Aren’t Cops Workers Too?
The crackdown in Pittsburgh and the attitudes of the angry left
YDSers at the G20 protests
SEAN MONAHAN
There is no doubt in my mind that civil liberties were egregiously violated in Pittsburgh during the G20 summit last week. Peaceful protesters were arrested, uninvolved onlookers gassed, students expelled. Limbs were bruised, eyes were seared, eardrums were blasted in the fog of tear gas, nightsticks and rubber bullets. Watching some of the more disturbing videos of the incidents on YouTube, it is very easy for a leftist to curse at the screen, call the police “fascist pigs” and idolize the protester who kicks the tear-gas canister back at those who fired it. Indeed, it is too easy. To use Saul Alinsky’s baseball metaphor in Rules for Radicals, this amounts to shirking true gameplay in favor of simply yelling, “Kill the umpire!”
Although such name-calling always reflects poorly on the name-caller, what bothers me is not so much the fact that some of us of the Left labeled the police in Pittsburgh “fascist pigs” after the turmoil at the summit, but before it even began.
The police and national guard presence in the city certainly was complete overkill, and without doubt was orchestrated for the purpose of dissuading would-be protesters. The rows and rows of armed guards in riot gear lining either side of the street as we marched, and attack dogs tugging on their leashes and green humvees sporting mounted machine guns, had descended upon the town for the purpose of intimidation as much as protection. When walking through such a scene, it is so easy to look into the goggled eyes of those uniformed men and see the face of the enemy — the system of global capitalism, of militarism, destruction and exploitation. It is even easier to imagine when you see them firing tear gas into peaceful crowds, ordering students around in their dorms and making threats of arrest.
But this projection falters when you ask yourself the question: are these men enjoying themselves? I’m sure some truly enjoyed their draconian tactics those nights, but similarly sure that the vast majority did not. Let’s not forget that these police and national guardsmen weren’t there because they wanted to be there, they were there because it’s their job. Like most other workers, they simply did what their bosses told them to do. History has taught us that ordinary people in certain situations are capable of horrible things — particularly involving orders from above and survival instincts, both of which had a role to play in the mentality of police in the chaos of the G20.
After the protest, returning to the beat must have been quite a relief for these police. No more yelling, no more running, no more worrying — just making an honest living.
Indeed, antagonizing police is counterproductive for the Left. As the (often unwitting) defenders of the capitalist stranglehold on society, they are an essential group to win over. Nothing shakes a capitalist to the core like seeing the police he brought in take up pickets and join the striking workers. As low- to moderate-income government employees whose livelihoods are threatened by budget cuts, police have as much of a stake in the success of the progressive movement as anyone else. But yelling “fascist pig!” certainly doesn’t help them gain that awareness. On the contrary: yell “fascist” at them enough times, and they just might start to believe it.
With the election of our first black president and the unfortunate widespread misuse of the word “socialism,” the far Right has been energized like never before. A right-wing extremist organization of military and police called Oath Keepers formed in the past year and purportedly is “hearing from more and more federal officers all the time.” Founder Stewart Rhodes said of the Right’s strategy for combating the alleged socialist conspiracy, “Imagine if we focus on the police and military. Game over for the New World Order.” For a more in-depth reading, see the Fall 2009 issue of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report. These right-wing extremist groups would seem much more attractive to a cop angry about senseless provocation by left-wing protesters than one who faced polite left-wing protesters with a well-articulated message. We need to treat police like the human beings they are, and not like the system it’s so easy to see them as embodying.
There is no cause to treat law enforcement with disrespect. By stereotyping ourselves as angry foul-mouthed rebels, we effectively cut off communication with any audience before it began. And as Saul Alinsky said, failure to communicate effectively translates to assent to the system. Taunting police serves only to vent our anger and to give us a convenient excuse to cop out of the necessary organizing to build a powerful social movement.
The police at the G20 did bad things. They did these things because their bosses gave those orders, whose bosses told them to give those orders, whose bosses told them to give those orders, etc. The responsibility for the horrible civil liberties violations is distributed all the way up the chain of command, but a real big-picture analysis would suggest that the real fault lies with the system itself, for the same reason that capitalism has always spread with military force, breaking down traditional societies, forcing subsistence farmers from their land and into wage slavery, violently protecting the property of the super rich above all else. For the same reason that police lined the streets in droves when the march took us through the business district of Pittsburgh, and not an officer could be found as we passed through the neighborhoods of the poor. The problem is the G20 itself and the plutocratic world system it serves to perpetuate.
