Daniel Schmachtenberger asks a set of “Questions regarding law enforcement in the US”.
Below is the simple version followed by the complete version. I focused on incentives, and limited the collection to what I think you’re question intends: the social and political problems that expose the escalating frictions in the polity that are most obvious in the interactions between police and citizens given the police monopoly, which can’t be blamed as is the political conflict on partisanship.
– SIMPLE VERSION –
In UK a disorderly person on the A roads will result in a dozen police keeping distance and slowly de-escalating the individual (stressed people get tired rather quickly if you use that technique.) If I go to Germany during Oktoberfest, or Amsterdam on a sunny summer afternoon, or Rome any time of the year, or especially Paris, police travel in packs. In Paris they seem to come out of the woodwork by the busload. In Tokyo or Seoul you encounter literally legions of them with extraordinary discipline. In Russia they don’t need it because the men police behavior in the traditional way (as we did in the states until 1968). But they aren’t to be disrespected for a moment.
In all of these countries your ‘public rights’ are prohibited from dominance expression, or aggression that’s even suggestive. They physically remove people who pose a potential problem (don’t mind their own business). And their presence is overwhelming and produces security (See Carabinieri).
I’ve had a whole table of Spaniards next to me disappear in moments at October fest. Been accidentally surrounded by twelve Carabinieri when asking an innocent question. Been muscled out of a driveway by forty Paris police with machine guns. Hugged the wall in a subway as three Russian policemen rolled a pair of suspicious middle easterners, and said ‘Hey, Off’ to a drunk in Amsterdam only to see three police almost immediately lift him off the ground and spirit him away. And of course, had to threaten a few malcontents at a railway station in Hungary. The only place I never feel safe is the Naples train station, or anywhere south of the rio grande. (I’ve never felt safer than in Eastern Europe.)
The problem is the shift from “adult’ organized corruption, property crime, gambling, usury, prostitution that ‘disciplined’ lower level members, to the greater profitability and simplicity of drugs encouraging younger, undisciplined, and more violent lower level members. The adoption of youth “gangs” as distribution channels, while at the same time economic factors and political policies have eliminated economic opportunity of the borderline and endemic sectors. This has been offset by cheap, high calorie, (high msg), sedating foods, cheap marijuana, cheap pornography, cheap electronic entertainment, cheap communication. Easy access to sex and birth control, the dissolution of the family, and the near universalism of single motherhood. And further offset by socialization (desensitization) of the signal economy of these cohorts, and loss of political and social will to aggressively suppress and geographically isolate the direct and indirect costs.
WHAT’S THE PROBLEM IN THE USA?
- Creating A Market for Violence Instead of De-Escalation : Economic Consequences: Europeans use multiple (cheaper) officers, de-escalation, and time creating trust between police and citizens. Americans use few (expensive) officers for rapid submission, rapid capture, and throwing bodies ‘into the system’ generating resentment and fear. Eastern Europeans use traditional “family policing” as we did prior to 1964 in the states.
Creating a Market for Dysfunction: The Many Malincentives in the police and legal systems. Below I’ll discuss them in detail. Most are economic on one hand, and limits of human cognitive ability, and natural incentives on the other.
Creating a Market for Conflict: Incoherence of demonstrated human behavior vs policy (legislation, regulation). The policies of the postwar experiment have failed at every level in everything from education to the workforce to policing to the political system.
Creating a Market for Escalation: Lack of standards of manners, ethics, morals (excessive tolerance) vs broken window reaction to conflict – any effort to maintain high trust norms escalates to conflict mandating police intervention, which angers all parties. In other words we have migrated from cheap policing of manners ethics and morals to aggressive policing of conflict that results from the failure to This results in policing by the test of ‘don’t cause trouble for police’ rather than ‘don’t cause trouble for each other’. And that’s the fundamental problem.
Creating A Market for Shootings: Instead of placing low level people on surveillance and calling in a team when the person is mobile and vulnerable they stage paramilitary attacks on people in their homes that end in extraordinary violence on one end, and result (as recently) in killing innocent people, or attacking and killing the wrong people.
