assault, Intimidation
The fact that if you go to protests you see them do the most fucked up shit.

This is a rather shitty list, but perhaps some others will chime in. Jimmie Higgins has struck me as someone who could probably lace together a much more eloquent and comprehensive response than my own, so maybe he'll see it.

I guess it would make sense to ask you, what reservations do you have about hating the police?

You forgot this one, big time:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/thousands-of-workers-blacklisted-over-political-views-8010208.html

[I'm sure the cops had a hand in that.]

[Yuppie Grinder]

To all those saying cops can be nice outside of work, I've met only one person who had a history in law enforcement or the American military that wasn't a gigantic asshole, and he said he hated being a cop every single day.

[Ostrinski]

You do certainly have to at least have some asshole personality traits to execute your duties as an officer effectively and not loathe your existence, at least in my mind.

[Ocean Seal]

A picture says 1000 words
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8c/Fred_Hampton_dead_body.jpg

[A Revolutionary Tool]

To all those saying cops can be nice outside of work, I've met only one person who had a history in law enforcement or the American military that wasn't a gigantic asshole, and he said he hated being a cop every single day.
Yeah my Aunt's ex-husband is a cop. Surprise surprise, he assaulted her. Only 40 percent of cops do! And my step-dad wanted to become a cop, it fit perfect for him because he's a angry white jackass.

[Ele'ill]

ACAB

-qEr_mZf06Y

[Beeth]

Cops all over the world are the same - they are the enemy of the working class. They love authority, which they use to abuse innocent people ... all in the name of fighting crime. And the public buys it. I tried in India many times to get independent media outlets to expose police brutality but to no avail. People here are apathetic.

[black magick hustla]

whats there not to h8 about some asshole with a badge and a gun that puts both on ur face and can drop u dead/beat u up/throw u in the slammer cuz u look suspicious (black) or your overstepped the boundaries of bourgeois law

[ComingUpForAir]

Check out 'Our Enemies In Blue' Lecture on the WeAreMany.org site.

Also - 'The Origins Of The Police'

The police are not 'natural' -- they are an unnecessary outside force used to regulate workers and keep them in 'order'.

Police should be citizens elected on a rotating basis -- or everyone should be citizen cops. In a socialist future, cops won't be necessary at all.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

Thanks guys! This was very helpful!:)

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I'll have to show this to my Mom. Shes a major cop apologist. She always defends them by saying, the victim must have been doing something wrong.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

I remember there was a whole thread one time just devoted to stories of bad encounters with the police. It lasted a few pages long. Anyways as it has been stated the cops are basically the armed wing of the bourgeois State, therefore making them natural enemies by that alone. An example of what that translates to in the real world: Recently in Modesto, California, the police department proposed laws to the city council which makes "outdoor camping" illegal. Now it has passed which means Occupy Modesto is essentially banned. But more importantly it cracks down on the local homeless population who businesses and developers have been complaining about for a long time.

And there have been sooo many times the police get away with murder. Just last year a man was killed in my city. He was unarmed with hands raised in the air and stumbling to the ground as his foot got caught in his seat belt. They shot him in the head even after he'd already been hit a few times and was on the ground. What did the bastard get? Nothing at all, I don't think they even suspended him. Look at the murder of Oscar Grant, the pig got what? A little less than two years I think. Anehiem, Oakland, Stockton, Modesto, Fresno, left and right, they're killing us and most of the time getting away with it, and you don't think it happens in Chicago?

That's horrible! The more I think about it, that tends to be the punishment.:sneaky:

And I'm sure it happens in Chicago.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

For most of human history there have been no real police. In Rome all citizens were supposed to report and try and prevent a crime and the police really only existed to guard judges and sometimes bring someone who'd been sentenced. The police as we know them today are pretty recent and came about with industrialization. Specifically they were developed to control crowds of the new working class people who were being concentrated in industrial cities. So even then the reason was not to stop crime or even necessarily to stop crimes. This concept came later in the Victorian period as popularized in culture with detective and true crime novels in the late 1800s and then in pulp form in the 20th.

