I am in general opposed to violence, except as a last resort. And I know that the police are not all fascists. Many policemen don’t like the drive against civil liberties any more than I do. But, even granted that they are only doing their job, I can promise you this. The first policeman who stops me as I am peacefully going about my lawful business, and demands to know who I am and where I am going, will get punched on the nose.
As the government whittles away our basic freedoms, there comes a point where you either resist, physically, or we all lose our liberty. I think Reid and Blair’s new proposal for a police power to “Stop and question” takes us to that point.
Of course, having skin of a regulation Scottish blue colour, I am not likely to be stopped. Jean Charles De Menezes was killed for having a slightly olive complexion and dark hair, and it is people of his hue and darker who will in fact be stopped and questioned.
The proposal is obvious madness – if the government was looking to provoke young British Muslims, no tactic would work better. Which does lead us, quite seriously, to be forced to question whether Reid and Blair are trying deliberately to cause an even further deterioration in community relations. There are two possibilities: either they are trying to provoke more “Islamic” violence, or they are very stupid.
Come to think of it, there is a third possibility. They may be trying to provoke more Islamic violence, and be very stupid.
Craig,
A couple of points, if I may.
Ordinary working-class coppers doing their jobs are merely that, coppers doing their jobs, although it could be legitimately argued that upholding the pernicious, vindictive and corrupt laws implemented by a corrupt and thoroughly rotten State is a practice contradictory to the police force's task of "keeping the peace". However, even coppers have to pay their rising mortgages, rents and taxes, and pay for ever more costly food, water, electricity and gas — just like the rest of us — for the extremely dubious privilege of merely existing.
The sources and causes of the problems that have led to the point that the UK has now reached are something else entirely other than the bobby on the beat and, with all due respect, individual instances of punching a policeman on the nose when he demands to see your papers are unlikely to solve very much and far more likely land the individual who threw the punch in far greater trouble than they might already have been, also for the heinous crime of existing.
It is perhaps worth noting that the eternally "not fit for purpose" Herr Doktor John Reid and his "not fit for purpose" Home Office / MiniJust entities, while endeavouring to control every single member of the public with Control Orders, ASBOs, and any other shameless and barbaric tactic the State can dream up, can't even keep his own family in order and recently Herr Doktor Reid's nephew John McGowan was arrested, charged, and convicted of possessing two deadly weapons in public, a crime for which he was fined ?400 before being allowed to walk free from court. This story should have been widely reported but, as is the case with such things, wasn't.
http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2007/05/herr-dokto…
Instead, Herr Doktor Reid resigned quietly and advised us all about his career track record of nine jobs in nine years which, to even the most rudimentary employer, would suggest a complete lack of ability, suitability and dedication for and to any of those tasks. Still, this is a member of the ruling classes we're talking about, more accurately described as the self-preservation society, a description with which you will be familiar from your own experiences as documented in Murder in Samarkand.
With regard to reaching the point where we are 'forced to question whether Reid and Blair are trying to deliberately cause an even further deterioration in community relations,' and the notion that they may be, 'trying to provoke more "Islamic" violence' (a phrase from which I notice you dropped the quotes around the word "Islamic" second time around), the answer appears plain for all to see. I would urge you and your readers to read the following information about a forthcoming extravaganza that could well be used as the justification to sate Herr Doktor Reid's thirsting for the declaration of a State of Emergency that would truly result in the end of what little liberty we have left:
http://antagonise.blogspot.com/2007/05/british-op…
Not sure what happened to the links so here are shorter versions:
Herr Doktor Reid's errant nephew:
http://tinyurl.com/ynnljb
British Oppression Downing Street Protest – A race riot in the making:
http://tinyurl.com/3asl3y
The Antagonist,
I quite accept your point about coppers just being ordinary people doing their job. My brother is one. But the people escorting prisoners to the gas chambers were also only ordinary working class people doing their job. There comes a point where tyranny has to be resisted, and it is best to start a long way before that. A bop on the nose from me won't do anyone serious damage. The point is that the government needs to understand that any further steps towards tyranny will drive people towards resistance.
My view of the police has been transformed by the policy enactments and general politicisation of both the police and Security Services under the Blair government. From community mandated guardians of the law-abiding local citizenry, they have increasingly become the uniformed (often armed, and gung-ho) agents of a thoroughly oppressive State – apparently answerable to nobody but their political masters. The average bobby is just that – average and I have no issue, per se, with the average guy of whatever race, colour, creed or occupation. The problem is that, when the average guy is employed by the State in an enforcement role, he is likely to follow orders and leave common sense and any scruples about the morality/legality of them at his front door, knowing that he will benefit from any doubt about his consequent behaviour. From personal experience I know that the reults can be very scary indeed.
