********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

John Reimann wrote

Here's an article of mine on the vote of the Minneapolis City Council to disband the police: https://oaklandsocialist.com/2020/06/08/minneapolis-city-council-votes-to-disband-police-will-they/

------------------------------------------------------------------------

First of all, the move to defund or abolish the police department eludes and obscures the real problem: as John says, the class relations are going to remain the same.

And to add to what John notes here, the police have greatly increased in numbers from my childhood in the late twenties, when there was one cop in my neighborhood, walking a beat, and acquainted with and generally friendly received by most. That changed quickly as the Depression deepened, and with the coming of the patrol car and night sticks replaced by lethal weapons. And the police have been given increased latitude by the power-wielders over the years because the system has insurmountable problems in maintaining social control.

Just like the army, police are recruited from the working class or the otherwise 'expendables,' who are faced with poverty and have no other jobs available, and who are young, often rural and usually unaware of the workings of the world. Just like the army, in which I spent three miserable years, the police are taught to hate, then they're taught to kill those they've been taught to hate, and just like the army, then they're assured, as was Frank Sheeran in The Irishman, that the army looks the other way, in fact expects you to do exactly what you did, and you're home free, with a lifetime of PTSD. This in a system of rigid discipline, where the only answer is yes SIR, and where you're also taught that you're there to protect your buddies in a crowd control situation, whatever the effect on anyone else. So almost anything goes, and you know you have department and powerful police union backup. Above all, your mandate is to protect property, which absolutely doesn't mean house and property in a ghetto neighborhood, You're there to instill fear in an uncontrollable social situation. So who's going to call the out-of-control cops to 'protect and serve,' when they are most likely going to make things worse, if they show up at all?

The only possible benefit of this reshuffle that I see is to mollify the liberal elements in the middle class, and the less checked-out among the afflicted, and to force the police union to back off and make a few compromises. But how long does that last? And to what end? How long, for instance, have liberal and neighborhood groups tried to implement community control, with no success and no change?

Property, wealth and its unequal distribution, is the basic problem, obviously, as John notes. It's endemic and unavoidable in this system, where the poor exist in good part as a reserve army of labor, and as the inevitable result of any system of devil take the hindmost. And that's where the discussion should be going and where the pressure should be applied. Anything less is dragging out the problem, really just hiding problem and solution and making it worse. The impulsion toward increasing militarization of the police, as the jobs disappear, worker organizing becomes ever more difficult, and inequality escalates, is not going to go away under the system of capitalist exploitation and inequality.
_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to