Creating A Market for Falsehoods: Lack of (reversal one) institutional integration (see intolerance of France, Germany) that limits friction and conflict. (Barrio vs Court). Europeans are unaware that our way of life is an expression of our (ancient) traditional laws and so we assume they are natural – they are not. Europeans are ‘WIERD’ (western, industrialized, educated, rich, democratic). When we talk we ‘testify’. We use ‘truth before face’. We are the least clannish people on the planet. We take the most responsibility for the commons on the planet. We are the most Aristotelian (scientific thinking – which while we don’t comprehend it, just means ‘court thinking’) people on the planet. And because of all this we are the most trusting and tolerant people on the planet. And unfortunately, we think this is natural, and it’s not. It’s the result of 3500 years of our dependence on one another for defense, mixed pastoral-agrarian economics, the inability to concentrate political power like the fertile river valleys, and to rely on vast organized underclass labor like every other civilization (although not as difficult as the subsaharan african territory).
This ‘WEIRD-ness’, our Christian tolerance, plus the natural tolerance of naval and trade vs landed and army cultures, in combination with the pre and post war social pseudosciences, and post-war false promise of endless growth, false promise of endless credit capacity, false promise of continued expansion of Anglo-American Economic Hegemony, or Globalization against the interests of competing civilizations, led to the 20th-21st legislation of ‘pseudoscientific’ social, economic, and strategic policy of which Police problems are manifestation.
This combination of factors has made anyone who must deal with police consider them, the system, and the entire country as a consequence, somewhere between uncaring, abusive, fascist, and out of control.
– THE COMPLETE VERSION –
PROBLEMS THE POLICE FACE
(1) Cost: police are expensive and patrol large territories in expensive vehicles with expensive equipment.
(2) Scale of USA Because of Cars: America (wrongly) made the choice of busses instead of trolleys and tubes; little pink houses, sprawl, and cars instead of zoning cities for family and multi-family apartments. Europe is small and densely populated. America is huge and sparsely populated. The same ratio of police to citizens causes vast difference in police knowledge, as well as coverage, as well as response time. Because police are expensive they do not travel in groups, and do not practice european policing of de-escalation. We have three choices available to us: i) high density and police with low demand for self defense, ii) medium density and sheriffs with medium demand for self defense, and iii) low density and citizen policing and high demand for self defense. This is what we see in demand for firearms by region.
(3) Officer Vulnerability: The use of single officers in patrol cars, rather than pairs or more of officers of different ranks patrolling together. The consequence is more violence because officers are under greater stress, because they are under greater risk. (If you travel the world the idea of a single police officer is …. ridiculous.)
(4) Force Escalation: Because police and their equipment are expensive, and because they are isolated in vehicles, they are trained paramilitary to use violence to obtain control of the individual and ‘bring him into the system’. Although we should emphasize that this escalation was driven by the conversion of ‘gangs’ meaning ‘we play basketball’ to ‘we sell drugs’.
(5) Prioritizing Control over De-Escalation. Partly because of this our officers are taught significantly more about restraining individuals quickly and harshly, and using weapons aggressively, whereas in the rest of the world they are taught to use numbers and time to de-escalate, and not manhandle the citizenry – which creates the resentment. Just the fact of having six to ten men around you when you’re afraid and angry tends to reduce resentment.
(5) Proceduralization Creates Irresponsibility and Hostility. Removal of discretion of officers due to the combination of increases in liability (failure of tort reform) and legislation and regulation dependent upon pseudoscientific claims about mankind, and the change in role of police into enforcers rather than defenders has eliminated the (traditional) ability of officers to function as mediators able to use discretion to ‘manage’ the local social order. The reduction of male military participation. The end of teaching ethics. And the breakdown of the family accelerated this problem.The end of religious participation (even if it teaches nothing other than submission to conditional authority) accelerate the problem.
(6) Political Policing vs Institutional Policing: Sheriffs are elected (‘citizen soldiers’) and will not enforce what they consider unjust laws. Police are hired (‘mercenaries’) so to speak. This was helpful when the state (federal government) wished to impose cultural license (ending of conformity). It was unhelpful once that experiment failed. It is not clear that policing like soldiering should be a lifetime occupation instead of one where many citizens take part.
