The police as workers

[Bala Perdida]

This year I took a class about crime and administration of justice. My teacher is a relatively nice person, he let us do things other classes wouldn't and such. He is very popular among the students. He is also an ex-cop and conservative. He told us many stories of the things he did when he was young, and of his work in jails and as a police officer. After hearing his stories, I realized that their job actually is important but must be heavily revised and reformed. Mostly his stories about seeing the worst in people (such as interviewing a child rapist and and a drunk guy who felt no remorse after killing a family) made me think about the job. I know there are better ways of going about this so I guess that won't be the focus of the thread.

He also talked about the adrenaline rush that comes with being a cop and that makes it easy to flip your shit and beat the crap out of someone. As well as how easy it is to 'accidentally' shoot someone, or kill them in a different way. I personally wasn't phased by these stories and continue to give no sympathy to criminal police officers, or any police officers.

So taking these stories into consideration, how do you see police as workers? Obviously they are workers acting against their class' interests and serving the bourgeoisie(is their a term for that?), but how much hate do they deserve? Most things they do are just a thoughtless routine for them like in any job, but what they do is not innocent obviously. We all know that police brutality is very common, and usually unreported. Keeping that in mind I always wondered what my teacher didn't tell us, in his effort to put a human face on brutality. My biggest concern is the fact that many people are becoming police officers for the pay and benefits. How do you consider those that think they are just simply doing a job?

So being a cop is a stressful hard job, but the institution has proven itself harmful and illegitimate to many of us. I personally have no respect for the police. I view them like I do the military or street gangsters. I sympathize with those that join because of economic difficulties and lack of opportunities, but I'm not going to clap for them when (or after) they harm the populace. Much less do I support these institutions, and their conversion of oppressed people into criminal murderers.

So in short I feel comfortable saying fuck the police, fuck the troops, and fuck street gangs. Although I still know how hard it is for the people involved, I can't support their bad decisions.

So what do you think?

[willwinall]

The police, troops, and street gangs all have something in common and that is that they all take orders and just do what the are told. To be a good soldier you don`t have to be smart you just have to be able to obey your superiors and this applies to police officers as well. So wen you say you hate cops, think about it, because they are just following orders and its not like they choose what to do. In a sense I think they don`t have a mind of their own because the police academy takes care of molding it for them.

[Naroc]

I said this in another thread with a similar topic again, but i'll repeat myself. My opinion doesn't differ that much from yours. They're people who're doing their job, though i don't like it. For me it doesn't mean i hate them as the persons they are, as most of them are doing it to get their bills paid as everyone else. Problem is the current system they're working for. I mean somebody has to fight crime. The other side of the medal is that they're tools of the state to suppress the people. Police violence against peaceful demonstrants should be 'nough to be said. Their main job isn't to protect the people, but to maintain the status quo.

I think the only task they should've is to protect society itself, and nothing more. But as we all know, this won't ne happening so soon.
Hate the job, not the guy who's doing it.

[Bala Perdida]

Hate the job, not the guy who's doing it.

Can't say I agree with that. I mean, if they're just standing there I won't be mad at them, but when they give me ticket for j-walking or get all aggressive when I question them, then they just found themselves a new enemy.

[Naroc]

Of course, some of them are total scumbags who are taking advantage of their authority. But they're also the normal ones (at least i made this experience here in germany), which is why you shouldn't generalize 'em all. But yeah, i never said you have to like everyone of these guys.

[Per Levy]

the point is that being in the police is not just a job, the police is an institution, a tool to keep the status quo and to protect private property. the police will beat up and shoot rebelling workers and also non rebelling workers for the ruling class. it doesnt matter if there are "good cops" or not they are totally on the side of the bourgeoisie.

I realized that their job actually is important but must be heavily revised and reformed

their "job" is only importent in a capitalist society, when the revolution comes the police must be smashed just as the state must be smashed.

[consuming negativity]

This is going to get me lynched by the mob, but the anti-police sloganeering, while fun to take part in, is based more in emotion than in reality. Everybody, in one way or another, supports the status quo. Buy anything recently? Not only did you support capitalists by buying their products, but you gave the government tax money that will be used to pay cops and soldiers who you all loathe. Do any of you have jobs? You're most likely, again, working for capitalists, and at the end of the year giving the government tax money.

Now, you're probably thinking "well that's not fair, not everybody can live outside the system - that's why capitalism is so insidious". Which, you're completely right, it's just that the logic suddenly stops when it comes to the police. Which makes sense for several reasons. For one, they're visible extensions of the state, on the front lines of the apparatus, meaning we have lots of bad experiences with them. And many of them are stupid dickheads due to the nature of the profession attracting a certain type of people. However, that they're supporting the state either directly or indirectly doesn't really matter very much when you consider that all of us do it. An argument can be made to say "well they didn't have to be /fucking cops/, I mean come on", but I could just as easily say "and yeah, you didn't /have/ to buy an Apple computer of all companies"... which you would probably point out is just descending into bourgeois boycotting bullshit. And again, you'd be right, which is my point: you've got to buy something, and you've got to work somewhere, and the police give damn good benefits considering their job requirements.

