Kristian Williams - Our Enemies in Blue - Police and Power in America

Rodney Stark writes, "It is vulgar nonsense to be anti-police. Our societycould not exist without them."'>Carl Klockars echoes the point: "[N]o one whom it would be safe to havehome to dinner argues that modern society could be without police .... "4Dozens of similar quotations are available for anyone who wishes to findthem. Yet in one sense these particular remarks are unusual. I present themhere because they come from authors whose critical insights have beeninvaluable to my work on this book, and because they clearly state what othersquietly take as given. Most authors do not even bother to assert that thepolice are necessary, much less argue the point. rThey feel no requirement toidentify social needs that the police meet, because the role of the police, asthey see it. is simply beyond dispute. It is outside the boundaries of debate. Itis unquestionable; the alternative, unthinkable. In this context, the defensivecomments of Stark and Klockars read less like arguments in favor of policeand more like evasive maneuvers against the accusation that the authorsmight somehow oppose the cops. Their statements serve as a kind of loyaltyoath, a promise to remain within the borders of acceptable opinion.But the assumption that the police represent a social inevitability ignoresthe rules of logic: if we accept that police forces arose at a particular point inhistory, to address specific social conditions, then it follows that social changecould also eliminate the institution. TI1e first half of this syllogism is readilyadmitted, the second half is heresy. Almost no scholarly work takes the possibilityseriously. \It is a bad habit of mind, a form of power-worship, to assume that things mustbe as they are, that they will continue to be as they have been.1> It soothes theconscience of the privileged, dulls the will of the oppressed. The first step towardchange is the understanding that things can be different. This is my principal recommf'nn