So as a modern organization they are directly linked to the needs of capital and controlling the working class population. In past major strikes as well as the policing of urban ghettos after WWII, we can see specifically how cops controlling of "crowds" of workers has a political purpose.

But even putting aside these bigger issues, do we need police? No. They rarely ever actually see and prevent a violent crime, at best they respond well after the fact. Violence in daily life is not the result of "bad people" but of conditions which produce anti-social or violent behavior, so to try and stop crime by stopping the individuals rather than the cause is like trying to cure small-pox with an ointment for the sores.

Finally, and what gets to some of your other questions, the vast majority of contemporary policing in the US (and what has contributed the greatest to the huge prison system in the US) involves pretext stops. That is pulling someone over for a minor infraction and then using that as a pretext to search their car for drugs or other contraband. They also do this in the street and stop people they say they have "cause" to stop - they look like some suspect or fit a profile. They can even use dogs and in they interpret that the dog has reacted to someone, they can search them. Or, as in New York's Stop-and-frisk tactics... stopping people for no reason other than the cop's suspicion. The vast majority of stops (and I mean like in the 90%s) lead to no arrest or citation and nothing is found. But in a society like they US where people like their drugs, sometimes they do find some drugs, or a concealed weapon, or even on the rare occasion a drug trafficer with lots of drugs.

But this system of casting a wide net results in most of the people going to trial (or actually more likely taking a plea) on these things being actually guilty - this gives the statistics and the courts the impression that cops do a fine job and "always get the right people" since the 1 out of 100 that they end up bringing in is actually guilty of some non-violent offense. Though, honestly, I doubt the courts and prosecuters would even care if they know that their statistics come from harassing huge chunks of the population.

The institutional racism stems from where and how policing is done. The methods I described above simply can't be evenly applied to the whole population even if they wanted to - so they target "high crime" areas. But "high crime" areas might have more violent crime, but the people being arrested are mostly for drugs and drug use and dealing rates are the same in almost all racial and class demographics... college kids get drugs from college kids, people in poor areas get it from other people in their neighborhood, rich kids get it from their rich friends and so on. But it's problematic if cops bust the college-age children of lawyers... or bust rich people and confiscate their stuff. On the other hand poor people likely won't be able to contest seized property and most likely won't even go to trial and will be willing to take whatever the prosecutor offers.

There are many other aspects of the system that I could go into, but the net result is a huge class and specifically racial bias inherent in the system. The results is disproportionate arrests of black people most of all but also latinos, and native americans. Of course poor white people are also brought in through this system, but just not quite as high in rates as black people... though more than before the "war on drugs".



No, it is EXTREMELY rare for police to be punished at all for the simple reason that they hardly ever get charged and even then if they are convicted (which is 80% of the time compared to 90% of the time with non-police trials) they almost never get the treatment that most people get. Prosecutors have a lot of discretion in charges and charging a cop is like going after a co-worker essentially because they also rely on the police the 99.9999% of the time they aren't charging cops. Then even if a prosecutor is just amazingly fair and legal-minded, he is unlikely to put cops on trial because the police unions generally have really tough lawyers and so it would be a hard case to win just based on that. So this is why generally when cops are even charged, it has to be either just an incredibly obvious case with no chance of innocence or there is mass protests or anger which forces the system to put the cops on trial for fear of just loosing total legitimacy.

In my neighborhood, a cop shot someone to death in the back while he was on the ground. First the subway system claimed they didn't have tape of the incident and the police did nothing - then cell-phone video was brought to the media showing the shooting and then they suddenly found the subway footage. Then did the cops fire or arrest the cop? No, he told them he was going to go to Nevada for a while and they didn't ask where. Only after some large protests outside city hall and a week of the video playing on the evening news did the city call for charges to be brought. In the end, he was CONVICTED but served less than a year.

Now, imagine if a black kid shot a cop in the back.

The anecdotal list goes on... the cops in Anehiem, paid leave. The cops in the Rodney King beating? Innocent.