(7) Complexity: Officers don’t know the law. They can’t. They just enforce order. The traditional citizen knows the natural law. But officers and non traditional. Moreover the citizens don’t know the law or their rights of the limits to their rights. And police abuse their rights whenever possible.
(8) Training and Trust: The failure to train citizens of all ages to submit to arrest and how trust the system. The only remedy to this problem is to reduce the stress of the suspect such that he is somehow rewarded for complicity and somehow punished for resistance. This whole ‘throw people to the ground’ has gotten out of hand.
(8) Accidental incrimination. Our traditional law tests for means, motive, and opportunity. But this applies to property crime not to political or procedural crime. One of the many subjects of today’s proposals for legal reform is to add ‘intent’ to means, motive, and opportunity. So the police can show up at your house, criminalize something you did by accident, or innocently, and throw you into the system. (This again, explains the ‘don’t make me come here’ versus public servant strategy of the police.) (9) Maximization of Criminalization. Police and prosecutors use ‘the system’ to maximize threats against the citizenry at the cost of their eternal hatred and mistrust. So people are charged with many separate counts for the same offense, and many are exaggerated, with the hope that the individual will negotiate rather than risk an unpredictable outcome.
(10) Loss of Returns on Truth. End of discount on punishment for telling the truth or confessing. We no longer reward people for telling the truth, and no longer reward people for not resisting arrest. And we no longer take the deescalation time such that they will tell the truth and resist arrest, and we do so because officers are too vulnerable acting in small numbers.
(11) Loss of individuals Juridical Defense and Disintermediation from Defense of the Commons. Under common law, no legislation, regulation or finding of law can be imposed without (easy) juridical defense. But the state has removed all manner of juridical defense, and reverse the presumption of innocence. Additionally, the state removed our ability for citizens to defend the commons, and monopolized the licensing of behavior. This was done to allow industrial pollution. There is no reason for the state to monopolize defense of the commons. This was partially restored with class action lawsuits but the range was limited. There is no reason that we can’t take the government to court by the same traditional vehicle.
(12) The Production of Police vs Citizen Stress and Anger: The law is also no longer limited to simple rules that reinforce natural law, but put citizens and officers in conditions of opposition, and misunderstanding. Legislative law is incomprehensible, where as reciprocity (natural law) is both intuitive and comprehensible – and is largely how our courts adjudicate offenses. Most Legislation and Regulation empowers the officers and prosecutors to intervene, whereas most adjudication simply looks into reciprocity (rights).
13) The Production of Social and Political Stress and Anger: Our current laws cause conflict because they do not allow us to act in our interests in defense of our lives, family, property, status, honor, reputation, and family roles – much less our businesses, and even less our norms traditions, laws, and institutions. This change began with the civil war and continues for the same reasons: voluntary disassociation and defense of social as well as personal investment is necessary if for no other reason that the combination of proximity and inequality damages both groups which rely on signaling for happiness , friendship, mating, family preservation, and economic and political order.
(14) Malincentives for Honesty: Therefore officers rely on manipulation, deception, intimidation, and force, to subdue an individual and ‘drag him into the system’. Whereas you or I only need to break contact, they have to bring people into the system. The reason is that they don’t have discretionary power (as do sheriffs and judges.) This is because they can get sued if they are forgiving but you do something stupid. So their only defense is to get you into the system.
(15) Malincentives in Prosecution: Escalation of Charges brought by Police and By Prosecutors (Lying). Police lie all the time. The reason being that they are not allowed to err. The reason cops must fear error is that we expect too much from human beings who are too often too vulnerable, operating under stress, and having to make snap judgements, using training that accelerates violence rather than de-escalates.
(16) Malincentives for Revenue: Revenue for a police department and justice system is funded by taxes, tickets and fines, and worst of all, property seizures. This has produced the malincentives we predicted. Up to 1/3 of police funding is from seizing assets. Either pay from the general fund or end it.
This results in ‘revenue enhancement’ initiatives that include expensive tickets for minor infractions by mom’s in minivans on one hand and requiring ten or more arrests for car theft before first incarceration on the other.