If those responsible are to truly answer for the crimes in Pittsburgh, global capitalism must be brought to justice. And that won’t happen in any court, but in the workplaces, classrooms and streets around the world. We can’t just shake our fists from the sidelines and yell “Kill the empire!” — we’ve got to get out on the field and beat the other team. As socialists, we fight for all workers, police and soldiers included.
Really great article. The concept of ad hominum has plagued humans even before the development of Latin and it is not solely at tactic used by the right or the left. In order to realise revolution, we must rework language in our favor, and create a discourse that minimalises marginalisation and more accurately defines the system in which we live, the people and their relationships to power. Very thought provoking. I’m going to post a few links to this article and mention it so all my colleagues read it.
When historically have police been an important group to bring over to the left? I can understand the armed forces, especially in a sane capitalist nation that has a conscript as opposed to a professional army, but cops?
That’s not to say that I disagree with your general analysis of the current futility of street violence and how it only serves to alienate those involved from broader society— given the current level of organization and class struggle (not in moral terms). Adorno’s writings on “actionism” and the more contemporary “activistism” concept are very important. http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Action.html (Hats off to anyone who knows why it’s, as my hipster friends would say, “ironical” for me to bring up Adorno in this context)
Police need to be examined in social context. Police are a mainstay of the capitalist state, part of what Engels called those “armed bodies of men” that are required by their social function to defend the status quo. Property status relations, the current inequalities, the current power structures… all that we all protest.
Socialists, especially socialists who want to relate to the experiences of minority communities shouldn’t be fighting for police. What’s next after we’re done defending cops? A union-drive for prison employees?
Sorry, a bit hyperbolic there, but the point is it doesn’t matter how much these people are paid in material terms, but their social function. They are class enemies if I ever seen ‘em.
I’ve heard this argument before and I’m not really sure where I stand. For the most part, I agree with Bhaskar. I have yet to be convinced that police are there to serve and protect the people. That comes second. They are there to protect and serve the status quo first. Until that changes, I personally have no interest in working to try and get cops to realize their role in the class struggle or achieve their class consciousness. Cops will more often than not side with law and order and crush any uprising or challenge to capitalism. It’s the police culture in general. I wouldn’t hold your breath on this.
The main point is that cops aren’t workers. They are human beings of course, but in much the same way that capitalists are human beings and are victimized by powers beyond their control.
***
http://theactivist.org/blog/beyond-good-and-evil
While it appears that the working conditions of proletarians are held captive to the caprice of capitalists, the capitalists themselves are imprisoned to market forces. Marx illustrates this point when he discusses the directors of the “Cyclops Steel and Iron Works” arguing with the factory commission that twelve-year old boys should be forced to work throughout the night. Responding to objections, the owner replies:
“But then there would be the loss from so much expensive machinery, lying idle half the time, and to get through the amount of work which we are able to do on the present system, we should have to double our premises and plant, which would double the outlay.”
Yes it may sound like the owner is a giant douche unable to see that his relentless pursuit of surplus value is ruining the lives of the young labor he is employing, but what is his alternative? Be altruistic, rebel against his interest to maximize the rate of exploitation and be undercut and driven out of business by less amiable competition? Leave both himself and his employees destitute?
****
I’m not saying dehumanize the enemy. I am saying **recognize** the enemy.
It would have been way better if these cops were in Pittsburgh last week:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/1331/arrested-development-hot-cops
The song “Little Boys” by The Professionals (Steve Jones post-Sex Pistols band) sums up my feelings on cops. Maybe I’m biased. My experience with cops on the whole has been mixed. Some try to do their job as honestly as possible. These last four years, however, have given me some negative experiences with police officers and other law enforcement officials. I have been stopped several times and questioned unnecessarily because of my complexion. I’m half Mexican. A lot of the assholes and meatheads I knew back in HS are now cops. That’s frightening. And, maybe I’m a minority here but I actually think police officers are paid rather well. The benefits alone compensate for any hardships they might have in their first couple of years.
You can add border patrol & customs on that list as well. I was detained on the NY/Canadian border last year and harassed for over an hour. That included verbal taunting and being hand cuffed and later brought into a detention room where I had to prove my fingerprints did not match whoever I was supposed to be. I was accused of being someone else. Based on what? They wouldn’t tell me due to the conditions of t he Patriot Act.
