I understand your view completely and sympathyze with it.
But … you should think again. We MUST have the state – the police and military. Don’t you agree?
(If not, stop reading here.)
Having a state – a police and military – there must be some institution – a king, a dictator, an elected body – in charge of them. I prefer the latter.
If this elected body makes bad laws, the police – backed up by the military if necessary – will have to enforce those laws, whether they like them or not.
Yes, they can ‘enforce’ them very lightly, in the dry, technical sense – as Abraham Lincoln said that the Fugitive Slave Laws would be enforced in the North, after the Dred Scott decision. (By the way, his enitre First Inaugural Address is absolutely relevant to what is happening in the US today, and should be read and re-read … at least by conservatives, who – rightly in my opinion – put a lot of stock in the wisdom of the past, which we have so painfully accreted. Available here: ). Lincoln said, " One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute. The fugitive- slave clause of the [Constitution][https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/usconst.asp] and the law for the suppression of the foreign slave trade are each as well enforced, perhaps, as any law can ever be in a community where the moral sense of the people imperfectly supports the law itself. The great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases, and a few break over in each. This, I think, can not be perfectly cured, and it would be worse in both cases after the separation of the sections than before. The foreign slave trade, now imperfectly suppressed, would be ultimately revived without restriction in one section, while fugitive slaves, now only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered at all by the other."
No conservative should ever want to live in a state in which the police only enforce those laws that they like, provided those laws were passed according to the established procedures of a constitution of which we approve. (The problem today is that we have moved pretty far from the constituional arrangements as originally establshed, which tried to accommodate different local customs – although, as Lincoln’s speech shows, this was not always successful.)
But since we do not have today, and have less and less in each passing year, an actual ‘constitution’ of which we approve … what should we do?
Well … that’s what this discussion is about. But … whatever is coming, we want to be on the closest and friendliest terms possible with the men who have the guns.
And … the reality is, most of these men do NOT approve of the cultural destruction which the Progressive Left is pushing forward. The genuine Hard Left hate the police and military, and this hatred is radiated outward, with diminishing effect, to the circles of people who are more and more following the Hard Left’s lead.
Case in point: Michael Brown was a thug who attacked a policeman and tried to get his gun, a few years ago. The policeman killed him, in self-defense. This happened in Fergusson MIssouri – the Hard Left mobilized and came from all over the country to ‘protest’ – ie to try to burn the place down. They spread the lie that this criminal was shot while holding his hands up and saying “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot!” The Obama Justice Department moved immediately to investigate the issue, the policeman was brought before a Grand Jury … which decided he had acted in self-defense. The Wiki piece on it is a good summary. (This was NOT a case of a bigotted all-white jury exonerating a racist kiler.)
The truth was accepted by reasonable people, even outspoken Black grievance-mongers. And then … Elizabeth Warren, who MUST know the truth, adopted this criminal as an example of how Black people are subject to “murder” by the police. She’s no Hard Leftist, and she is not stupid and must know the truth … but she knows what goes over with the activist base of the Democratic Party.
But you can believe the average policeman does not like this at all. They are no friends of anti-Fa, even in Portland. Don’t mistake the PC appointed Chiefs of Police in Left-dominated areas for the rank and file.
We must be ‘on the side’ of the average policeman, just as the typical anti-Fa activist is not. Whatever he has to do to enforce the increasingly-insane laws the Left will get through … we must not hold HIM responsible. The odds are great that he too does not want to enforce these laws.
We have to be smart. We have to think out our tactics, and not react emotionally.
Hate the people who make the insane laws, not the poor guy who has to enforce them. In what is coming, his support, or at least neutrality, may be crucial to getting redress.