As for punching a bobby on the nose – exaggerating to make a point I know but, consider this: as soon as police are given an additional power, they start to use it; and usually in circumstances far removed from those ostensibly intended; in the manner of the anti-terrorist powers used against that octogenarian holocaust survivor who had the temerity to protest inside the 2005 Labour Party Conference for example – common sense simply does not enter into the matter. One of my own experiences went like this: An animal rights protest at a local guinea pig farm (the grave desecration one that terrorised a thoroughly decent family over several years, that I'm sure you will have heard about) halted traffic on the A515 with police present and paraded back and forth across the road in guinea pig suits asking for support though loud-hailers. I was at the front of the traffic queue. I wound my window down and yelled "You're a bunch of terrorist bastards" at them. Guess what? I was arrested and charged with behaviour likely to cause alarm and distress.
These days and as a general rule, I see the police are dangerous people to get close to and so am inclined to avoid them like the plague. Which is sad because traditional policing is clearly a necessary function of a free, open, civilized society. Trouble is it is becoming less and less free, open and civilized and it is the police, at the behest of their political masters who are its enforcers.
Sabretache: "These days and as a general rule, I see the police are dangerous people to get close to and so am inclined to avoid them like the plague. Which is sad because traditional policing is clearly a necessary function of a free, open, civilized society."
Good points, both.
Regarding your first point, I think part of the problem is that the truism that power corrupts applies just as much to policemen as to politicians. The less power policemen have, the more they are dependant upon community assistance to achieve their goals, and the better behaved they are. Of course, a corollary is that they will often be unable to enforce laws which are locally unsupported, but this is generally at least not a particularly bad thing and often a very good thing, considering how asinine much of our legal verbiage often proves to be.
The worst thing to do is to give them guns. The best situation imo is where the police are generally unarmed and the citizenry is armed – as used to be the case in Britain during the period when our violent crime rates were among the lowest in the world, and in our history.
Another point is to do with local control versus centralisation. The more centralisation you have, the less local variation – both up and down – from the norm. Policing should be as locally controlled as possible, but this will of course always lead to very badly policed areas as well as very well policed areas, and the bad examples will be used in alarmist campaigns for centralision of control. The abuses in a centralised force, on the other hand, are much more pernicious, but much more easily covered up.
I don't think Blair, Reid and Co are stupid. Giving police Stop & Search powers and threatening to use emergency powers to derogate the European Convention on Human Rights is, I believe, part of a premeditated process of dismantling our freedoms bit by bit.
The staged attacks of 911 were meant to traumatise the public into accepting this process. It has been not so much a "War on Terror" but a War OF Terror against the very people the former was supposed to protect.
This process is going on on both sides of the Atlantic in what is a coordinated campaign to destroy what is left of the so-called liberal democracies and to replace them with de facto dictatorships.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/ytmc4u
I would be delighted to be proved wrong.
PS: In his book, Writing by Candlelight, the late radical historian, Edward Thompson, warned how repressive techniques being used in Ulster were being imported into the mainland.
Where are the radical historians today?
Dear Craig. Thanks for all your hard work for speaking up for what is right. Please continue to give us hope against near hopelessness.
I would like to point out that there were warning signs and commentaries long ago about the mad dash to fascism. These people were ignored, ridiculed and even censored by those today who bemoan the current situation.
An expression of horror is now breaking upon the face of some who have twisted (and in some cases, continue to twist) the dagger in the back of those who valiantly opposed and slowed down the freefall into imperialist neofascism. Brutus is guilty of a great crime yet some will impose a mental denial and blind themselves that they did no wrong.
I do not accuse you of doing this, but rather some of those who you know.
But this must be pushed to the side as unity is required to defeat this monster, 'Fascism Britannia'. Victory over it is of the utmost importance.
I urge your readers to contemplate these words and to act upon them.
Even train spotters are going ballistic:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.railway/browse_…
Randal
I agree with all that including the arms issue. Guns don't kill people – people do.
In particular, all power tends to corrupt – absolute power … etc. It certainly applies to the police as much as anyone. Seems to me that mitigation is the only real counter to it and, for the police, that must involve the bulk of their accountability to be to as localised a community as possible.
I live in a pretty remote rural community. I know our nominated bobby quite well and like him. He does his best. But – and its a BIG BUT – I have no illusions about his ultimate loyalty and the potential effects of his accountability chain. If he were required by some alleged National imperative to provide intelligence to assist in a dawn raid on my home for example, his job prospects and pension would depend on him doing so. In the present climate of politicised national policing priorities, the relationship is thus constrained in ways that undermine genuine community policing needs.