Going back the they systemic nature of the injustice and your question about why we just can't use the legal system to balance out the cops... well the major thing right now and since the Clinton years is that the Supreme Court has sanctified all these things and made it incredibly difficult to challenge racial bias or police brutality. The Supreme Court has even acknowledged the statistics which show that policing is racially targeted and results in disproportionate arrests of blacks... but the court has ruled that unless a cop or prosecutor says: "I'm doing this because they are black" then there is no racial bias.

So as with Jim-Crow, a system of "separate justice" has been implemented at the ground level while made untouchable from the top of the system. The result is that really this system of "justice" can only be challenged from without, not from within.

I have problems with the local FTP marches here - mostly just because I don't think the key to challenging the cops comes from direct confrontation by a small self-selected group of activists. I went on many of them here and while I think it's fine as propaganda and a way to attract people who are angry about mistreatment of police, I think really the way to go is to try and help people organize their own neighborhoods and try and build a movement, rather than just march in hopes of some hide-and-seek with the police.

Anyway, as others have said, ultimately it's political and not about "hating the police" personally. However, I think the hatred comes in anyway after someone's been politically active a while and fuck over once or twice or had cops try and intimidate them or illegally try and prevent them from handing out fliers (as happened to me on Thursday:sneaky:). It's a lesson all working class movements will learn at some point - Occupy learned it first hand, any bitter strike will mean that the rank and file learn this first hand, and so on.

So while I don't think "hatred" is a good political reason for anything, I also don't blame anyone whose been mistreated from hating cops, I more than understand.

Very helpful! And as for the marches, I can see how they aren't majorly helpful, but I've been wanting to join a protest really bad ever since I got into leftism, so I'm willing to join.

[helot]

You forgot this one, big time:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/thousands-of-workers-blacklisted-over-political-views-8010208.html

[I'm sure the cops had a hand in that.]

That they did. The company operating the blacklist was fed information by the police.

[solarian_13]

"I have no particular love for the idealised "worker" as he appears in the bourgeois Communist's mind, but when I see an actual flesh-and-blood worker in conflict with his natural enemy, the policeman, I do not have to ask myself which side I am on." - George Orwell

Police murder minorities and homeless people and uphold the current (racist) social order. They're the footsoldiers of the bourgeoisie and about as bad as you can get. Lots of them are white supremacists/affiliated with neo-nazi groups and such.

[Marxaveli]

I think NWA summed it up best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urUhLD0fSFI

[Rafiq]

We don't just hate cops because they're the guardians of Bourgeois society. We hate them personally, because they tend to be douchebags.



Fuck that shit, cuz I ain't tha one
For a punk muthafucka with a badge and a gun
To be beatin on, and throwin in jail
We could go toe to toe in the middle of a cell

[Rafiq]

Do I personally hate every cop to step in uniform?

Well, regardless of your position, I certainly do.

[Comrades Unite!]

I think NWA summed it up best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urUhLD0fSFI

HELLS YES!

NWA in the house!

[icefair3]

sometimes they beed bad and mean.i agree

[Clarion]

So much personal hate. Some people really need to find a more mature way of engaging with these issues.

[Keath]

They protect the bourgeois order

This is correct when looking at the cops in terms of a general effect they have on society however it is also important to recognize that people of all races and social classes and ages have been harassed and abused by cops on "power trips". So I just hope that recognizing an over-arching social function of the cops does not blind people to the fact that cops oppress everyone.

I do not think people should hate cops though and I do not think people should engage in avoidable confrontations with police. Of course there are times for protest though, I am not saying people should avoid those times when it is time for protest(for those who are physically able to protest).

[Thirsty Crow]

I'll have to show this to my Mom. Shes a major cop apologist. She always defends them by saying, the victim must have been doing something wrong.
Really? Like striking?

I'd strongly advise you to show here this:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/south-africa-miners-t174345/index.html?t=174345

That is the function these murderous pigs perform.

[Amir_2591]

I have a problem with the establishment not the people working for it, generally they're as much victims of the system as the rest of us.

.

[Ele'ill]

I have a problem with the establishment not the people working for it, generally they're as much victims of the system as the rest of us.

.

The establishment is set up, protected and run and thus is the people 'working for it'.

