Are we living in a Police State? (poll)

[G_j]

Are we living in a police state?

My personal opinion is that for people of color the answer has always been yes. For certain outspoken activists it has been a reality also.

For everyone else the police state has been manifesting by degrees, it's much further along than most people realize. We are like the frog in gradually heated water, not noticing.

what to do you think?

[cprise]

1. If you push the right political buttons...

Saudis and other fascists have traditionally gone where they want in the US, but our government blocks a Cuban minister from speaking at African American churches:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=354433

[waylon]

2. I dont know too many police states that would allow this..

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blnobushnudes.htm

[G_j]

6. is it the nudity, the message

or the combination, that you think would be considered dangerous?

[seventhson]

11. Just like they "allow" DU

The powers that be have to permit a certain degree of freedom to maintain their power. If tyhey cracked down too hard we would rebel.

Americans, in particular, are too used to a lot of freedoms and we would go ballistic f they cracked down too much.

There is ALWAYS some degree of freedom in totalitarian societies because there must be just enough liberty to keep the police and the military from rebelling.

But as long as they hold the executive branch then they have nothing to fear from naked bushes in the snow spelling no bush or radical anarchists on DU yelling that Bush is a Nazi.

And in 2004 the way things are going either way there will be another insider from Skull and Bones holding the reins of power.

So there is NO threat to the sataus quo whatsoever from any quarter.

When someone becomes a real threat to the seat of power POLITICALLY , like Wellstone or Jim Hatfield or the scientist Baxter or the weapons guy in England - they get whacked. The rest of us pose no real threat so they only whack us if they feel like it or if we are dark-skinned or too left.

Fascism depends on the support of a majority in a democracy to succeed (Heiden, "Der Fuehrer" 1944)

[Minstrel Boy]

12. That reminds me of this important Mussolini quote:

"The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone."

That "sufficient margin of liberty" is the zone in which most Americans are content to live their lives, and so they remain oblivious or uninterested as to the true nature of the State.

[damnyankee2601]

15. Sort of correct, but...

why are we just sitting here calling Bush a Nazi. Proper subversives would attack these people at their base. NO, not asassination. That just plays into their "tough on terrorists" propoganda. We need to attack them in such a way that anything they do to defend themselves makes them weaker. I have some ideas, but I hesitate to post them here.

In general, it is high time we used their own dirty tricks against them. As LBJ said, we can't call them Pig Fuckers, but we can make them deny it.

[indepat]

20. Good point, but the machinery is in place and the zealots are in place, so

it's just a matter of when they decide to make all the unconstitutional clauses of the Patriot Act operable.

[Mairead]

37. Police states behave differently toward different classes of people

Simply because certain things are allowed certain classes doesn't mean it's not a police state. Consider the young anarchist who recently got a felony conviction, had his computer hardware confiscated, etc.

I think a good working definition of 'police state' is one in which the police are allowed/encouraged to behave unlawfully in the interests of 'preserving social order'.

[BiggJawn]

43. "As long as we kin see Nekkid Titties, we is FREE!"

Isn't that a modern version of "Bread and Circuses"?
People ask me "Jawn, do you think people will ever realize what's going on and rise up?"

And my answer is:
Not as long as they have their cable TV, Dish network, and Playboy Channel....

You want to see a "popular uprising" in this country? You'll have to take "Survivor" and "Friends" off the wire, first.

They're controlling us with the video. People like me who are not connected worry them. And "Maxx Headroom" was fantasy?

[starroute]

3. I believe very strongly that we are at a crossroads

I see the current moment as being similar to other periods of hysteria and repression in the past, some of which passed without a trace. England during the reign of Bloody Mary was one such -- but that was succeeded after her death by the glories of the Elizabethan Age. China during the Cultural Revolution was another.

My greatest fear is not of a police state so much as the kind of benign surveillance state that England seems to be developing -- the sort of setup where they don't even have to repress you because they already know everything about you and can head off any move you might make that would shake the system. In the long run, RFID tags worry me more than grand juries.

[G_j]

4. sorry, This would have been helpful, some DEFINITIONS:

some definitions:

POLICE STATE - Definition by HyperDictionary.com

Definition:   a country that maintains repressive control over the people by means of police (especially secret police)   

See Also: absolutism, authoritarianism, Caesarism, despotism, dictatorship, monocracy, one-man rule, shogunate, Stalinism, totalitarianism, tyranny 

www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/police+state -
-----------
Encyclopedia Dictionary Languages Web Pages.

A police state is a political condition where the government maintains strict control over society, particularly through suspension of civil rights and often with the use of a force of secret police. This implies that the control by the government contradicts the will of the people being controlled. Thus, a police state is inherently anti-democratic. It is similar to martial law.

The definitive literary treatment of a police state is George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which describes a totalitarian regime that uses the excuse of constant war to permit police and security cameras to surveil the entire population.

