most cops here (slovenia) actually do help the community they serve
i remember getting pissed on reddit because someone used a slovene police officer on a horse to promote ACAB while ignoring the entire backstory of the picture which contradicted their entire post
the whole world isnt the same as the US or western europe
AND BEFORE I GET CALLED A BOOTLICKER
i support neither the ACAB movement nor the corrupt cops that try their hardest to power trip over innocent people
You will not be called a “bootlicker” because you support think cops are there to protect you. That’s something reasonable to believe.
You will be called a “bootlicker” because you are in support of the state, which defends the interest of those in power (aka. political class, “the rich,” bourgeoisie, etc) and its soldiers, which are cops.
I mean no harm; I’m not calling you a “bootlicker.” You are a decent human just sharing your experience. I want to bring “the other side” perspective in a friendly way. I was thinking like you until I was at the other end of their macanas for helping other decent people.
The ACAB is a widespread movement in South America and has good reasons to exist since it is adjacent to Antifa. But the overall reason to hate cops is based on the argument that I explained before in a very brief way.
Since I abide by the movement, I invite you to check it out so you can engage more deeply in the conversation. For a starter, I may interest you in:
The excellent channel of Philosophy Tube (that has some fascinating videos of other topics, 10/10) and her video about How Police Make Up The Law (ft. LegalEagle) or this one Violence & Protest. Her work is highly focused on going in-depth to help you understand the arguments about various positions, such as philosophical dialogs, with a bit of theatrics to keep it interesting.
And sorry for not sharing other voices outside the anglosphere who cover the topic. It is just that they don’t speak English, so we can’t understand each other.
Again with the absolute statements, as if you and only you knew the absolute truth of the universe.
There are a lot of problems with current police forces, in Europe as well. These must be fixed, sooner than later. But again, most people know we need some institution to uphold the law, because most people aren’t naive enough to be absolute anarchists.
There are a lot of problems with current police forces, in Europe as well.
And this is what ACAB is meant to address. It’s not saying we shouldn’t have rule of law, and it’s not saying the law shouldn’t be enforced. It’s saying the current mechanism has serious issues that need to be addressed as a whole.
But there are folks in this comments, specifically the person I originally replied to, talking about how any form of law enforcement and a state is by definition evil, and falling very short of calling OP who disagrees a bootlicker.
Well, if there are faults and bad actors in police organisations that are allowed to persist, it goes down the road of bad apples spoiling the rest of them.
This is a situation where apathy is acceptance. And by and large police units protect their own to the detriment of the reputation of the so called profession. Which is more than apathy, its consigning it. Anything less than excision of the rot is allowing it to spread.
In authoritarian structures, the facts are dictated by the authority, not reality. When the authority and reality come into conflict, and you choose to side with reality, you are at danger of bodily harm or death.
Many people consider life and death to be more important than what letters and words mean, so I would imagine your proposal is simply impossible at any large scale, in any place where the people more inclined towards uprisings have already been killed.
The critique is a bit too broad to explain simply in a lemmy post.
I can try, but keepin mind that this will not be exhaustive:
The police’s job is to reinforce the current power structures and keep the people that currently are in power at the top. That has been their historical purpose, too. Dating back to the 1800s when they violently beat down strikes and workers’ protests. They are always “legitimized” by “the rule of law” without adressing how legitimate the law is. Speznaz, Gestapo and the Stasi all “upheld the rule of law”, but where highly immoral. The same goes for Frontex.
When the police acts immorally and/or breaks the law, the social structures most likely will prevent repercussions for those police officers. If you get beat up by police, other officers will pretty much always cover for their colleagues.
The image of the police’s job being to “protect and serve” is the result of active police propaganda (so-called “Copaganda”)
I see what you are saying, and while I disagree that the concept is to reinforce the current power structures and keep the people currently in power at the top, that is the end result of upholding the rule of law.
Eh, it’s mostly splitting hairs at this point anyway, the police uphold the laws as written by the people in power which usually benefits themselves.
That is fair, I find that it can simplify too much in some cases, but eh, I am very seldom in a position of power to have to actually answer these questions, so these concepts are purely academic to me.
gotta agree with you
most cops here (slovenia) actually do help the community they serve
i remember getting pissed on reddit because someone used a slovene police officer on a horse to promote ACAB while ignoring the entire backstory of the picture which contradicted their entire post
the whole world isnt the same as the US or western europe
AND BEFORE I GET CALLED A BOOTLICKER
i support neither the ACAB movement nor the corrupt cops that try their hardest to power trip over innocent people
Just a clarification:
You will not be called a “bootlicker” because you support think cops are there to protect you. That’s something reasonable to believe.
