Discussion about this post

User's avatar
King Beauregard 👂's avatar

Okay, you're making the claim that most bad police outcomes start with issues that would be better addressed by social services. Why don't you start by backing that up with statistics or something other than your fervent belief that it is so.

But even if we send social services out to handle social services calls, all that means is that the police will be freed up to crack a different set of skulls. If we should NOT expect that, I'd like to know why not.

"And try to see how your reply sounds like "I don't want improvement if it isn't perfect!""

No, that's just you deliberately misreading me so that you don't actually have to examine your own stances critically. You should be vetting your stances without any outside input, but here we are.

Expand full comment
Regret's avatar

Absolutes are always wrong (especially this one!)Every anarchist would suggest no law enforcement, the idea that you can't trust people with power is kinda our shtick.

My arguments go like this (Because anarchists talk about their politics like vegans about their diet):

1. Power can be abused. (And this is bad.)1.1. People suck at not abusing power (in the long term).1.2. People suck at determining who is going to abuse power.2. Power structures are like crystals: They grow bigger and bigger until they crush everything or shatter. (Both are bad.)2.1 Harm scales with power structure size faster than linearly.2.1.1. Conclusion: We should shatter them as often as possible, accepting the limited short term harm in exchange for never getting crushed by massive crystals (dictatorships, fascism, etc.)

Expand full comment
307 more comments...

No posts