ATS' attitudes with the police and Occupy: I think I'm starting to understand

In a recent thread, Kali was saying that she was trying to understand why a lot of the people on this forum seem to view Occupy as filthy hippies, punk kids, domestic terrorists etc; whereas the police are defended and apologised for, more or less no matter what they do. It's as though Occupy can literally do no right, and the police can do no wrong.

For a while, this seemed like a very puzzling paradox, but I've been thinking about it, and I think I might have figured it out. My theory on this at the moment, at least, is that the police are viewed as authority figures. A lot of people on ATS seem to feel that they require police intervention in their lives, in order to survive. I've seen any number of posts recently rationalising police brutality, as well as defending the authorities when they set up checkpoints at bus stations and such.

A lot of the people around here mentally associate the police with protection and a feeling of security, I am starting to suspect. The police make them feel safe. They also need to believe that the only job of the police is to make them feel safe, to the point where they are not willing to hear a word against them; because after all, if the police can't act as your parental figure and protect you from all the terrorists and the other big, dark scary monsters out there, who is going to?

So there is a determination and a craving to never view the police in a negative light, no matter what they do, because of the above. Occupy, conversely, are viewed as a threat. They are attempting to act in violation of the sense of order and security that the police provide.

A lot of the people on this forum (and in Western society more broadly) do not want freedom at all. Freedom is seen as extremely threatening to them, because it means that they would need to look after themselves, and define their own objectives, etc. Worst of all, freedom means open-ended situations, which means lack of control. Freedom means chaos. Freedom means a scenario where they might encounter, however peripherally, their own fear of death.

Said people will gladly give up every last freedom they have, and live in an extremely controlled society, as long as that means that they never have to take any responsibility for anything themselves, and they can feel as though they have someone else looking after them.

Because of that, Occupy will never find much support from the majority of the American public, sad as it is to say. Occupy are trying to create something which is the opposite of what the majority want. Occupy are attempting to encourage self-determination in people, which directly translates to adulthood, and the American people largely do not want that.

They just want to be protected.

They want to be protected from the endless number of perceived threats which they have been trained to see everywhere. They want to be protected from the terrorists, and the paedophiles, and disease, and sharp knives, and guns, and criminals, and "filthy hippies," and black people, and whichever other group or thing that the government tells them to be afraid of.

I'm truthfully wondering, how long it will be, before police are expected, whenever they encounter civilians outside, (including physical, but not psychological adults) to pick them up and put them in the back of a squad car, drive them home, put their bottle in a microwave, change their nappy, give them their blankie, and put them to bed. I am aware that that is the scenario which all of the rationalisers, and the justifiers, and the police apologists, and the people who beg for protection from the terrorists, really want.

They just want someone to put them back in their playpen.

You may have a point.

You have got to remember that due to the fact that this is a conspiracy site, conservative minded people are drawn to this place. What is generally the mindset of a conservative?

1. There must be some form of order and rule.
2. Love God and country
3. The government as a whole is not corrupt, just certain individuals within it.
4. To rebuke authority is almost equivicable to immorality.

Once you put all of those considerations into perspective, the picture becomes a bit clearer.

It actually makes perfect sense.
They like to keep us divided, that is why people are are generally against the idea of protesting, or do not see what is before their very eyes. At least occupy had some idea as to what is going on, Most people cannot say that. Lots of people continue to perpetuate the differences between the most minor of things. Like skin color. or sexual orientation.

(Most people -think- they know whats going on)

But the government, banks, and corporations do not have your interest at heart, they have eachothers interest in that spot (if you call it a heart). Like rats in a cage.

The OP makes an interesting argument, albeit not one that I agree with. I cannot say I have ever had an altercation with any police enforcement officer, indeed the local garda where I live are great guys to have around, although their numbers are sparse.

In order to try to further balance the argument, I thought it would be good to look at the various mottos of the police forces around the world, so see what members are taught are the values that underpin their organisation, and lend a hand to how their roles should be fulfilled in everyday law enforcement:

The NYPD: "fidelis ad mortem" or "faithful unto death"
Metropolitan Police: "Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity"
The Russian Police Force: "By serving the law we serve the people"
The French Police:"La cohésion fait la force" or "Cohesion brings strength"
The Australian (NSW) Police: "Culpam Poena Premit Comes" or "Punishment Follows Closely On Guilt"
and finally
The Canadian Mounted Police: "Maintiens le droit" or "Defending the Law"

Interesting to see that only one of the mottos even mentions the word "people" The NYPD motto is a bit open to interperetation; faithful unto death to whom or what?

Anyhow, just thought I would throw it in, see what happens.
Don't shoot me or get me arrested!

reply to post by Mufcutcakeyumyum


Well, here in the U.S, even the police in cities such as Los Angeles, who until about 25 years ago had good relations with the general public never use "people" or "public" in their mottos. What is Los Angeles' motto? "L.A's Finest."

reply to post by petrus4


There are still quite a large number of people who support the occupy movement. I would also add that many of the occupy haters are probably shills trying to stop the movement from gaining too much momentum. If it gains that critical mass there will be no stopping it, and they utterly fear that type of revolution. They have worked long and hard to establish this extreme form of large government. People a hundred years ago would never stand for the type of absurd laws and intensely intrusive government we have today. Add to that the declining economy and it's a perfect cocktail for mass dissent.

Their only hope to stop people from reaching the critical mass is to use the extensive authority they have established to enforce excessive conformity and reliance on the Government. The biggest mistake was to let them get this far. They release constant propaganda to solidify our conformity and alliance to the Government. They also do everything in their power to make you depend on them. They want you to believe they are too big and important to fail, if they were to be cut down to size all hell would break loose. They try to enforce this belief that "this is just the way the world works, respect authority and deal with it".

