Occupy Wall Street 3: Now What?

the kind of people who want to be cops

they gain their power from the demands that we the people place on our government. they exist because we collectively demand that they exist. they are violent because we demand that they be granted the license to employ violence.

first two points = sure yes. last point = eh, not so sure about that

we need a finance industry on some level and we need police. we don't need highly leveraged market speculation or police brutality.

― iatee, Wednesday, February 8, 2012 12:41 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

"highly leveraged market speculation" is an industry in itself. it exists because the mechanisms of capitalism encourage and reward it. we do not directly demand it (in the way that we demand road maintenance, mail delivery and police protection), but we get it anyway as a product of other things we do demand.

"police brutality" is a crime. it is to be expected that certain individuals will "screw up", will abuse whatever power is granted them. to the extent that this is what we're talking about and we have sufficient mechanisms to identify and prevent it, then it's not a big deal, socially speaking. to the extent that it's endemic, unpunished, denied and/or the product of institutional neglect, arrogance or corruption, then it is a big deal and we have an obligation to address it.

it's a mistake, though, to compare an industry with an error.

the industry is an error!

cops are just workers like any others who can arbitrarily whack you with a baton/tase you and pay no price for it.

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, February 8, 2012 12:46 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the failure of american society and government to adequately police its own police forces is not the fault of those police forces. it's the fault of american society and government at large. if postal workers were allowed to whack you with impunity, i'm sure we'd have a corresponding with postal brutality. we need to police the police. we don't need to demonize them as "the jackbooted enemies of freedom" or w/e.

a fb friend who is an OWSer has been posting tons and tons of police brutality stuff and I feel like it's really unfair to cops to overwhelm yourself with that perspective.

...

the industry is an error!

― iatee, Wednesday, February 8, 2012 12:54 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

eh, kinda sorta. those laws got struck down quite a while back.

Sorry, late to party.

yeah it's like saying if we had even fewer laws w/r/t political or police corruption, it would be 'an industry'

we need to police the police.

If you find a workable solution for the average person to set this in motion, please let me know.

iphones 4 all

Because afaik there really isn't a very good track record for the average American coming out on top of a "he said/she said" disagreement with a person in a position of institutionalized power.

first two points = sure yes. last point = eh, not so sure about that

― max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, February 8, 2012 12:48 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

could you expand on this? i think we really do demand that cops be granted the authority to employ violence, and i believe that this in turn enables most of what we call police brutality. we've become loath to demand of cops that they police themselves, and we flat-out refuse to police them externally. this results in a police culture where violence can be employed with relative impunity.

iphonesdrones 4 all

If you find a workable solution for the average person to set this in motion, please let me know.

― Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, February 8, 2012 12:59 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

some communities obviously police their police forces better than others. periods of outrage about police brutality are often followed by "clean up" periods where standards are overhauled and systems put in place. this does seem to do some good, though i don't think anyone's ever come up with a perfect solution.

but hey, if the occupy people think that they can effectively address the massive imbalances of power and wealth that exist in this country by means of civil protest (and i agree that they can), then i don't see why something couldn't be done about inadequate police oversight by similar means.

we do demand that cops be granted the authority to employ violence, yes, but I don't think that's the root cause of WHY individual cops are violent. in general, people don't do everything they are authorized to do, simply because they can.

xp

we do demand that cops be granted the authority to employ violence, yes, but I don't think that's the root cause of WHY individual cops are violent. in general, people don't do everything they are authorized to do, simply because they can.

xp

― max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, February 8, 2012 1:04 PM (14 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

actually i think that's the main reason they do!

yeah it's like saying if we had even fewer laws w/r/t political or police corruption, it would be 'an industry'

― iatee, Wednesday, February 8, 2012 12:58 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

??? my point is that the industry we're talking about (highly leveraged market speculation) exists because the regulations that constrained it were struck down. and because it's crazy profitable.

if there were potential for huge profits in busting heads (and i suppose there is, one way or the other), and there were no laws against it, then i'm sure it would be a viable industry.

my point is that leveraged market speculation isn't a mistake. it's entirely intentional, something to which we allow people to dedicate their lives. police brutality, on the other hand, is generally considered an error, whether a mistake or deliberate transgression. it's either an individual error (poor judgment, bad apple, w/e) or an institutional error (corruption, entitlement, oppression, failure of oversight, etc).