[Comrade #138672]

Just because they may be victims of the system as well doesn't make them less dangerous.

[Geiseric]

A better question would be "What about cops makes us like them?" And the answer is nothing. They are needed because of capitalism, thus their interests are hand in hand with the bourgeoisie.

If you are ordered to deport an immigrant, and you do it, you're still deporting an immigrant, and you're still going to hell, figuratively. You want to have power over people if you become a cop, that's the only reason one would want to.

I mean "fighting crime," is only a fraction of what cops do. Most of the time they're harrassing minorities, arresting young people, and overall making the population afraid. That's why they are so emotional if you talk back, they want complete control, and have a deep, ingrained feeling of inferiority. They are figuratively self conscious about the size of their reproductive organs, thus anything they do to stimulate their private parts will naturally be what they want to do for a job.

[Prometeo liberado]

I know this may be a topic some of you are sick of, but I would like some thoughts.

I found out about an upcoming march, and I was very excited for it. I then found out that the march is an FTP march. I was a little disappointed, because I don't necessarily hate the cops. There are good reasons in support and against them. I've never heard a good reason though, to outright hate them. If anyone has any reasons why cops are bad, please share.

How many times do pigs arrest a factory owner for locking out it's workers?
Who were the people trying to infiltrate the various Occupy movements?
When anti-war demonstrators in Berkley were beat up by the Hell's Angels back in the 60's, who let the Angels through?
When it comes time to evict families who does the dirty work?
When undocumented workers get pulled over, for absolutely no reason, and their cars impounded who does it?

Are these the traits of honorable, upstanding people? And if you want to argue that they just take orders then we need an entirely new thread.

MUST HATE THE PIGS, NO EXCUSES.

[p0is0n]

All cops may not be assholes, but all of them are inherently protecting the status quo of the hegemonious class, and as such are enemies.

[Solidarity]

We should hate all cops just for being cops?

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

Really? Like striking?

I'd strongly advise you to show here this:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/south-africa-miners-t174345/index.html?t=174345

That is the function these murderous pigs perform.

Pretty much. I can see her saying that the strikers must have been getting out of hand, or doing something wrong.

[Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores]

Thanks for all the other information everybody.

[Art Vandelay]

We should hate all cops just for being cops?

Yes, yes we should comrade.

[Sheepy]

They know damn well who they're working for.

[Rational Radical]

I'm an African-American but live in a predominantly white neighborhood and still got stopped along with three other African-American friends of mine while walking up the street to get ice cream because "we fit the description of the thieves that recently stole a car". My friend looks at me and says "oh no not this shit,racism!!" which causes me to burst out laughing. The cop then grabs me, throws me to the car and starts searching me,collecting my data and asks if I have any tatoos(which I don't) or if I'm in a gang. The pig holds my friends and I up for about 40 minutes,then proceeds to give me lecture about how my "cocky ass" will end up behind bars,the most racist shit I've been through.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

How would he even arrest you or anything if you're walking down the street aka not driving around in a stolen car?

[Prometeo liberado]

How would he even arrest you or anything if you're walking down the street aka not driving around in a stolen car?

Are you serious? Have you been following what is happening in NYC? Shit, any city for that matter. Pigs feed on shit like this. No one is exempt when are on the hunt.

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

Fighting (literally) the average policeman is like saying you love Capitalist proxy wars.
They're part of the working class too you know...

[GiantMonkeyMan]

Fighting (literally) the average policeman is like saying you love Capitalist proxy wars.
They're part of the working class too you know...
They are class traitors no better than scabs. Their whole purpose is to prop up the bourgeoisie and maintain capitalism. They produce nothing as a proletarian does, only ensure through threat of force that others are compliant and produce. And, on a completely other aspect, cops are smug arrogant arsholes who willingly fuck over people's lives daily and enjoy themselves while they do it. Fuck cops.

[Bronco]

As a general rule, the police (armed wing of the bourgeois state) have a higher bourgeois class consciousness than the bourgeoisie do.

They are uncompromisingly the enemy.

I might be being a bit dumb here but what does this mean exactly?

