Is America really becoming an unaccountable police state or is that hyperbole

Great Debates
21

I don’t know about an overall police state, but the idea of no-refusal drunk driving stops, and mandatory blood draws without a warrant gives me the heebie-jeebies.

I can’t consider it to be acceptable for people to be compelled to provide evidence against themselves by an invasive procedure without a search warrant.

And even if states try and get around that, there need to be clear and strict rules as to when issuing that sort of warrant is and isn’t acceptable. We don’t need a-hole judges sitting around waiting to issue those warrants every time a cop pulls over someone they think may be drunk.

22

Every generation likes to complain that things are getting worse but they are usually wrong. Compare what’s going on today with McCarthyism and tell me it’s worse.

23

I’d say we are trending generally toward becoming just another Third World banana republic, though we still have a long way to go to become a completely crapulent banana republic. We’ve had rigged elections (US Presidency, 2000) a partisan judiciary that makes questionable decisions (Bush v. Gore), erosion of civil liberties (warrantless wiretapping, siezing the AP’s phone records, loss of habeus corpus rights (Gitmo) the killing of American citizens without due process (drone strikes) the construction of a huge security apparatus to deal with a vague shadowy threat (the Homeland Security Administration), secret agencies that torture and kill people (Gitmo and the CIA’s black prison system), we’ve developed a prison system that uses people as slaves for profit (the for-profit prison system), and we have individual police officers who on occasion rape, beat and kill people with impunity.

We are not in banana republic land yes, but I’d say the groundwork has been laid.

24

That also occassionally happened when cops just had their blue uniforms, a nightstick and their service revolver.

Your offer is accepted.:smiley:

25

That happened???

26

Let’s look back at the 1960s-70s, say, and compare.

Rigged election? Check. (US Presidency, 1960).

Erosion of civil liberties? Several of them, like Miranda rights, or the right to an attorney in all criminal cases, didn’t exist yet to be eroded. Coerced confessions were more common, as was racial harassment by police.

You had COINTELPRO, the federal government’s illegal effort to undermine political organizations.

The CIA was up to some highly unsavory activities.

There was a draft that forced millions of American men to fight a war for their nation, many before they could even vote.

It was very easy to place eccentrics or non-conformists in mental institutions, until 1975.

Individual police officers abusing their power to get away with criminal acts was notably worse, as well.

On balance, I think the situation has improved over the last 50 or so years. I’d put the Nixon Administration’s crimes alone against the sum total of wrongdoing by subsequent Presidents, as well.

27

:confused: Generally it is true. And, whether it rises to police-state levels or not, the American system at present does include a lot of abuse and corruption (some legal, some illegal) to serve the interests of the ruling class.

28

If you don’t want to be subject to such things, you’re free to walk. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and when you sign the license application you’re agreeing to the terms of the contract.

29

Let me add to the chorus of people wondering what people are talking about when they think the police of today are somehow dramatically more brutal than they were in the 40s, 50s, or 60s.

Hell, well into the 60s, cops regularly beat confessions out of people. That still happens, but not remotely to the same extent.

And when it comes to the treatment of minorities while things are hardly idea, they’re not remotely what they were like in the past.

Moreover, people seem to ignore that many of the issues that they’re complaining about are true in plenty of other countries.

Do people think the police in Germany, France, and other countries don’t have problems with racism, abusing suspects, or similar issues?

If you don’t, I’d challenge anyone to go into some of the Arab neighborhoods in Paris and start asking them about their experiences with the police. From the stories I’ve heard, the Paris police made the LAPD under Darryl Gates at his worst look like boy scouts.

And don’t even get me started on the Japanese police and the treatment and “rights” of suspects in Japan.

Similarly, people have been talking about “violations of press freedom”.

Have people ever checked out just how strict the libel laws in many other western countries which has a huge stifling effect on press freedom.

Hell, in Sweden, those convicted of “libel”(who probably wouldn’t be in the US) are put in jail.