I just don't see the choices being made here as being fundamentally any different. If anything, we should be trying to convince the armed enforcers of the state to come on our side given their crucial role with regard to the state apparatus... sort of like the crucial role that us workers play in regard to the capitalist apparatus. Having the army and police go against the real enemies would be awful useful in any revolutionary situation, so it might be better for us in the long-term for our movement to not jump on emotion-filled chants like "all cops are bastards", even if we have to kick officer asses in the meantime.

[exeexe]

By being a cop you get a lot of privileges. The problem is that other people are excluded from these privileges. For example you have the monopoly of violence and if you by some mistake overreacted and used too much violence the chances are you will not get fired just get a nice vacation.

Destroy the privileges so everyone can do copwork when its needed.

Also as a cop you are physically defending the exploitation that is taking place in our society. The cops can then say that exploitation is good because it has been decided through democratic representation that it is good.
But a national majority should never have the political power to decide over a national minority that they should be exploited. Its morally wrong on so many levels.

If socialist thinks they shouldnt be exploited then the cops should leave them alone so they can pursue their dream for a better world.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

This is going to get me lynched by the mob, but the anti-police sloganeering, while fun to take part in, is based more in emotion than in reality. Everybody, in one way or another, supports the status quo. Buy anything recently? Not only did you support capitalists by buying their products, but you gave the government tax money that will be used to pay cops and soldiers who you all loathe. Do any of you have jobs? You're most likely, again, working for capitalists, and at the end of the year giving the government tax money.

Now, you're probably thinking "well that's not fair, not everybody can live outside the system - that's why capitalism is so insidious". Which, you're completely right, it's just that the logic suddenly stops when it comes to the police. Which makes sense for several reasons. For one, they're visible extensions of the state, on the front lines of the apparatus, meaning we have lots of bad experiences with them. And many of them are stupid dickheads due to the nature of the profession attracting a certain type of people. However, that they're supporting the state either directly or indirectly doesn't really matter very much when you consider that all of us do it. An argument can be made to say "well they didn't have to be /fucking cops/, I mean come on", but I could just as easily say "and yeah, you didn't /have/ to buy an Apple computer of all companies"... which you would probably point out is just descending into bourgeois boycotting bullshit. And again, you'd be right, which is my point: you've got to buy something, and you've got to work somewhere, and the police give damn good benefits considering their job requirements.

I just don't see the choices being made here as being fundamentally any different. If anything, we should be trying to convince the armed enforcers of the state to come on our side given their crucial role with regard to the state apparatus... sort of like the crucial role that us workers play in regard to the capitalist apparatus. Having the army and police go against the real enemies would be awful useful in any revolutionary situation, so it might be better for us in the long-term for our movement to not jump on emotion-filled chants like "all cops are bastards", even if we have to kick officer asses in the meantime.

The knowledge that our society currupts everyone is not a new insight. There is a stark difference in purchasing food to survive or working for a wage and thereby perpetuating the system, and say, murdering a mentally unstable vagrant in the foothills or attacking striking fast food workers demanding a living wage and thereby perpetuating the system. Sympathy for cops is misplaced. Many victims of torture will tell you that the most terrifying thing about their tormentors is that once they go home at night after a day of beatings and electrocutions they go back to being a 'regular' person with spouses and children and bills etc. Do these people deserve special sympathy as well? Are they "just doing their job"?

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Police are part of the physical force wing of the state. Whether some of them might be nice away from the job is irrelevant.

"If you need help, don't call the cops!" as my great-grandfather liked to say, and he was a cop.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

Police are part of the physical force wing of the state. Whether some of them might be nice away from the job is irrelevant.

That's true. What's your opinion of the class nature of the police? Are they proletarian? I was recently arguing with some folks that people on benefits were still proletarian due to the nature of how they have to survive but it also occurred to me that the police perform many of the same tasks as those on benefits (filling out paperwork, for example) but also perform actions that ultimately are detrimental to the working class as a whole in their role as the armed wing of the state. What are your thoughts?

"If you need help, don't call the cops!" as my great-grandfather liked to say, and he was a cop.