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

They are class traitors no better than scabs. Their whole purpose is to prop up the bourgeoisie and maintain capitalism. They produce nothing as a proletarian does, only ensure through threat of force that others are compliant and produce. And, on a completely other aspect, cops are smug arrogant arsholes who willingly fuck over people's lives daily and enjoy themselves while they do it. Fuck cops.

False consciousness explains precisely why the Bourgeoisie manages to fool the average policeman into being a shield wall against the rest of the proletariat. The police are part of the proletariat regardless of their purpose as they do not own any means of production and are employees rather than employers. Therefore they must work to earn a living.

There are policemen/women who genuinely wish to "protect" people, more so than one might expect. They are just as exploited as the rest of the proletariat by the institutions of society that socialise them to believe whatever will blind them from the truth. Speaking of dogs, they are trained to do a job and that is how they earn their food (read: earn a living). We can apply this in a similar fashion to the underlying structure of the police force.

Also, as much as I despise scabs, they do donate money each month to their union. Surely the union should use this money to create a fund for lone parent families (as an example) that suffer a day/days loss of income? That way it acts as a safety net for strikers. If you look at it from a single mother's point of view, she'd rather go in to work because needs to support her family. Is it her fault for wanting to do that? No. The system is responsible for it is what I've worked out for myself so far.

[doesn't even make sense]

There are policemen/women who genuinely wish to "protect" people, more so than one might expect. They are just as exploited as the rest of the proletariat by the institutions of society that socialise them to believe whatever will blind them from the truth. Speaking of dogs, they are trained to do a job and that is how they earn their food (read: earn a living). We can apply this in a similar fashion to the underlying structure of the police force.

Also, as much as I despise scabs, they do donate money each month to their union. Surely the union should use this money to create a fund for lone parent families (as an example) that suffer a day/days loss of income? That way it acts as a safety net for strikers. If you look at it from a single mother's point of view, she'd rather go in to work because needs to support her family. Is it her fault for wanting to do that? No. The system is responsible for it is what I've worked out for myself so far.

This is so trivial though. Nobody likes to go around believing they are the bad guy and everyone likes to think they are following what seems like the best course of action. I'm willing to bet some chips that most bigshot capitalists genuinely believe they're all a bunch of fucking Galts holding civilization on their shoulders. Why do the self-serving illusions of cops deserve any less contempt?

[Jimmie Higgins]

How would he even arrest you or anything if you're walking down the street aka not driving around in a stolen car?

It's a pretext stop. They say "you fit the description" which is the pretext and then they search you and ask you questions and find a reason to arrest you. If they don't find anything, they act all irritated but then let you go.

If you are young and black in the cites or suburbs or Latino in some areas or "white trash" they ask what warrants you have, who your probation officer is etc, put you in an inferior position, treat you like you are already guilty and being arrested. This is cops "being assholes" - but it's actually a kind of logic related to how policing is done. They intimidate you and treat you as guilty so that then when they say "Can you spread your legs so I can search you?" it sounds like a direct order rather than what it is technically and "legally": getting consent. If you know your rights and refuse, then they lecture you about how you can go to jail for resisting or hindering investigations - they don't actually say YOU are resisting or I'm charging you with resisting - it's all psychological "softening" of the people they harass so that people will do what they say with less resistance. Or they just lie. Either way, it makes their job easier if we don't know what our rights are or are intimidated - it makes it easier because I've read statistics that on average they police stop 90 people in this manner before they actually make an arrest based on a pretext stop. So this is why they are so cranky and pushy - to soften us up. If that doesn't work, they just lie or try to soften us up in a more literal sense.

In the NY example the comrade was talking about - they don't need the pretext of pretext stops anymore - a cop's suspicion is enough. Other cities are looking into this.

[Jimmie Higgins]

False consciousness explains precisely why the Bourgeoisie manages to fool the average policeman into being a shield wall against the rest of the proletariat.No, for cops, it's not "false consciousness" it's actually logical consciousness. The role of the police and the strength of the bourgeois are related - when the capitalist is doing well, he needs the cops even more to control the population because doing well for the capitalist means doing poorly for the rest of us. While teachers are having their unions destroyed cops in many of the hardest hit urban areas are increasing their ranks, getting new equipment and don't have to worry about austerity -- austerity is job security and full employment for the pigs!