You will be called a “bootlicker” because you are in support of the state, which defends the interest of those in power (aka. political class, “the rich,” bourgeoisie, etc) and its soldiers, which are cops.
I mean no harm; I’m not calling you a “bootlicker.” You are a decent human just sharing your experience. I want to bring “the other side” perspective in a friendly way. I was thinking like you until I was at the other end of their macanas for helping other decent people.
The ACAB is a widespread movement in South America and has good reasons to exist since it is adjacent to Antifa. But the overall reason to hate cops is based on the argument that I explained before in a very brief way.
Since I abide by the movement, I invite you to check it out so you can engage more deeply in the conversation. For a starter, I may interest you in:
And sorry for not sharing other voices outside the anglosphere who cover the topic. It is just that they don’t speak English, so we can’t understand each other.
Take care, fellow stranger.
You should come to terms with the fact that not everyone is an anarchist and believes that any form of the concept of a state is by itself evil.
Police abolition is not solely promoted by anarchists.
That’s right. That’s the reason I shared content about why we have our position.
Just because your statement is true, doesn’t mean the idea that the institution of police isn’t rotten to the core.
Again with the absolute statements, as if you and only you knew the absolute truth of the universe.
There are a lot of problems with current police forces, in Europe as well. These must be fixed, sooner than later. But again, most people know we need some institution to uphold the law, because most people aren’t naive enough to be absolute anarchists.
And this is what ACAB is meant to address. It’s not saying we shouldn’t have rule of law, and it’s not saying the law shouldn’t be enforced. It’s saying the current mechanism has serious issues that need to be addressed as a whole.
But there are folks in this comments, specifically the person I originally replied to, talking about how any form of law enforcement and a state is by definition evil, and falling very short of calling OP who disagrees a bootlicker.
That’s who I’m addressing.
Well, if there are faults and bad actors in police organisations that are allowed to persist, it goes down the road of bad apples spoiling the rest of them.
This is a situation where apathy is acceptance. And by and large police units protect their own to the detriment of the reputation of the so called profession. Which is more than apathy, its consigning it. Anything less than excision of the rot is allowing it to spread.
The ACAB movement Americanizes other countries’ police forces needlessly.
ACAB states that there are inherent problems in the concept of the police. The first “A” stands for “all”, after all.
And the second “A” stands for “Are”! I like this game!!
Some tankies claim that Sovjet, GDR, or Chinese police are/were based and still shout “ACAB”, because they just dislike liberal capitalism police.
They should be reminded of the first “A”.
In authoritarian structures, the facts are dictated by the authority, not reality. When the authority and reality come into conflict, and you choose to side with reality, you are at danger of bodily harm or death.
Many people consider life and death to be more important than what letters and words mean, so I would imagine your proposal is simply impossible at any large scale, in any place where the people more inclined towards uprisings have already been killed.
I sm not sure the concept itself is bad, though I absolutely admit that I don’t know the stated concept of the police.
To me it is “uphold the rule of law”, but that might just be me hoping it is that.
The critique is a bit too broad to explain simply in a lemmy post.
I can try, but keepin mind that this will not be exhaustive:
The police’s job is to reinforce the current power structures and keep the people that currently are in power at the top. That has been their historical purpose, too. Dating back to the 1800s when they violently beat down strikes and workers’ protests. They are always “legitimized” by “the rule of law” without adressing how legitimate the law is. Speznaz, Gestapo and the Stasi all “upheld the rule of law”, but where highly immoral. The same goes for Frontex.
When the police acts immorally and/or breaks the law, the social structures most likely will prevent repercussions for those police officers. If you get beat up by police, other officers will pretty much always cover for their colleagues.
The image of the police’s job being to “protect and serve” is the result of active police propaganda (so-called “Copaganda”)
I see what you are saying, and while I disagree that the concept is to reinforce the current power structures and keep the people currently in power at the top, that is the end result of upholding the rule of law.
Eh, it’s mostly splitting hairs at this point anyway, the police uphold the laws as written by the people in power which usually benefits themselves.
My interpretation follows the POSIWID heuristic. ;)
That is fair, I find that it can simplify too much in some cases, but eh, I am very seldom in a position of power to have to actually answer these questions, so these concepts are purely academic to me.
https://www.enainstitute.org/en/publication/mark-neocleous-capitalism-was-created-by-the-police-power-interview-at-ena-institute/
https://inthesetimes.com/article/police-and-poor-people
https://www.enainstitute.org/en/publication/mark-neocleous-capitalism-was-created-by-the-police-power-interview-at-ena-institute/