Last January when at Keene district court I was thrown to the ground then carried to a cage because I wore my hat. Last Thursday over coffee I had a conversation with Jim Cemorelis, the person who did the throwing.
Over three hours we had a freewheeling discussion that touched on the Keene community, activism, rights, the role (if any) of government, the provision of courts and law enforcement, philosophy, books, families, and single-issues like firearms and drug prohibition.
Some people have communicated that such meetings are a waste of time – almost likening the other party to “the enemy.” While I appreciate such feedback I disagree. As I wrote on a previous post:
There is no benefit to write-off an entire group of people based on their place of employment. . . Don’t you think it likely that some of those individuals [cops] might, once exposed to new, better ideas, shed their old, worse ideas? Like anyone else the average cop has been exposed to a lifetime of pro-State, defer-to-authority rhetoric.
When our conversation kicked-off Jim noted that there was probably only a “minutia” of things that separated our perspectives. With the glaring exception of how we each subsist, I found that statement was pretty accurate. We both want to live in a safe, prosperous community, where individual rights are respected – the question is how is that best-achieved?
In the least our chat allowed for personalization, which means ideas shared will likely be given more weight. And while I haven’t heard that Jim has yet moved on from the Keene police department, based on how we parted ways, I’m hopeful our conversation will continue.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A person who forces another person to obey a mindless rule is immoral. He is declaring he is a robot and will force everyone to be the same. This is the government saying, “Do not think. Just obey.” What’s worse, though, is that this amounts to an order to be stupid. “If you must think, at least do it silently.”
This is why the police are the enemy. Also, teachers, preachers, parents, employers, etc. and anyone who says, “DON’T BE SMART!”
In the book “The Three Musketeers” there were competing authorities. There was the authority of the state (The king’s musketeers) and the authority of a non-government entity (In the case of both history and the tale it was the Cardinals guards) perhaps a nongovernment police force is needed today to balance the power-your thoughts?
Grant, I don’t want to balance the power claimed by someone, I’d rather encourage people not to grant others power simply because it’s claimed.
Did you get a chance to check out the last video linked to above? It’s long (almost an hour) but pretty solid. As are the others embedded.
I did read The Three Musketeers maybe five years back and had some of the same take-aways which I think speaks to your question.
At one time religious “leaders” were granted authority at a level that enabled them to fund wars and attempt to force their views on people. At the same time government “leaders” acted likewise.
That’s not true today.
Yet it is still true for government “leaders.” That seems to be changing and I’m hoping it continues and is replaced by self-government.
Larken Rose’s “The Most Dangerous Superstition” is solid on this – the harm of granting arbitrary authority; of allowing for a double-standard.
@ Pete
How often do you get to sit down with an officer that arrested you and have civil conversation??. I appreciate what you wrote before about not writing off a group because of where they work. I try to treat people the way I want to be treated. I have tried 6 timesto get all the way through the last video and always get interrupted. I think if your able to have another conversation with that officer the seed will start to bear fruit. and thats on both sides.
This is the height of nobiity, not merely loving your enemy, but seeking understanding and conversion.
My problem with voluntarism is I don’t expect most of them to understand or honor the constitutional rights. If something is stolen, will they give those they suspect due process, probable cause, no self-incrimination, acess to a lawyer, and no cruel or unusual punishment? Cops may fall short but have an oath and duty. Private citizens are in a grayer area.
No state means no constitution, and rights become purely abstract, what you can enforce. And if you can’t enforce rights yourself or find someone to do so on your behalf (wouldn’t they become a cop)?
Cops used to be peace officers, not mercenaries of the oligarchs or militarized (kill and break instead of protect and serve).
“This is why the police are the enemy. Also, teachers, preachers, parents, employers, etc. and anyone who says,” “DON’T BE SMART!”
Wow, that’s alot of enemies. Even preachers and parents. Anyone not an enemy? I don’t think that comment was very smart.
I wasn’t necessarily saying we should give policing authority to somebody else-perhaps it could be reserved to we the people. Just saying somebody else needs to be able to stop these guys-even if it’s us. I like my idea but glad to hear the ideas (even the ones without substance) of others.