As an individual a cop might be a nice person, a loving family member, etc. At the job, the cop might think "here I am trying to help people, but this black kid looks at me with such hate, that white kid flipped me off, and people threw bottles at me at a protest! Why? I'm just trying to do my job".

But then conversely, doesn't the black kid think "man why do these cops come here and search me for doing nothing?" Couldn't the white kid think, "why did cops have to take my dad to jail for half my life just because he was an addict?"

So I don't think we can just throw our hands up and say "oh well". We shouldn't let systemic and constant injustice and suffering continue for fear of causing some momentary suffering indirectly of our own. After the Civil War the old Southern Rulers were just a big collective Scarlett O'Hara crying, "Woe is us, what did we ever do as people to deserve such a fate?" and many did suffer, but that's not a good reason for us to not want the institution of slavery to be destroyed.


The police are part of the proletariat regardless of their purpose as they do not own any means of production and are employees rather than employers. Therefore they must work to earn a living. This description applies to the petty-bourgeois professional as well - police are not workers because their job is to maintain the class divide: in their labor, they have no interest in abolishing the system because they do not provide a service needed by the class like other professionals like doctors or engineers or teachers, they only fundamentally perform a service for the capitalist.


There are policemen/women who genuinely wish to "protect" people, more so than one might expect. They are just as exploited as the rest of the proletariat by the institutions of society that socialise them to believe whatever will blind them from the truth. Speaking of dogs, they are trained to do a job and that is how they earn their food (read: earn a living). We can apply this in a similar fashion to the underlying structure of the police force.Bosses, managers, bankers, all do a job and are men and women who are caught up in a system they do not control but must deal with.


Also, as much as I despise scabs, they do donate money each month to their union. Surely the union should use this money to create a fund for lone parent families (as an example) that suffer a day/days loss of income? That way it acts as a safety net for strikers. If you look at it from a single mother's point of view, she'd rather go in to work because needs to support her family. Is it her fault for wanting to do that? No. The system is responsible for it is what I've worked out for myself so far.Ok well first, there are strike funds and wages and often other means that strikes have used so that strike PARTICIPANTS can keep their lights on and get some food for the duration. This is less common these days because most strikes don't get that far and we don't have a lot of rank and file organization and tradition in the unions these days... it's a whole other topic in of itself. Second, because the union leadership sees strikes as a very last and unattractive option, they usually don't strike for long, the won't strike if there is any hesitation or lack of push from the workers themselves too. So most strikes in the US do not involve much crossing of pickets from among the union workers - unless the strike drags on, but like I said, that's rare these days. Therefore in all the strikes I've been involved with or followed, the scabs come from outside the union, if not outside the company's regular workforce. Sometimes they shift non-union people from within that company over to fill the spots, sometimes they will use workers who do the same tasks but work for the company in non-union states and ship them in.

But either way, these folks are crossing the picket line and hurting people who are doing the same job as them from having more power doing that job. While they are working a job they are also working for the bosses in a second way by helping the bosses more fully dominate and control workers. They are exchanging short-term personal gain for a long-term sell-out which would inherently make your own long-term position weaker. So it's hard to have sympathy for those without solidarity.

[Permanent Revolutionary]

Yes, yes we should comrade.

I'm sorry, but seeing as this seems to be the major opinion in this thread I must disagree. We, as workers must not not "hate" another group of workers, just because of the work they do, under the capitalist system.

Yes, there undoubtedly are right wing nazi-cops, whose only motivation for becoming a cop, are the promise of power.
But some have seen it as a line of work, and we should respect that.

PS: Although it would be interesting to see a poll which showed the political affiliation of police officers.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I'm sorry, but seeing as this seems to be the major opinion in this thread I must disagree. We, as workers must not not "hate" another group of workers, just because of the work they do, under the capitalist system.Hate is neither here nor there. They should be opposed by any means which will further the struggles against injustice and help working people gain more power over their own lives.