With police departments funded from seizures, fines, and tickets we have nothing but licensed corruption by organizations rather than individuals. (Note: Living, running, and consulting for companies around the world, it’s obvious to me how little contact one has with police in say the eastern block vs America. To the average citizen, police in cars are literally pirates. Street police are at least helpful. Sure, in third world countries they’re often corrupt.)
(17) Malincentives for Self Correction: Police retirement funds (and sometimes insurers) do not have to pay for police malfeasance and therefore are NOT insurers – the cost of malfeasance is passed on to the citizenry as the insurer of last resort. If this one change was made – that malfeasance must be carried by insurer and if not insurer then the pension fund – and that i cannot be passed on to the citizenry, then natural incentives of officers would rapidly change.
(18) Conflicting Complex Decisions: Police are in a position of high risk, high responsibility, and under multiple conflicting incentives for which they can lose job and pension for any normal human error. This is a no-win situation for them. So they tend to develop procedures that are the safest for them and their careers, by choosing processes that put the officer in the position of making THE FEWEST DECISIONS. This is the problem.
(19) Use The System vs Personal De-escalation Problem The police do not control the bad laws that they operate under. Their job is to bring people into the system and let the system and system processes do the work – thereby (mostly) using time and isolation for heated afraid or excited people to calm down.
(20) The Talent Problem; Police will not stay in the job if they have IQ’s over 105, so they hire average people for the job, because frankly it’s a lot of paperwork, and a lot of putting up with unpleasant people, and a lot of very high stress followed by very boring procedure. So for an average guy it’s a high income high status job – with decision making above his pay grade. In other words, we are asking medium skilled workers to make the judgments of high skilled workers, and throwing people into the system as a result, rather than the traditional sheriff who makes political, social, and personal decisions and is less likely to systemically generate animosity.
(21) The Knowledge Problem: Some police forces are run well and others not, and there is no requirement that police come from the area nor stay in an area and learn the ‘crook book’ for the area. Instead, better police forces hire and train better officers, who then take positions that pay more money in less ‘difficult’ territories.
(22) The Education Problem: Students in the criminal justice system are artfully taught about the chances in policies in the 80’s and 90’s and not the changes in policies in the 60’s and 70’s nor the economic and cultural changes that caused those two experiments in the criminal system.
(23) The Legal Reform Problem. Just as political systems follow capital concentrations and capital distributions because there is no possible steady state, legal and moral codes vary between two extremes. The reason is that the problems are unsolvable under current false promise. (Study the effect of ‘genetic pacification’ by hanging in Europe from 1200 onward and its effect on crime. The Chinese were even more aggressive which is why the justice symbol in ancient china was the headsman’s axe. But not the demographic differences in Far East and western distributions vs the rest of the world. Then research these studies of the cost of one mentally ill mother’s promiscuous reproduction over four generations.)
(24) Living The Lie: They must ‘live the lie’: The data is what it is and the cops know the data: Stereotypes are the most accurate measure unsocial science. Criminality follows the demographic distribution of the classes. Black Americans are disproportionately impulsively violent and will fight or run. Drug users are disproportionately unpredictable and dangerous even with bodily fluids or needles. And hispanic Americans are disproportionately involved in gangs and dangerous. And white Americans are disproportionately cunning and dangerous especially in numbers. In effect each group specializes in certain types of crime from the most impulsive to the most calculating. Southeast asians have made an industry out of telephone scams. Domestic east asians confine themselves largely to tax evasion, under-reporting, and petty financial nonsense. The police are the friction point between political false promise and empirical evidence of human behavior.
So police are under absurd irrational pressure. Where instead, we should probably have three classes of officers, at three pay grades, the top being criminal lawyers (proto-judges), the middle being today’s armed officers, and the bottom being de-escalation officers, and we should try to use numbers rather than concentration of force to deescalate and bring people in.
STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS: THE GENERATION OF CONFLICT
1) Anonymity Creates Limited Investment: Automobiles make a highly mobile population repeating the historical problem of military maneuver but this time at social-criminal scales.