What are you supposed to do then if you need help?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

I don't think it's realistic to never call the cops although I think it's possible to do many of their functions on your own that people seem to think can only be handled by police. It's unfortunate that the same people who hurt us do in fact provide some useful services like protecting children and victims of abuse (although I could provide tons of incidents where police ignore this responsibility when it suits them) but that is likely by design, because such a combination of duties produces all sort of confusing and conflicting feelings within the public, like what's on display in this thread. The capitalist who buys my labor is pretty nice to me too when I interact with her and has even fulfilled a number of my requests regarding payment and flexibility in my schedule, but those nice things can't change what our relationship truly is, instead all they can really do is play with my emotions and put me in a weaker position when dealing with her.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

That's true. What's your opinion of the class nature of the police? Are they proletarian? I was recently arguing with some folks that people on benefits were still proletarian due to the nature of how they have to survive but it also occurred to me that the police perform many of the same tasks as those on benefits (filling out paperwork, for example) but also perform actions that ultimately are detrimental to the working class as a whole in their role as the armed wing of the state. What are your thoughts?

I think most cops have a working class background, but I wouldn't consider police themselves to be working class. I believe there are small classes that exist outside of the tripartite working class/petit bourgeoisie/bourgeoisie dynamic. We can call this one the police class.

What are you supposed to do then if you need help?

That's just it, the first duty of the police is to serve the capitalist order not the working class.

[consuming negativity]

The knowledge that our society currupts everyone is not a new insight. There is a stark difference in purchasing food to survive or working for a wage and thereby perpetuating the system, and say, murdering a mentally unstable vagrant in the foothills or attacking striking fast food workers demanding a living wage and thereby perpetuating the system. Sympathy for cops is misplaced. Many victims of torture will tell you that the most terrifying thing about their tormentors is that once they go home at night after a day of beatings and electrocutions they go back to being a 'regular' person with spouses and children and bills etc. Do these people deserve special sympathy as well? Are they "just doing their job"?

You claim there is a "stark difference" between the behaviors of normal people which reinforce capitalism and the behaviors of police that reinforce capitalism. What is the difference, then? And why should I care about any alleged difference(s), assuming that they exist? I already addressed the reality that police are more visible and more directly participating in the systemic violence that is capitalism, but I fail to see how this results in anything fundamentally different than farther-removed and more common methods by which we perpetuate the system.

Moreover, when did I ever say anything about being empathetic, sympathetic, or otherwise to the police? Let alone saying that they "deserve" "special sympathy", or that they are "just doing their job". And since when did government agents who torture people even enter into this conversation about the rank-and-file police force? Of course I find many of the actions that police undertake to be morally reprehensible, but that has nothing to do with their relation to the means of production or their unique position as a certain type of worker in our society - which is the topic of this thread. Cops are not members of the bourgeoisie, but of the working class. Their class interests do align with ours, even if they don't see that, and they share with the rest of the working class a powerful, albeit different, position in relation to the state and capital.

[VivalaCuarta]

Police are the core of the modern capitalist state. They exist to protect capitalist property, and all the institutions and social norms that capitalist property has grown to depend on.

For the workers to take power the capitalist state must be smashed.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

You claim there is a "stark difference" between the behaviors of normal people which reinforce capitalism and the behaviors of police that reinforce capitalism. What is the difference, then? And why should I care about any alleged difference(s), assuming that they exist? I already addressed the reality that police are more visible and more directly participating in the systemic violence that is capitalism, but I fail to see how this results in anything fundamentally different than farther-removed and more common methods by which we perpetuate the system.

Moreover, when did I ever say anything about being empathetic, sympathetic, or otherwise to the police? Let alone saying that they "deserve" "special sympathy", or that they are "just doing their job". And since when did government agents who torture people even enter into this conversation about the rank-and-file police force? Of course I find many of the actions that police undertake to be morally reprehensible, but that has nothing to do with their relation to the means of production or their unique position as a certain type of worker in our society - which is the topic of this thread. Cops are not members of the bourgeoisie, but of the working class. Their class interests do align with ours, even if they don't see that, and they share with the rest of the working class a powerful, albeit different, position in relation to the state and capital.

Additionally, most people, even if they've had terrible experiences with the police, see the police as necessary and are very much in favor of doing something to handle the problems of child molestation, serial killing, and other reprehensible acts. Refusing to acknowledge this aspect of policing and instead resorting to ACAB sloganeering does us no favors, but instead just makes it easy to dismiss our position as nonsense. Hard-line moral posturing doesn't make the police any less likely to follow orders that involve mowing us down in the streets or make our movement stronger in any way, and therefore I'm not interested in it.

How do our interests and theirs align? No one is drafted into police work, it's a volunteer position that requires a lot of prerequisites to be considered for, which implies that the individual must desperately want to perform that specific function within our society for whatever reason.

In a post revolutionary society there will be no property rights for them to protect or working class to keep in line, so their function, which they clearly are very keen on, will not even be possible let alone desirable. So no I do not believe their interests align with mine at all as I want communism while they clearly desire police work.

