this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
38 points (97.5% liked)
Anarchism
2940 readers
27 users here now
Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.
Other anarchist comms
- !anarchism@slrpnk.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- !anarchism@hexbear.net
- !anarchism@lemmy.ml
- !anarchism101@lemmy.ca
- !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Police having monopoly on (legal) violence does not mean the point of them existing is explicitly to terrorise people to the extent people are afraid to call them for assistance.
Only in places where they are allowed to become thugs is that the case.
Yes it is what you said.
You said they're there to carry out violence on citizens. That's not what the police are or should be for.
No. You're again thinking police are violent thugs everywhere.
That doesn't make much sense to me.
My wife gets sexually harassed at work... is she just not supposed to call the police? My car gets stolen... am I not supposed to call the police? I see a policeman in the street and I am lost, is it wrong to ask for directions?
I appreciate that the police may be far more militaristic where you live, I acknowledge that I'm lucky in that regard, but you should at least acknowledge that that stuff varies place to place. I don't think the belief that police should be/are only "violent labour" is a correct one.
No, you're still misunderstanding. Police explicitly exist to do violence on behalf of the state. That is their exclusive function, everywhere, at all times.
If you do not need violence against your fellow citizens, do not call the police.