2) Malinvestment in Economic Density: The postwar strategy of bringing people to capital (urban density) versus brining capital to people (territorial wealth and opportunity distribution) caused (a) destruction of the intergenerational family, (b) income disparity, and rewarded (c) the financial sector, the urban political sector,
3) Mid Century Political Conflict: The attempt to prevent the socialist and communist left from using unions to achieve at national scale what they have achieved at urban cores, caused the flight of industrial production to lower labor and less environmentally regulated industries – which was coupled by consumer credit expansion causing a multiplier effect of providing cheaper faster consumption while trading higher productivity work for lower productivity work and the resulting destruction.
4) Disproportionality (economic immorality): Despite substantive differences in consumption consisting entirely of (a) “Signaling Goods”, (b) credit capacity b/c of home equity, the postwar financialization of the economy via fiat (state) credit expansion without capture of proceeds (interest) by the state.
5) Preservation of Primary Asset: A High Trust (anglo-scandinavian-german) polity requires greater suppression of minor crimes…
( … Undone … )
The Common Law and Scandiavian-Anglo Culture is via-negativa, maximum opportunity, sovereign, full liberty.
Conversely, continental law is via-positiva and via-negativa specifying both what you may and may not do.
( … Undone … )
6) Suppression of Citizen Enforcement: the majority necessity of continuous suppression of discipline for failure to conform to high trust (middle class) norms by verbal(shaming, criticism), rallying (group pressure) and physical punishment (fighting) has been intentionally eradicated under the presumption that either (a) integration would occur without it (b) integration didn’t matter, has been false. Creating majority middle class behavior and the associated manners, ethics, morals and truth telling was the most expensive institution every produced in the west, and only successfully repeated by the Japanese-Koreans.
ECONOMIC AND INFORMATIONAL: THE PAINFUL TRUTH YOU WON’T LIKE: THE FAILURE OF THE CENTURY OF SOCIAL PSEUDOSCIENCE
1) The Century of Pseudoscience: (a) Post War Denial of Human Nature. (b) Marxist-Neo_Marxist-Postmodern-Feminist Denial of the Malleability of Man. (c) the (c) conversion of the academy from critical to hostile, from persisting culture to undermining it.
2) The Undermining of the Constitution As A Second European Federation; Post-Civil War centralization of legislation and universalization of norms despite that the continent consists of something just short of a dozen different ‘countries’. The civil war din’t create a country. It created an empire. And adding ‘diversity’ only expanded the empire. Yet empires have only one value – military and taxation to feed it. And that value has rapidly dissipated since 1992, and we cannot dismantle the postwar political institutions or the burden they place on us.
3) The Capture of the British (And German) Empire. Including Power over the Seas, London’s banking and use as a reserve currency. Between (a) selling off conquered continent to immigrants, (b) financing it with fiat currency, and (c) ‘stealing’ the UK’s economic empire and the Pound as Reserve Currency, (d) and importing the German’s second industrial revolution, Americans are of the rather odd opinion that they are somehow special instead of the ‘provinces’ that scavenged the cultural, institutional, military and economic value of the collapse of Europe during its civil war. America is no different from Spain’s self destruction from the windfall of Latin American gold; Athen’s self destruction from the discovery of its silver mine; Rome’s self destruction from capture of mediterranean trade. Wealth is bad for you if it makes your institutions, your mythology, your behavior and demographic distribution, no longer correlate (no longer ‘commensurable’) with your economy once the windfall is exhausted. So it is better to consider the 1830-1990 american experience as a windfall the Americans had nothing at all to do with. We have spent the windfall. China has done to american manufacturing what America did to European manufacturing in the 1870’s. And America is now in the same position as Europe pre-war – except the enemy isn’t our cousins with same values practicing the same rules of warfare under the Westphalian peace, but an ancient enemy with very different values completely hostile to everything in our civilization from it’s foundations to its ambitions and it’s vision of man.