And yes we should hate the work they do because it is directly harmful to us both as workers and as radicals.

But no, they work, but their relationship to the working class is one of control over workers. Most middle-managers need their jobs and need a wage, but they generally are not workers in the same way. Unlike cops, some managers who don't actually have control over other workers might side with worker's interests. The only way for an induvidual cop to side with the working class is if he quit his job.


Yes, there undoubtedly are right wing nazi-cops, whose only motivation for becoming a cop, are the promise of power.
But some have seen it as a line of work, and we should respect that.What's to respect? Good job in helping to make homeless people and addicts and poor kids members of the largest prison population in history?!

There are no good cops just as there were no good slave-catchers. To be good at those jobs means to be good at oppressing people.


PS: Although it would be interesting to see a poll which showed the political affiliation of police officers.In the US? I'd guess that they lean slightly Republican because of past Republican claims of being "toughest on crime" which is also code for "most lax about rights and the leeway as well as legal cover given to police". But since the early 1990s the war on crime/drugs is Washington bi-partisan orthodoxy and so I bet the breakdown of individual officers is more 55% to 45% than some overwhelming lean to the Republicans. In police union election endorsements, it's sort of de-fault to the Republicans, but they also support Democrats - it seems like they just kind of play them off of eachother. In California there was a mini-scandal where the Democratic candidate for Gov. was recorded talking to the police union and promising that when he cut the benefits of other public sector unions that the police would be left out if they endorsed him.

But this is under realitivly stable social conditions and ones which are highly favorable for police in the US, so there probably isn't much need to be all that political when both parties are falling over each-other to prove how tough on crime they are and how much power they are going to give the police and courts.

Under more polarized conditions like in Greece however:


Greece's far-right Golden Dawn party maintained seven percent of the vote in the June 17 elections, winning 18 seats in the Greek parliament. Support held strong in one sector as figures show that half of Greece's police force voted for Golden Dawn.

To Vima (http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=el&u=http://www.tovima.gr/&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dto%2Bvima%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1093%26bi h%3D496%26prmd%3Dimvns&sa=X&ei=utjhT5-LENKt8QPdxcHaAw&sqi=2&ved=0CHEQ7gEwAA)published figures showing half of Greece's police force voted for Golden Dawn (Chrysi Avgi), a figure unchanged since the failed May 6 elections. The paper says this phenomenon raises "numerous questions about the political perceptions and choices of uniformed official."

Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/article/326980#ixzz27cqFuJyr

[Yuppie Grinder]

It takes a sadist to make a cop. You have to get personal gratification from controlling other people and fucking with their lives to make a good cop.

[Prometeo liberado]

I'm sorry, but seeing as this seems to be the major opinion in this thread I must disagree. We, as workers must not not "hate" another group of workers, just because of the work they do, under the capitalist system.

Yes, there undoubtedly are right wing nazi-cops, whose only motivation for becoming a cop, are the promise of power.
But some have seen it as a line of work, and we should respect that.

PS: Although it would be interesting to see a poll which showed the political affiliation of police officers.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Maybe we should walk up and place flowers in the barrels of their guns?

Should we be respecting them the way they respected the occupy protesters? If by that definition you mean respect than by all means lets respect the motherfuckin shit out of them. Over and over, relentless and unmerciful respect!

Yeah, I think you converted me.

[Slavoj Zizek's Balls]

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Maybe we should walk up and place flowers in the barrels of their guns?

Should we be respecting them the way they respected the occupy protesters? If by that definition you mean respect than by all means lets respect the motherfuckin shit out of them. Over and over, relentless and unmerciful respect!

Yeah, I think you converted me.

I must say now that I have changed my views after combining both what has been on this said and something relating to hypocrisy.

Has anyone noticed that the police do not actually enforce the law but take it into their own hands? If a policeman attacked someone during a protest, the policeman would be in the right because he has instructions to prevent the protest from becoming violent and may be part of an operation, and so above the law because of that. Police can literally get away with murder in the interest of "public security". What about when I defend myself or another person in the interest of our security? Evidently not reason enough, or was not in the past.