this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
1019 points (95.9% liked)

solarpunk memes

3788 readers
288 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Couldn't those community patrols be considered a type of police

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I agree with you. What would be the use of those patrols if not to police behaviour?

Maybe someone with more historical knowledge could expand on the meaning of "Black Panther style community patrols".

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 weeks ago

What we need is a police force of negotiators and social workers.

A police officer should only get a job after a mandatory time spent as a social worker and a expensive study of law and peaceful conflict resolving.

Before that: no weapons and no authority.

Also accountability: every bullet and every taser use has to be explained. Cams 24/7 on the job, disabling them should be a grounds for immediate expulsion.

Oh and of course, cops should no longer be above the law.

I think this would also scare away a lot of the people who become police officers for the wrong reasons.

Yes, I believe it could be possible to have good cops - it's just not possible under the current system. Hell, the current system is a deterrent to good cops.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Without cops, who will throw people out on the street when they can't pay rent?
Or who will arrest the folk giving less fortunate people food?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Who needs cops anyway?

CHOP/CHAZ

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Everybody just getting along and cooperating and not fucking with each other sounds dope too. So go ahead, make that happen and we won't need cops. While you're at it, lack of fires and accidental injuries would be super dope too. Got an ETA on those?

If that makes me sound like a hardline law-and-order type, guess again meme-brain, I'm just intelligent enough to know that seriously thinking we don't need cops is idiotic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

OP: [proposes alternatives]

You: "So you're basically suggesting Mad Max"

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Your post makes it look like a binary choice between cop-filled reality and cop-free fantasy. But there are marked differences between how many cops (many = often more stupid, untrained, poorly selected, corrupt) a society needs and what activity is expected of them.

Existing societies also demonstrate a vastly different need for imprisoning people.

Myself, I think that prisoners per capita is a better indicator than cops per capita. The latter gives weird results heavily tilted towards microstates (lead by Vatican, Pitcairn Islands and Motserrat).

  • Maximum of prisoners per capita: North Korea (undisclosed but estimated), El Salvador (1600 per 100K), Cuba (794), Rwanda (637), Turkmenistan (576), United States (541).
  • Minimum of prisoners per capita: go and have a look, it's interesting. The leading 5 have a trend towards microstates and very poor developing countries, but if one filters them out and chooses sizable countries with functioning economies, the first that comes across is Japan - with an incarceration rate of 33 per 100K. That's 48 times less than El Salvador and 16 times less than the United States. The first European country on the list is Finland with 52 per 100K, indicating approximately what a "western style" society can achieve. The EU average seems to be around 100 per 100K. The highest rated EU country seems to be Poland with 194 per 100K.

Notably, the first somewhat sizable European country and western-type society on both lists is Finland. It has the lowest prisoners per capita in Europe (at 52 per 100K) and the lowest cops per capita in Europe at 132 per 100K. It is not a known haven of rampant crime - it has really low crime rates too. Apparently in some conditions, you can have few cops, few prisoners and limited crime.

My guess - I could be wrong - is that the quality and coverage of social security, education and health care are what actually make the difference. Most people don't start criminal activity for fun. Contributing factors include desperate poverty, poor parenting, lacking education, mental illness and exposure to trauma, damage from disease and substance abuse, etc, etc. Lots of full prisons are probably a factor that contributes to criminality, by making a "higher education in crime" accessible to more people.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Do you have evidence? A controlled study?

Also firefighters may be racist magas, but they provide a universal good with no downsides. I've never personally witnessed three firefighters gang up on a homeless person chilling on the sidewalk, for example. Very unaware of any firefighters trying to charge you a fee for not knowing your tail light was out.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A controlled study that proves crimes happen? LOL nope you got me there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

No, a controlled study where for example a small town decided to eliminate a majority of policing. No patrols, no presence except for 911 response, etc. crimes would still be reported (if someone breaks into your house you'll still call) but without any of the active policing that this thread is about. How do the numbers compare?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 64 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

I wonder if they'd become a gang instead. Community police of their own

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The entire system would need to change for this to work though - there ain't no way that in an unequal society such as ours where not everyone's needs are met (and crime essentially staying as high as it is today) community self-management would be sustainable.

Often crime is committed out of frustration (like violence born of inequality) or necessity (theft), so imagine being in a community in some larger city and having to deal with this every other day - I'd argue most people would just grow apathetic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You're putting the cart before the horse. It's not that the entire system needs to change for this to work, it's that this working changes the entire system. Community self-management would quickly result in the redistribution (and hopeful removal) of the inequalities, possibly with help of guillotines. The primary job of the police is to prevent this redistribution.

Historically, pretty much every "thriving local culture" is the result of a downtrodden wretched hive of scum and villainy where self-organisation was more important than police during the time of flourishing. Broadway (and NYC in general), New Orleans, Amsterdam, most Italian and German cities' high points, London, Hong Kong, Osaka, etc.. It turns out that when people don't have enough, they will work together to get enough, and the benefits of that cooperation can be felt in that town for centuries. (Which is why gentrification is profitable - rich people exploit the commons of a flourishing lower class mutual aid network which persist in the design and culture of the space even when the lower class people are gone).

That is, unless a violent organisation like the police or the CIA or a multinational corporation or an invading army forcefully breaks up that cooperation. Like happened when the US government funded drug gangs and arrested black panthers members to specifically break up black communities throughout the US. Or when the US government funded drug gangs and armed fascists to specifically break up socialist communities in central and south America. Or when the US government funded drug gang religious fanatics to break up communist communities in the middle east and South-East Asia.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

It’s not that the entire system needs to change for this to work, it’s that this working changes the entire system.

Would it really? Capitalism is fundamentally a system of economic social relations, workers sell their labour power to the capitalism and so on - that's the fundamental of it and all the various institutions inside (e.g. the police, financial sector, etc) aren't essential/fundamental to the system. They can be changed/tweaked or abolished when the need arises, but the economic social relation between the two main classes cannot be.

Creating some self-managing community that focuses on eliminating the need for police doesn't fundamentally challenge the system (economic class relations), neither does it really challenge the police as an institution given how they'll still exist outside that community and, as you point out, is able to crush this community anytime if it ever becomes a legitimate threat.

Community self-management would quickly result in the redistribution (and hopeful removal) of the inequalities

The community would still operate under capitalist system which reproduces inequality - after all, the community does need money for things like food, rent, utility, essentials, etc. This requires participation in wage labour/markets which means there's still income inequality, inequality in time one has to participate in the community, some people possibly having extra leverage due to private property ownership or their income/education, therefore new hierarchies spawning as a result, etc.

A commune like that under a capitalist system would be good as a survival strategy where the least well off can be supported and be kept over the poverty line (therefore reducing the need for theft but not eliminating it), but it wouldn't remove economic or social inequality - it will just seep back in from the outside.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Crime isn't high today

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›