4) Demographic Pseudoscience: Pre-war (1940) immigration was intentionally regulated to maintain european dominance in the population. AND by the late middle ages, agrarianism, manorialism, aggressive suppression of criminality, led to genetically middle class population, that by the industrial revolution (1830) was (a) economically constrained by availability of land (b) and that vast germanic population could immigrate to the americas producing the optimum combination of anglo-dutch entrepreneurship and German agrarianism. (c) the same genetically middle class population that could self regulate (govern) (We forget that the constitution was written in both German and English for good reason.) (d) when we expanded immigration outside of the Hajnal line (Bipartite Manorialism, Holy Roman Empire) we were no longer drawing on majority middle class populations limited by territorial-agricultural constraints. As a result we lost cities, then the northeast, then Chicago, to the precise damage that was predicted by the protestants. We can complain about the Scots-Irish of the south but they fill our military where Scandinavians escape it at all costs, and Germans avoid it if they can, and the New England WASPS fled to south and midwest when immigration drove up the cost of land – and the absolute nuclear family requires land and is high investment, but it’s high investment in training for the production of commons, rather than for individual achievement. This concept is again lost because it was practiced normatively not enforced institutionally.
5) Economic Pseudoscience: Escalating Post-War “utopian” (Left) presumption of unlimited growth, b/c of (a) expansion of fiat credit, (b) coupling of fiat credit, end of intergenerational saving and transfer (c) spending down of what had been intergenerational savings, (d) false promise of soviet experiment spread to USA by design (e) american ability to manufacture expensive low quality goods without competition in the world, (f) all of which ended by the 1970’s, and was escalated dramatically when in the 1990’s the Chinese abandoned communism and adopted the combination of strong (fascist) state using consumer capitalism rather than soviet model discounted labor depleting manufacturing, and the Indian ‘investment’ in anglo civilization was added to the market by the internet depleting the clerical. It was exacerbated at the bottom by the immigration of third world labor – especially post ’92. And at the top by the university systems false claim that immigrant talent was needed rather than that they wanted to perpetuate the myth of growth with cheap foreign research labor. Add these leftist mistakes to the right mistake of trying to expand ownership creating the housing boom and bust, and the false recovery of the 00’s, and the present consequence of all of the above, and we have today’s broken economy, broken social order, and broken political order.
PAINFUL TRUTH YOU WILL DISLIKE EVEN MORE
1) Our Material Differences: Genders, Classes, Sub-races, and Races differ primarily by three developmental axis, that have extraordinary consequences for (a) education and (b) socialization, (c) normative demands , (d) and therefore political demands – because of the demand for the production of suitable (necessary) commons.
… i) Degree of neoteny. Some groups mature faster and deeper than other groups. Slower development crates less impulsivity – greater agency (temperate). Faster development creates greater chances of surviving in disease gradients (tropical). Neoteny is associated with youth and fertility (female) and as such humans select for neoteny. And group expansion is spread by males venturing into external territories and mating with local females. This is extremely evident in both the western IE expansion, the Han expansion, and the Ashkenazi expansion from Rome into Europe.
Neoteny is the primary axis of group differences and they are rather obvious with the cline of East Asians, Europeans, East Caucasians, Semitic Caucasians, Austronesian’s and Africans. This accounts for rather extraordinary behavioral differences from birth forward, given our rates, and depths of maturity. Why? We domesticated ourselves just like plants and animals. And we are domesticated by the same pathways as animals: neoteny.
… ii) Direction of Sexual Dimorphism: Some groups favor the female cognitive and physical biases, and some favor the male cognitive biases, and some are more cognitively and physically dimorphic in general. This results in fairly large differences in the infant, child, teen, adult, and late adult differences in behavior and performance. We see this expressed as differences in (a) verbal and non-verbal capacity of groups (b) the conflict strategy of different groups (an area I work in), (c) when sexes, classes, and groups peak. This latter difference is something we’ve recently discovered, when East Asian university excellences peak and European and Ashkenazi don’t.