I've already addressed the useful functions they provide in my other post, it doesn't change anything. I agree with Danielle that the security services represent a separate class outside of the prole/bourgeois dynamic.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Proletarians are people who are forced to sell their labour-power, either overly or through ideologically-concealed means (household labour etc.), and who participate in the capitalist production of exchange-values.

The police are part of the state apparatus, a special organ (Lenin calls them a special body of armed men) of society that secures private property but does not participate in the production of commodities.

Furthermore, since the position and security of the policeman are tied to the existence of the police and the first act of any revolution is to smash the old state apparatus, the interests of the police are diametrically opposed to those of the workers.

[consuming negativity]

How do our interests and theirs align? No one is drafted into police work, it's a volunteer position that requires a lot of prerequisites to be considered for, which implies that the individual must desperately want to perform that specific function within our society for whatever reason.

In a post revolutionary society there will be no property rights for them to protect or working class to keep in line, so their function, which they clearly are very keen on, will not even be possible let alone desirable. So no I do not believe their interests align with mine at all as I want communism while they clearly desire police work.

I've already addressed the useful functions they provide in my other post, it doesn't change anything. I agree with Danielle that the security services represent a separate class outside of the prole/bourgeois dynamic.

No one is drafted into any civilian work either and yet none would argue with me when I say that we are compelled to work in factories, fast food, or any other occupation by the capitalist system. In this sense, the police are no different than anybody else - they wouldn't be waking up early to go out and do police work if it wasn't for the paycheck they get. They are compelled to work just like the rest of us. Yes they reinforce state power and capitalism, but almost all of our consumption and work does this to one degree or another. I've yet to see anybody make a convincing argument for separating police from the rest of the working class that can't apply to any reactionary member of our class. Supporting the state covertly, overtly, or however else does not suddenly change your relation to production or capital.

Proletarians are people who are forced to sell their labour-power, either overly or through ideologically-concealed means (household labour etc.), and who participate in the capitalist production of exchange-values.

The police are part of the state apparatus, a special organ (Lenin calls them a special body of armed men) of society that secures private property but does not participate in the production of commodities.

Furthermore, since the position and security of the policeman are tied to the existence of the police and the first act of any revolution is to smash the old state apparatus, the interests of the police are diametrically opposed to those of the workers.

The positions of many workers are put into jeopardy by the dismantling of the capitalist system, not just police. For example, factory workers will no longer be assembling tanks or yachts for purchase by the state. Millions of public sector workers will have their employer destroyed as well. This does not change their class, and it does not mean their interests are ultimately any different than the rest of ours. Having a job dependent on the state doesn't suddenly mean that a person has a vested interest in the perpetuation of capitalism or the state. The logic you're using could be applied to anyone given enough mental gymnastics.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

The positions of many workers are put into jeopardy by the dismantling of the capitalist system, not just police. For example, factory workers will no longer be assembling tanks or yachts for purchase by the state. Millions of public sector workers will have their employer destroyed as well. This does not change their class, and it does not mean their interests are ultimately any different than the rest of ours. Having a job dependent on the state doesn't suddenly mean that a person has a vested interest in the perpetuation of capitalism or the state.

This doesn't make sense. In socialism, workers would not be producing objects for sale on a market, so the entire "well no one will buy tanks anymore" argument fails, because no one will buy anything.

"Public sector workers" is also an ambiguous term that can mean anything from secretaries to cops and other cop-like beings.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

No one is drafted into any civilian work either and yet none would argue with me when I say that we are compelled to work in factories, fast food, or any other occupation by the capitalist system. In this sense, the police are no different than anybody else - they wouldn't be waking up early to go out and do police work if it wasn't for the paycheck they get. They are compelled to work just like the rest of us. Yes they reinforce state power and capitalism, but almost all of our consumption and work does this to one degree or another. I've yet to see anybody make a convincing argument for separating police from the rest of the working class that can't apply to any reactionary member of our class. Supporting the state covertly, overtly, or however else does not suddenly change your relation to production or capital.



The positions of many workers are put into jeopardy by the dismantling of the capitalist system, not just police. For example, factory workers will no longer be assembling tanks or yachts for purchase by the state. Millions of public sector workers will have their employer destroyed as well. This does not change their class, and it does not mean their interests are ultimately any different than the rest of ours. Having a job dependent on the state doesn't suddenly mean that a person has a vested interest in the perpetuation of capitalism or the state.

The reactionary boot maker or structural engineer or numbers cruncher will still be able to perform their desired functions in a new society, albiet in a fundamentally different capacity, the cop will literally be incapable of doing so regardless of his feelings towards that new society. Communism offers him nothing if his desire is to be a cop, which we can infer is in fact his desire due to the prerequisites I mentioned.