Do we even need police?

[Cordel One]

They play a key role in US-backed coups, we can't get rid of them.

Ah yes, the infamous police coups. Have you already forgotten that being in the police is a civilian job and not a military one?

It was attempted in Turkey in 2016, and they helped overthrow Allende.

[Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire]

Ah yes, the infamous police coups. Have you already forgotten that being in the police is a civilian job and not a military one?

It was attempted in Turkey in 2016, and they helped overthrow Allende.

The army was doing the heavy lifting in those coups. The police were, at most, the side dish, while the army served the main course. So even without the police, those coups would've still happened with (roughly) the same events occurring.

Abolishing the police doesn't solve as many problems as you think it does.

[Cordel One]

It was attempted in Turkey in 2016, and they helped overthrow Allende.

The army was doing the heavy lifting in those coups. The police were, at most, the side dish, while the army served the main course. So even without the police, those coups would've still happened with (roughly) the same events occurring.

Abolishing the police doesn't solve as many problems as you think it does.

It solves a good number of problems.

[Western Fardelshufflestein]

It was attempted in Turkey in 2016, and they helped overthrow Allende.

The army was doing the heavy lifting in those coups. The police were, at most, the side dish, while the army served the main course. So even without the police, those coups would've still happened with (roughly) the same events occurring.

Abolishing the police doesn't solve as many problems as you think it does.

Agreed. It creates more.

[Sicilian Imperial-Capitalist Empire]

The army was doing the heavy lifting in those coups. The police were, at most, the side dish, while the army served the main course. So even without the police, those coups would've still happened with (roughly) the same events occurring.

Abolishing the police doesn't solve as many problems as you think it does.

It solves a good number of problems.

This might come as a shock to you that I haven't looked at the first half of this thread, but I haven't and therefore shall commit the cardinal sin of asking: such as?

[San Lumen]

The army was doing the heavy lifting in those coups. The police were, at most, the side dish, while the army served the main course. So even without the police, those coups would've still happened with (roughly) the same events occurring.

Abolishing the police doesn't solve as many problems as you think it does.

It solves a good number of problems.

No it doesn’t. A functioning society needs law and order. I would think the attempted coup in Washington would prove why police are needed.

[Nazeroth]

It solves a good number of problems.

No it doesn’t. A functioning society needs law and order. I would think the attempted coup in Washington would prove why police are needed.

and to stop those fools attacking the portland federal buildings, our state buildings cannot EVER come under attack again.

[Cordel One]

It solves a good number of problems.

This might come as a shock to you that I haven't looked at the first half of this thread, but I haven't and therefore shall commit the cardinal sin of asking: such as?

It will eliminate the existence of policing as a job in which racists and sadists can carry out their will, and the people will no longer have to suffer under the brutality of these servants of capital.

[Cordel One]

It solves a good number of problems.

No it doesn’t. A functioning society needs law and order. I would think the attempted coup in Washington would prove why police are needed.

Who else is gonna take selfies with the rioters?

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

i think law enforcement is need for a safe state (to ensure domestic tranquility, one might even say), but reforms must take place to end police brutality

[Nazeroth]

i think law enforcement is need for a safe state (to ensure domestic tranquility, one might even say), but reforms must take place to end police brutality

re-education my dear boy?

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

i think law enforcement is need for a safe state (to ensure domestic tranquility, one might even say), but reforms must take place to end police brutality

re-education my dear boy?

hmm if you're referring to reeducation camps then i'm afraid not

[Nazeroth]

re-education my dear boy?

hmm if you're referring to reeducation camps then i'm afraid not

meh, we can meet somewhere in the middle.

[Greater Kopmakia]

Any and every society will require police IMO, either to protect the state (authoritarian) or the people (democracy) because this world isn't perfect. It's not like with enough money and therapists crime rates will drop to 0%, and we can't rely on vigilante justice to fix everything.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

hmm if you're referring to reeducation camps then i'm afraid not

meh, we can meet somewhere in the middle.

compromise? in this economy political climate??? it's more likely than you think.

[Nazeroth]

meh, we can meet somewhere in the middle.

compromise? in this economy political climate??? it's more likely than you think.

My freind, we are much more alike than you think

[Sanghyeok]

i think law enforcement is need for a safe state (to ensure domestic tranquility, one might even say), but reforms must take place to end police brutality

While I fully understand your feelings that law enforcement can create a safe state (and order), I want to emphasise that police have never been effective in creating "law and order". Reforms themselves cannot end brutality and other abuse such as assault or failure to enforce laws equally- although they may be effective in reducing them, I don't see anything significant enough gaining political support anywhere (and such extensive reforms might as well be replaced by abolition).

The interests of the (bourgeoise) state and citizens also differ, but that's a post I'll write when my keyboard is cooperating.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

i think law enforcement is need for a safe state (to ensure domestic tranquility, one might even say), but reforms must take place to end police brutality

While I fully understand your feelings that law enforcement can create a safe state (and order), I want to emphasize that police have never been effective in creating "law and order". Reforms themselves cannot end brutality and other abuse such as assault or failure to enforce laws equally- although they may be effective in reducing them, I don't see anything significant enough gaining political support anywhere (and such extensive reforms might as well be replaced by abolition).

The interests of the (bourgeoise) state and citizens also differ, but that's a post I'll write when my keyboard is cooperating.

what would you propose as an alternative to police?

[Nazeroth]

While I fully understand your feelings that law enforcement can create a safe state (and order), I want to emphasize that police have never been effective in creating "law and order". Reforms themselves cannot end brutality and other abuse such as assault or failure to enforce laws equally- although they may be effective in reducing them, I don't see anything significant enough gaining political support anywhere (and such extensive reforms might as well be replaced by abolition).

The interests of the (bourgeoise) state and citizens also differ, but that's a post I'll write when my keyboard is cooperating.

what would you propose as an alternative to police?

a seperate but purley political vanguard group to ensure saftey and security.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

what would you propose as an alternative to police?

a separate but purely political vanguard group to ensure safety and security.

um, that definitely won't cause any problems at all

[Nazeroth]

a separate but purely political vanguard group to ensure safety and security.

um, that definitely won't cause any problems at all

They have to be on the right side of history

[Cordel One]

um, that definitely won't cause any problems at all

They have to be on the right side of history

It's a given that they won't be.

[Nazeroth]

They have to be on the right side of history

It's a given that they won't be.

That sounds like someone whos NOT on the right side of history would say

[Nekostan-e Gharbi]

what would you propose as an alternative to police?

a seperate but purley political vanguard group to ensure saftey and security.

Wut?!?! Hell nope. Why does that remind me of China and Nazi Germany?!

[Resilient Acceleration]

a seperate but purley political vanguard group to ensure saftey and security.

Wut?!?! Hell nope. Why does that remind me of China and Nazi Germany?!

My first thought was the Roman praetorian guards, which as we all know ends really well.