… iii) Demographic Distribution. Success at the agrarian, legal, and credit suppression of reproduction of the underclasses and as a consequence the relative scale of the underclass and therefore the median of the group’s distribution, and the norms and commons suitable to that distribution, and the subsequent evolution of a majority middle class population and majority middle class norms, traditions, values, customs, laws, and institutions that make prosperity, the political franchise, and redistribution possible. … iv) Market Value. All the above combine into differences in individual, class, group, sub race, racial sexual, social, economic, political market value. Growth and False Growth by Credit Expansion, and False Growth by Immigration all serve to temporarily mask differences in our market values – until the necessary eventual reorganization (contraction) re-exposes (restores) the utility of kin selection within each group in the pursuit of political power to circumvent our different market values. (This behavior is rather obvious in dating site and marriage data – which follows predictable curves.)
2) Abandoning our Lower Classes Forced integration (a) destroyed the emerging leadership of the emerging black middle class who ‘defected’ leaving their (vast) underclasses behind. (b) leaving economic wealth as the only means of obtaining access to schools with positive academic, social, and political learning environments, and made it impossible for white lower income classes to insulate themselves from non-white lower genetic classes.
3) Abandoning The Source of Our Economic Institutional, and Cultural Advantage: A high trust low crime, highly redistributive, democratic and apolitical polity requires genetic, normative, and cultural homogeneity, a majority middle class, institutionalized ‘mindfulness’ by suppression of impulse (religion, or a substitute), an independent judiciary, and rule of law by the natural law of reciprocity (Tort) with minimum deviation therefrom, and the empowerment of citizens to do the ‘majority of the policing’ both for manners, ethics morals, norms, and laws. (Otherwise favelas are a deterministic consequence.)
4) Utopian Denial Of Repetition of History: The social pseudoscience of the 20th century especially the latter half, has destroyed western civilization one city at a time – and it’s still continuing. We aren’t collapsing like Rome from our capital – although we’re collapsing at the same rate (about 70 years). We’re collapsing like the Justinian plague. From the international cities outward. No Great Migration Has Ever Occurred Without Collapse.
1) Failure of Basic Education: Why can you get out of grade school and not know (a) how to testify truthfully (tell the truth), (b) the basic law of tort and contract- i.e.; ethics (c) how to run a checkbook, (d) the two circuit monetary system (d) basic (very simple) micro and macro Econ, (e) the limits of democratic “calculation”.
2) Failure of Method of Education: If western civilization’s great achievements including truth, law, politics, reason, science, medicine, and technology, boil down to Adversarialism (competition) in all walks of life, why did we give up teaching Adversarialism (masculine) and convert not just to Negotiation and Trade (neutral), but we went all the way to Undermining (the feminine means of conflict)?
Answer: The industrialization of ignorance: Marxism to undermine the market compromise between the classes; Neo-Marxism to undermine heroism, excellence, beauty; Postmodernism to undermine truth, trade, and reciprocity, feminism to undermine the compromise between the genders, the intergenerational family and intergenerational asset production – collectively these produced the art of undermining civilization from within. They repeat the christian destruction of the Ancient World from within, and the we are now repeating the creation of the dark ages by false promise of salvation from physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe.
Always and Everywhere, diversity increases friction, increase demand for more suitable commons for the group’s distributions, increases demand for access to political power to resolve it, and generates demand for authority to maintain the status quo, and authority is antithetical to high trust, high velocity, wealthy, peaceful, democratic polities, under the simple natural law of sovereignty and reciprocity we mistakenly refer to under the philosophical sophism of ‘individualism’.
When instead, it’s intergenerational familism in political policy and individual sovereignty under the law, producing the least friction by the optimum conformity: Truth.
The future is not Star Trek. It is not shining cities. The future is Brazil, Mexico, Lebanon, Yemen, Bangladesh. The future is not a global order. It is a divided United States and Europe, against a Russia fearful for her existence, a homogenous china restoring her tradition of incrementalism by delay and deceit, a reemergent re-expansionist islam, both lacking any ethical or moral limits at all. And the only people on earth right now who understand this and act accordingly are the Chinese and the Korean-Japanese, with the Indians having just changed from tolerant globalists to intolerant nationalists – because they see what has happened to us.
Moreover, the USA is no longer capable of continuing the policing and administration of international finance, transport, and trade given the end of the age of navies, and loss of anglo-european institutional, economic and technological advantage. And the USA is no longer dependent upon foreign energy production. Instead we have the world’s best and largest farmland. And we have greater strategic interests in world instability from which we are insulated, than we do in continuing to destroy the reproduction of our ancestral advantage of a majority genetic middle class in exchange for financing the world patterns of finance, transport, and trade.