I don't think that's the root cause of WHY individual cops are violent. in general, people don't do everything they are authorized to do, simply because they can.

individual causes will always be individual, but in general, i think people do do everything they are authorized to do. and a little bit more. i'd almost go so far as to call this a rule of nature. the recognition of this rule is what makes the constitution's attempted "balance of powers" so brilliant.

police brutality, on the other hand, is generally considered an error

wow I totally disagree with this, it is a specific tactic that is used in specific circumstances to get specific results, with total collusion by all relevant authorities (as regards OWS and demos, maybe not in general)

“If their real target actually was the cops and not the Occupy movement, the Black Bloc would make their actions completely separate from Occupy, instead of effectively using these others as a human shield.

this part of Jensen's quote bears repeating and is in line with my own thinking on the subject after literally 20 years of watching people argue about this (and sometimes arguing myself).

with total collusion by all relevant authorities

I don't know about that, I'm pretty sure there are plenty of cases of rogue copes engaging in police brutality that isn't exactly supported by their higher-ups.

oh sure, but when you get situations like the cops during Seattle '99 deliberately beating the shit out of the first person on each prison bus that talked back, that is where it becomes an accepted tactic.

yeah, come on, when a cop starts beating someone/shoots somebody/whatever the tendency of the other cops present is to close ranks and either protect the cop or participate themselves

"brotherhood of the badge" and all that bullshit. you will never see cops argue amongst themselves about tactics in public, EVER.

wow I totally disagree with this, it is a specific tactic that is used in specific circumstances to get specific results, with total collusion by all relevant authorities (as regards OWS and demos, maybe not in general)

then we really have to work at defining terms. because a certain amount of a police officer's work is likely to involve the application of physical force, perhaps even lethal force. this is a big part of the job description.

we typically use the phrase "police brutality" not to describe police violence we find acceptable, but rather unacceptable and even criminal applications of violence by police officers and forces. thus "police brutality" is inherently unacceptable, transgressive.

if the brutality we're speaking of is institutional, then yes, it's typically authorized from on high, at least tacitly, but again, adequate oversight and constraint of police forces should prevent and/or punish this.

But thats not what I was saying at all, you are completely otm Shakey, but I don't think its as simple as saying that all incidents of police brutality receive "total collusion by all relevant authorities".

"brotherhood of the badge" and all that bullshit. you will never see cops argue amongst themselves about tactics in public, EVER.

― max buzzword (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, February 8, 2012 1:29 PM (14 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

agree, and it's a huge problem that should be addressed. but that's my angle here: address it. the problem isn't that cops are evil, but that we don't work hard enough to make a police force we can live with.

if the brutality highly-leveraged finance we're speaking of is institutional, then yes, it's typically authorized from on high, at least tacitly, but again, adequate oversight and constraint of police forces the financial industry should prevent and/or punish this.

oh so it's OUR fault? xp

we do not have anything remotely approaching "adequate oversight and constraint of police forces" in this country, and that is because cops and govt resist it at every step.

I know this isn't what contenderizer is actually saying here, but sometimes his posts itt read a little, "if we all ask nicely, the police won't abuse their authority".

we do not have anything remotely approaching "adequate oversight and constraint of police forces" in this country, and that is because cops and govt resist it at every step. we don't demand it. period.

― sleeve, Wednesday, February 8, 2012 1:32 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

cops and government resisted democracy, too, and black civil rights, and cetera.

my point is more that we have to power to address police brutality, if we care to. just as we have the power to address economic inequalities and abuses.

xp.

Well, yeah, but "address" is a choice word instead of "change".

dude we have been working to get a real police review committee going in my town since 1997, you ghave clearly never done any actual organizational work on this issue.

xp

have

Serpico was the only honest cop in NY, right?

iatee: though we can swap them in and out of sentences without eroding sense, i don't think there's any sense in which police brutality and highly leveraged speculation are terribly similar. from a social engineering standpoint, they might both be described as "tactics" i suppose, but they're tactics with very different ends. one attempts to fleece, the other to control. a well matched set, perhaps, but still quite distinct from one another.

Knapp Commission findings (Serpico) in the early '70s got us a NYC civilian complaint review board... in 1993.

attempts to reform the Oakland PD, including recent actions by the Justice Department, have proven er ineffective, to say the least. I'm not sayin reform can't be done, but it is a long, long uphill battle.

and then we had Rudy G for 8 years so u know

xp

jeez you guys i go apply for jobs with the national park service and the koch brothers for 10 damn minutes and i miss all the fun

like I said upthread, I count it as a small miracle that the OPD hasn't murdered anybody from Occupy Oakland yet.

xp

*literal facepalms*

you ghave clearly never done any actual organizational work on this issue.

that's ridiculous. people have been trying to disempower rapacious capitalism in america for ages, with little success. this does not prove that someone who argues that it's possible to address capitalism's problems is ignorant.

attempts to reform the Oakland PD, including recent actions by the Justice Department, have proven er ineffective, to say the least. I'm not sayin reform can't be done, but it is a long, long uphill battle.

this i agree with. same as everything to which OWS has dedicated itself.

it is a specific tactic that is used in specific circumstances to get specific results, with total collusion by all relevant authorities (as regards OWS and demos, maybe not in general)

i mean everything i know about policing in the war on drugs suggests this ~is~ the case in general--if it isn't a matter of deliberate strategy, there's at least a deliberate blue wall

contendo I never said "ignorant", I find your statements naive and I think you are overthinking and intellectualizing these issues, to their detriment.

as much as I love a good tactics debate, I have to go do a radio show.

what thread are we on again?

smtg about Kaputt i think

fwiw the new ubiquity of 'non-lethal' weaponry, studies have shown, actually make them more likely to be deployed against 'passively resisting' people, rather than as mere non-lethal alternatives to lethal force