In short, I’m not sympathetic to a lot of law enforcement officials.
Police really are the armed guards of capitalism, who work to uphold the social and political dominance of the capitalist class. The subjective intent that some may have in becoming cops — to protect the innocent from street crime, etc. — doesn’t matter.
Yelling “fascist pigs!” and such is stupid, of course. Deliberate antagonism of the police is always stupid. But the social role of the police puts them outside the working class. Walk a picket line with striking workers and you’ll soon figure out why the cops come out — to protect private property, not to protect the workers.
In general, I agree with Jason. The police are the armed guards of capital–have been and will be until the revolution. That is their job. Yet they are working class because class is a relation. Like other member of the working class they have to sell their labor to gain access to the means of subsistence. I do not think, then, that they are “outside” class but rather they are class collaborationists who have betrayed the class they belong to. Of course, the success of revolutionary moments has often depended on cops refusing to work (with-holding their labor). And, of course, there are many different types of cops. People policing all kinds of borders and little micro-fascist cops policing thought. Deleuze and Guattari had some beautiful things to say about all this.
Not to take this into some weird sectarian terrain, but wouldn’t police be like technocrats, doctors, lawyers etc in the petty-bourgeoisie?
Btw I always avoided Deleuze and Guattari. I thought they were like Negri. What do you recommend? The Capitalism and Schizophrenia volume?
While cops exist within the wage labour system, unlike proper workers and even proper petit-bourgeoisie they do not further the *development* of society’s labour power or capabilities (by having a direct relationship with surplus value).
I think this is a thoughtful piece, and dead wrong. “Following orders” is no excuse, and progressive change happens when cops refuse criminal orders. Cops may be workers, but so are scabs, and any self respecting activist knows how to treat a scab.
Some workers are not our allies.
if you really care about implementing practical ideas to change the consciousness of the masses then maybe you should dial down the Marxist language and avoid alienating a security entity that nearly everyone has some degree of support for.
this intellectual masturbation is fine I suppose. just seems like this blog is full of pointless infighting. i guess it’s a relevant observation to comment on police brutality in a protest. but uh….why don’t you guys actually outlay some plans to be implemented. i think it’s fair to say that many of the basic tenants for a progressive vision are already agreed upon and there is an ample base of historical work that shows how class consciousness arose in different places in different times. i think when you pursue showing off intellectual prowess and pursue largely irrelevant infighting that you show more concern for yourself than effective means of disseminating and educating people on the basics.
or….whatevs?
I think you have a poor understanding of what YDS (and DSA) actually does and the real position the left is in today.
To begin with YDS chapters and campus activists are involved in anti-sweatshop campaigns, anti-war efforts, local union drives and worker outreaches, demonstrations (we had organizers work to help build the National Equality March that happened last weekend), we host panels, educate our peers, and have members involved in support for strike actions (recently NY DSA members were heavily involved in the struggle at the Stella plant).
Now, the left has been engaged in apolitical movementism for a long time… throughout our slow descent into irrelevance (not to downplay the role of objective factors). The fact that some members (we aren’t a monolith and are only broadly unified by our adherence to a few basic principles) are engaging in theory is a bit refreshing after decades of post-political movement building that basically amounting to hoping that disparate identity politics could be wielded together to form some coherent sphere of “resistance”.
Also, as unfortunate as it is The Activist is read by a few hundred left-activists everyday… not where a thriving mass movement is going to for agitation material. There is no doubt that some steps towards a re-foundation and unification of the left and the breaking of illusions about our present prospects for effective politics (both in the form of the inside-outside strategy or the building of microsects) are prerequisites for meaningful, relevant mass action. I like to think that some of the material that you malign on “The Activist” serves, at the very least, a purpose in at least getting a few activists to think critically about such things.
I think that the future may lead to the end of the left’s malaise and through this, an increase in consciousness and activity of a (larger) militant minority… but getting from A to B doesn’t involve just shutting about socialism and joining the Progressive Democrats of America or something like that. Old dead-ends — utopianism masquerading as pragmatism.
***
for an overview of democratic socialism:
http://theactivist.org/blog/archives/towards-freedom-the-theory-and-practice-of-democratic-socialism
what futile exercises
Then why are you here, “e.p. thompson,” if everything we say and do is “futile”?
I really like your site