As a result:
- The Russians, the Intermarium, the remains of the Holy Roman Empire and the Catholic states will be forced to strategically integrate what the Anglosphere has resisted: the unification of Russian resources, German technology, and Catholic labor and markets.
- The anglo-sphere will be forced to integrate – although parts of Canada appear lost.
- Turkey is in the process of ending it’s position as a torn country with the USA’s withdrawal of nuclear forces the last step in dissolution.
- The Middle East will see multiple centers of power between an advanced turkey, a militant Iran-Iraq with Iran trying to seize the Saudi oil fields in the gulf so that they can create the world’s bourse, and copy Saudi wealth. And a resistant Saudi-Egypt-Israel will try to find allies until they must have a war to stop Iran.
- And Pakistan-Afghanistan will continue their efforts to colonize the north of India, and India will resist.
- China will continue her historical colonization of tibet, Mongolia, and then north into Siberian Russia in ‘defense’ justified as always as pursuit of ‘harmony’ (authoritarianism) regardless of cost – because the Chinese failed to solve the problem of natural law, truthful speech, trust, responsibility for the commons, and institutions.
And the world will continue apace after the brief British imperial attempt to create a middle class majority marketplace of the world – ending the enlightenment’s false promise of an Aristocracy of Everyone that Europeans sought to produce as foolishly as the Muslims an underclass of everyone, and the Chinese a ‘harmony’ of everyone.
I hope this was helpful.
The Propertarian Institute
. . .
Daniel’s Original Post Follows:
Questions regarding law enforcement in the US:
1. What is working well regarding US policing forces?
2. What is wrong with the systems, policies, training, staffing, and regulation of the police forces in the US currently?
3. Was the US police force better at some point in the past? If so, when and how? And what led to it becoming worse?
4. How uneven are the answers to these questions for different policing forces within the US, eg, between different cities, states, and branches? (Including US marshals, state patrol, SWAT, ICE officers, national guard, CPS, etc.) Which could be said to have the most and least effectiveness, most and least integrity? And why is that?
5. Which countries have the best policing forces? What about them should be considered a good model? Why is that more able to happen there than here?
6. What would an ideal police force look like? In an idealized world where we also have good mental health care, education, economics, culture, and the various factors that condition criminality vs civility in people…and in this world where we have all the background issues we have and we are asking how policing could be improved with the context as is?
7. Are effectiveness at crime mitigation and civility in process inexorably inversely proportional? Or are there examples that are better at both? If so, what is required for that?
8. How has the increase in private security effected state run police forces? How about private prisons?
9. How have the intelligence agencies and legislative acts affected all of the above? (CoIntelPro, NYCPDIB, DHS, USA PATRIOT Act, FEMA act, etc)? What have been the effects of and causes for changes to police related jurisprudence like changes to habeas corpus and posse comitatus, people excluded from due process (illegal immigrants, suspected terrorists, etc.)?
10. How have foreign interests and activities affected it?
11. How has organized crime influenced it and how has that changed?
12. How about the war on drugs – affects on policing, influences, and agendas? Relationship with operations like Iran Contra?
13. Effects of and reasons for the increasingly powerful military and surveillance equipment and training employed?
14. How does gun policy, ownership, and training in a region affect policing?
15. Where have organized militias and/or vigilante groups or citizen policing efforts been employed and to what effects? And how does that effect formal policing?
16. Without fixing culture, what could be done in the short term to help provide better protection against domestic violence?
17. Where are there perverse incentives or structural flaws that damage the quality of law enforcement?
18. What role does race play in all of the above? What about red vs blue state dynamics? What about poor vs wealthy zip codes/people?
19. What is the distribution of views that various law enforcement agents would have in response to these questions?
20. Who are the best thinkers on these topics? What are some of the best resources?
21. What are other critical questions that need asked along with these?
These are obviously heated topics. Please only comment if you have well considered and non reactive answers. Thank you.