• MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Cops are always a bunch of authoritarian pieces of shit who can’t stand being criticized for being the violent fucking thugs they are.

    Such blanket statements about all the cops is intellectual dishonesty at best. While there are shitty people working in all professions, and having some police officers shitty means very bad things can happen, the majority of the force is not that, as I am sure you aware. Yes, structural changes are needed, but this is not the same as calling all of them as bunch of authoritarian pieces of shit. There is crime in this country, and police does have its function and is needed by society.

    • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just admit you were wrong. Just say “Actually, you’re right, the cops were committing violence against striking workers first.” It’s not that hard.

      No need to split hairs or change the subject.

      • MxM111@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Not on May 4. And I did not change the subject - you did with the ACAB statement.

        To the topic: The bomber was anarchist. Labor was not behind this attack and wanted to distant itself from it. Thus they selected the September.

        • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re really dedicated here to handwaving away the violence committed by the police before the bombing and also handwaving away that the cops were asked by the Mayor to not interfere. Maybe, just maybe, if the pigs hadn’t fucking showed up, it would have never happened.

          It’s also handwaving away that only 2 of the 8 men put to death for the bombing were actually at the Haymarket event, and it was never conclusively proven that any of them built the bomb. They also never proved conclusively who threw it, but they put 8 men to death over it.

          Also, it’s handwaving away the brutal crackdown on union organizers afterwards. Maybe, just maybe, the reason the labor organizations acquiesced and distanced themselves is because all the businesses, property owners, newspapers, and government were busy vilifying them. How much choice did the labor movement actually have in the date?

          There was disagreement among labor unions at this time about when a holiday celebrating workers should be, with some advocating for continued emphasis of the September march-and-picnic date while others sought the designation of the more politically charged date of May 1. Conservative Democratic President Grover Cleveland was one of those concerned that a labor holiday on May 1 would tend to become a commemoration of the Haymarket affair and would strengthen socialist and anarchist movements that backed the May 1 commemoration around the globe. In 1887, he publicly supported the September Labor Day holiday as a less inflammatory alternative, formally adopting the date as a United States federal holiday through a law that he signed in 1894.

          So the labor movement is Grover Cleveland? And so it’s pretty clear it was because they wanted to prevent socialists from strengthening their numbers. Give me a break. Stop trying to rewrite history and get that boot out of your slobbery mouth.

          Also, finally, stop repeating “anarchist” like it’s supposed to be an insult. “Not on May 4th” is the definition of splitting hairs, chucklefuck.

    • mimic_kry
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Look, I kind of agree with your sentiment, but the historical event in question did involve what the commenter you’re replying to insists happened. I that instance, all the cops involved were assholes. In that era, law enforcement was tied to power by necessity, since only the powerful (read: rich) could start townships and such and afford to pay for law enforcers.

      But now? Things are a little complex. This is on purpose, as the powerful class has continually meddled in police affairs through lobbying and unions (ironically the police union is hilariously well funded due to rich interests wanting am army to keep the poors in line), and we’re (in the US) trending back towards police basically being an official branch of Pinkertons.

      Still, I’ve met good cops. Genuinely good people. Last year, I had a flat (entirely my fault. In CA) tire and a passing motorcycle cop stopped to help. He not only helped me replace it with a spare, he offered to call and pay for a tow truck for me. Truly a kind man, and believed in his social position perhaps more than the average.

      But yeah, that’s not how it is in most places. Even in CA you have sheriff gangs, prison guard gangs, corruption, you name it. Like I said, the US as a whole is generally trending backwards as of late.

      Anyways we need nuance. But we’re increasingly approaching a world where nuance is shunned or laughed at as missing the point, or being needlessly picky. Not only that, people seem even more desperate to feed into tribal groupings. Even on lemmy, you’re either pro US or pro China/Russia. It’s like people think they need to pick a side.

      Sorry, just needed to rant I guess. I just hope we manage to keep the planet alive while we figure our bullshit out.

      • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Cheers mate, thanks for the nuanced take.

        I don’t think most folks like me reject the idea that good cops could exist, it’s more that we’re so aware of how many bad cops exist (at least in the US), it’s one of those situations where good cops are run off the force (or worse, targeted and murdered before they can testify) or put up with so much bad behavior themselves that over time, they’ve become a bad cop, because they’re not stopping other bad cops. Even if they’re nice to citizens, if they’re covering for crimes of their fellow cops, they’re a bad cop. The fact that more cops aren’t standing up against things like qualified immunity when it’s painfully being abused or civil forfeiture when it’s abused shows exactly how little they care for the public and how much they care for their right to abuse the public without recourse.

        Unfortunately, that leaves most cops in the USA falling under the umbrella of ACAB.

        Oh, and the whole 40% of cops self-reported as beating their spouses. On top of the whole “Killology” mess that trains them to be an occupying force in their own cities. It’s really hard to make excuses for them at this point.