One thing with all of this which puzzles me as a non-American, how does the "acceptance" of people getting killed by the police fit together with the whole anti-gorvernment thing which seems fairly common in the US as well?
One would think that if one does not like the government, one would be extremely upset about the gouvernment randomly killing people. But for some reason this does not seem to be the case.
I guess similar things could be said about gun ownership/self-defence argument etc. I guess if one decides to shoot back at the police one is truly screwed?
One thing with all of this which puzzles me as a non-American, how does the "acceptance" of people getting killed by the police fit together with the whole anti-gorvernment thing which seems fairly common in the US as well?
One would think that if one does not like the government, one would be extremely upset about the gouvernment randomly killing people. But for some reason this does not seem to be the case.
It's a good question. As a half-American with something of a background in political science, let me offer the following.
The free market liberal ideas, mixed with a sort of pioneer spirit that historically existed here (and still in much of the rural areas of the U.S.), carry with it an arguably consistent ideology:
- Independence from government in the realm of strong market regulations, price controls and so forth, particularly property rights.
- A government whose role is to minimize taxation but to protect said property rights.
It's a logical fact that you can't protect property rights without violence, due to the unequal nature of property ownership and the class system that comes from it. Historically, police start to make an appearance in such societies, as it makes more sense to have the State perform this activity than have each individual hire or join their own private militias or pay protection money to some organization.
That's the best way I can think to explain this discrepancy, which to a European sounds totally contradictory. You say you don't like the State's influence, but when the State does the worst it can do, kill citizens, you do nothing?
It has to do with free market capitalism not existing without a state having basic functions: protection from external threats at the national level, and enforcement of property rights via a legal system and an enforcer of this legal system. I.e. Police.
I have long pondered this also. I don't have a great answer for you, sadly. I have come to decide that there are many factors involved:
1. People want to feel safe, and for a long time (and still in many small towns) police were/are viewed as protectors and people that will help you when you've been wronged by another. Because of this they are willing to give benefit of the doubt, even when it isn't justified. I've seen some of these people starting to come around actually, especially after that nurse at the hospital in Utah.
2. Many people aren't actually all that anti-government. I've come to believe that only about 10% of the population here actually is. A surprising number of people vote for and continue to vote for politicians that just continue to grow the size and power of government. They support government control over things as long as it doesn't affect them. They also like to stick their nose in other's business, and then using the government to force that person to live the way they think they should.
Those are some random thoughts, and could be completely wrong, so take with a heap of salt :-)
As partially libertarian, I am appalled at the police for this. Even though police is necessary to enforce private property, life and liberty, that doesn't mean they get to do whatever. They have to be responsible. Cops are citizens employees, they are servants for the general public.
In an intuitive sense, the cops can be improved if politicians worked on legal reform for cops. But instead, they squabble over israel, buying new military planes, government shutdown, elections, etc etc etc. The more things the government does, the worse it does all of them.
It makes sense if you realize that actual voices in our so-called-democracy are drowned out by people who have power/money and extremists (who are often funded by the former).
In an oligarchy, your opinion doesn't count unless you have money.
One would think that if one does not like the government, one would be extremely upset about the gouvernment randomly killing people. But for some reason this does not seem to be the case.
I guess similar things could be said about gun ownership/self-defence argument etc. I guess if one decides to shoot back at the police one is truly screwed?