We never used to have this type of powerful Government with tentacles reaching everywhere, and we never used to have this unconscious dependance and trust in the "status quo", thus it was much easier to reach a critical mass. But now we have become nothing but spineless sheep sucking from the teet of the Government as if we were on life support. The United States was founded on principles of independence and control by the people rather than unaccountable overlords who suck the masses dry. A new system with more freedom was devised because they were utterly sick of the ruling royal classes.

However, getting more back on topic, I don't necessarily see the point of making this about protestors vs the police. I think it goes much deeper than that and it's important to see the whole picture for what it really is. At the core it has not much to do with the police, like I was explaining in the previous paragraphs. When people turn it into this battle between cops and protestors then it becomes this thing which can easily be demonized and opposed because people would rather believe that the police are always the "good guys". As you said, they don't want to compromise that feeling of security.

This is where the real problems lays. People need to see the true reasons behind this movement and why it is absolutely necessary at this point in time. The whole system is collapsing, and the lower classes are feeling it hard. The upper classes don't feel this as much and as such they would rather ridicule the dissenters and label them "fanatical extremists who hate America". That's a classic straw-man and diversion tactic, they would rather delude themselves into believing this lie rather than acknowledge the true state of affairs which people are facing today.

reply to post by petrus4


Good discussion, but I simply feel that a lot of the most vociferous about Occupy are just right-wing radicals, and anyone who doesn't accept their view of how society should be is immediately a "dirty hippie" or a "commie". It's an easy method of attack for people who can't think of any valid reasons to attack, and they're not gonna admit that they only stand for freedom and liberty when it means it's them getting all that freedom and liberty.

I think we have a lot of them here. They scream about the constitution, but want it for themselves. They believe in the freedom to protest, as long as the protest suits their beliefs.

That's why some people support the cops here, when it suits their political opinions and the cops are beating people with a different political opinion to them, it's okay.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


CO, I noticed you've linked to some writing of yours on here. I also wrote something here in January; a four part piece inspired by Amaterasu's writing. It's actually fairly relevant to the current thread, as well. Consider it a letter from the future.

Another Possibility.

reply to post by petrus4


Sadly enough, awhile back.. Maybe a couple months ago, I was invited to Occupy Tampa. I went as I have a passion for such things.
Yet when I got down there in Tampa. There where about 15 kids, all with signs about how drugs should be legal, and they where just yelling and sprouting stuff about drugs...
Okay...
So I tell my friend, lets get out of here.. This is not any message I want to be part of..

Occupy Tampa lost my respect, and support.

I have since moved on, and found better things to do with my time.. Granted don't get me wrong, I support the core ideas of what Occupy is suppose to be.. But human nature takes over.. And turns it inside out..

So what I ended up seeing here in Tampa.. Was a group of teenagers, with drum sticks, and drum circles.. Bare feet, and them using the bathroom outside like its cool..

Originally posted by zysin5
reply to post by petrus4

 

Sadly enough, awhile back.. Maybe a couple months ago, I was invited to Occupy Tampa. I went as I have a passion for such things.
Yet when I got down there in Tampa. There where about 15 kids, all with signs about how drugs should be legal, and they where just yelling and sprouting stuff about drugs...

I know there has been some of that, yes. I also know that that is not all there has been. There's both good and bad.

reply to post by petrus4


I don't think the majority are motivated by fear. I think its something more subtle than that.

There is a strong streak of conservatism on ATS, but I see it is mostly aesthetic rather than rooted in fear. ATSers like guns and muscles and embrace a cartoonish masculitinity that is associated with the police and military elements simply because "it seems cool." Yes, it really is that shallow.

I sort of see a semi-unconscious attute at work that goes something like: Smelly hippies remind me of my baby-boomer mom and my liberal teachers at school who were always nagging me to "embrace diversity" and stuff. I want to be a manly man with muscles and guns, not some limp lib who is always bleating about the need to stick up for women and minorities, making me vaguely uncomfortable and guilty for being a white male."

Its an infantile/adolescent psychology at work. But part of the blame lies with these liberal teachers and mothers who did indeed unfairly castigate the white male by imposing a churlish, overwrought political correctness that has been largely hysterical in tone.

I'm no apologist for the police, I will criticize them when I see where there's real brutality. But I will also defend them when I see they have truly done their jobs and all people want to do is bash them.

There is a fair amount of cop haters on this site also.

A good example of this is in one thread in which it was reported one woman had been arrested and handcuffed, so what does she do? She decides to run while still being handcuffed. The officer tazed her, she fell to the ground, injured her head, and is now brain dead.

So they do the cops haters do? Want to prevent the cop from tazing her. If that woman hadn't decided to run, she wouldn't have forced the cop to react in his manner.

But the cop haters whine and say he shouldn't have done anything and his actions should have been restricted. When it was revealed she was wanted for hit and run, they didn't care, they still blamed the cop. In other words, no matter what the circumstances the cop haters believe it's the cop's fault and she did nothing wrong. I strongly disagree with that, believe that if the woman hadn't ran, he would not have tazed her. She forced him to do so, the responsibility is hers, not the cops.

But anything to bash a cop. Nothing else matters but finding fault with the cop. You can't use reason with these people.

You also can't use reason with the pro-cop crowd either. The flip side to the cop haters is that no matter what a cop can do no wrong and will always defend a cop, no matter what.

Both of them are extreme views, and I can't stand either of them.

Each case needs to be examined carefully on its individual merits and flaws, and people should refrain from making knee jerk reactions until all the facts are in about the case. That's why I'm not commenting on the Trayvon case.

But 95% of everything is bullchit.

But make no mistake, when I do see clear cut cases of brutality or the police doing something wrong, I do want to see them held accountable for it.