At least in the US, reporters when they’re doing reports on the government or businesses don’t have to worry about getting sent to jail like Mikael Blomkvist.

And just ask people in the UK what happens to newspapers that print the names of people being charged with crimes.

For that matter, I don’t know if it’s still true, but in Israel, well into the 90s, all foreign newspapers and Arab language newspapers(including those in Israel) had to submit ever story to a military censor for approval.

In one notorious example, the Hebrew language version of *The New York Times *was forced to censor part of an interview with a former PM, Yitzhak Rabin, because he confessed to engaging in large scale ethnic cleansing during Israel’s War for Independence.

Incidentally, I’m not trying to say that any of those countries are police states or even necessarily more like police states than the US.

However, the flip side of the myth of American exceptionalism seems to be this idea that “America’s the worst”.

30

I worded that poorly. what I meant was in a real police state the judicial and law enforcement agencies exist to serve to ruling class and themselves. in the US they generally, but definitely not always, exist to serve the public. surveillance exists, in theory, to protect public safety.
in between the drug war and the war on terrorism it seems our legal system has gotten more invasive and police more paramilitary. however accountability and transparency may have increased at the same time and brutality on an individual level has likely gone down over the last few decades.

31

Whereas that’s not the case in say Japan and this is somehow different from the past how?

32

I would say that there is an important, substantive difference between what went on in the 60s and what went on now. Back then, most official misbehavior was covert, hidden, they well knew it was not something they should be doing.

For example, back then I do not think that the President and Vice President ever openly advocated torturing people … as Bush and Cheney did with regard to waterboarding. I do not think they advocated warrantless wiretaps, as the President has done.

it’s like the difference between America under Jim Crow, where discrimination against black people was codified into law, and the period after Jim Crow laws were repealed when Americans still behaved in racist ways, but without legal cover.

33

I’d say that’s evidence that we’re less of a police state now. A police state depends on arbitrary powers and secrecy. That it’s much more difficult now to get away with crimes and abuses of powers by our government, and thus their crimes are quite small and petty by historical standards (compare the recent IRS scandal to COINTELPRO). I don’t want to say we’re out of problems with government, but the ones we have are matters of what the law is, not flaunting of the law. And as long as the law comes from the democratic process, it’s hard to see the U.S. becoming a police state.

34

As I understand it, in America you elect everyone from the dog-catcher upwards. You know, the people who form and enact and enforce policy and laws. So why don’t you elect people to do something about it? You know, study their platforms and judge their characters rather than just blindly pulling the levers marked R or D?

35

Are you implying Hitlertiddies666’s comments on youtube are not based on the most recent developments in civics?

Cite?

36

I think this shows the opposite of what you are intending. Waterboarding came up because the administration believed it was not torture but the public outcry put an end to it. Does that happen in a police state?

More generally your argument is to take a specific incident that happened recently and, because it didn’t happen in the past (that we know of), claim that things are worse. By itself it shows nothing because it’s anecdotal. Things that have happened in the past but don’t happen now:

  • Imprisonment of 100,000 Japanese-Americans for no reason other than their race.
  • Congressional investigation sparked by mildly (to us) pornographic pictures (Betty Page).
  • Artists being prevented from getting a job because of their political leanings.
37

Plenty of secrecy here.

38

I feel more comfortable with CCTV being owned by store-owners, with access only by request or court order.
Not 24/7 surveillance.

39

Again, though, relative to what? Since the '60s, there’s been a surfeit of transparency laws, from the Freedom of Information Act to various Sunshine in Government laws. Criminal proceedings are all public. Even the linked story involves the FBI having to go before a judge to try and get information. In a police state, they just seize what they want, no judicial proceeding or careful parsing of narrowly-tailored laws involved.

40

I asked this question late last year. The overwhelming response was pretty much “not really.” I doubt much has changed over the past five months.

Most of the “police state” cries I hear are from really hardcore progressives/left wing activists and libertarian circles.