Until the fall of the Berlin Wall, a classic modern police state was East Germany, or the German Democratic Republic (GDR). The country's secret police force, the Stasi (or Ministerium für Staatssicherheit) maintained an incredibly close watch over East German citizens, to the point where virtually every residential building, place of employment or place of leisure was home to at least one Stasi informant.

The constitution of the United States has provisions in place to protect citizens from unreasonable actions by police. Specifically, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights assert that people accused of crimes have certain rights, such as

habeas corpus
probable cause
the requirement of specific warrants
trial by jury
right to counsel

In addition, police actions must start with the "oath or affirmation" of a civilian complainant, which makes for a prohibition against the execution of standing orders.

However, many attempts have been made to bend these rules and regulations throughout the history of the United States. Recently, reaction to the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack, and the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act has expanded powers of the government to surveil and detain people it considers potential terrorists without affording them rights of due process, such as those listed in the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. A proposed new act, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 is likely to accelerate this process, and is being fought by civil libertarian groups like the ACLU.

[G_j]

5. I learned something here

according to these definitions, my answer is #1. Originally I had thought, "partially there"

To read these definitions, at least from my take, we are there already.
I particulat this part:

>The constitution of the United States has provisions in place to protect citizens from unreasonable actions by police. Specifically, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights assert that people accused of crimes have certain rights, such as

habeas corpus
probable cause
the requirement of specific warrants
trial by jury
right to counsel

In addition, police actions must start with the "oath or affirmation" of a civilian complainant, which makes for a prohibition against the execution of standing orders.

...seems this all became obliterated with the PATRIOT act. :-(

[proud patriot]

7. crossroads

I have to believe we can prevent it .

[EastofEdon]

22. crossroads and yes we are

a crucial moment, we could still turn it around.

But we probably won't, even here people don't pay much attention to things such as the "Mami Model" at the FTAA protests.

[TexasMexican]

8. Yes

just that some place are worse than others at the moment. However it will all get worse unless we do something to change it.

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. The question

The mere fact that you can ask the question means the answer is a resounding no.

[Minstrel Boy]

10. Only if the question, and our answers,

pose a threat to the state. And they don't.

[Muddleoftheroad]

18. Let's put it this way

Imagine asking the same question in the old Soviet Union, current Communist China or Nazi Germany. Since, asking or answering the question would have meant: Gulag, reeducation camp or concentration camp, you know damn well we aren't close.

[G_j]

23. what is this all about?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1089727

23 peaceful activists sent to federal prison:

Ministers, Divinity School Student, a Former New York City Firefighter, and a Nobel Peace Prize Nominee included among 27 Sentenced for Nonviolent Protest of the School of the Americas/WHISC
Twenty- three human rights activists received three to six month sentences in Federal Prison for nonviolent actions to close the SOA/WHISC.

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. They got locked up

Lacking an independent news source, I can't tell really what laws they were charged with, but probably trespassing on a military facility and some other stuff like that.

So what's your point?

[G_j]

29. if you didn't get it

then there's no use explaining further.

[Muddleoftheroad]

30. Again, lacking an independent source

It's impossible to tell if they were railroaded or deserved to go to jail.

[G_j]

31. Unfortunately

in this great "free" country, not a single news outlet published the story.
But they never do, as this happens every year. In a symbolic act of non-violent civil disobedience, people (generally catholic peace activists) trespass onto the grounds of the "School of The Americas". This is very much in the tradition of Gandhi and MLK.
You can read all about the movement at www.SOAW.org

[Muddleoftheroad]

32. Civil disobedience

Last time I checked, that was a euphemism for law breaking. I'm not saying they are morally wrong in doing so, but we jail lawbreakers in America. We did so when Clinton was president. We did so when LBJ was president. We did so when FDR was president. And so forth.

And yes, Dr. King served time in jail as well.

[G_j]

33. I understand

and Dr.King said that a part of non-violence was taking responsibility for one's actions which includes being subject to the law. My point is, how free is a society that would imprison people of conscience who pose no danger to the public? Considering many of these people are elderly, these sentences in federal prison seem excessive. No, this didn't start with bush either, but the treatment has gotten harsher.

[Muddleoftheroad]

34. The treatment has gotten harsher

Because government can't tolerate random protesters traipsing all over military facilities. Because we live in different times than we did a few years ago.

These days, "acts of conscience" in the wrong place can get you shot, so one could argue they got off easy.

[Minstrel Boy]

45. You say "one could argue they got off easy" because

"these days, 'acts of conscience' in the wrong place can get you shot."

Imagine, for a moment, your indignation if a supporter of Castro had offered such a defense of Cuba.

That you can say this - and that you place acts of conscience in quotation marks - suggests to me you'll never hear the jackboots. And yet you boast such acute hearing when it comes to the streets of Havana.

[Muddleoftheroad]

46. My point that you seem to want to ignore

SOAM is a military/government installation. If you trespass there, you are immediately assumed to be a threat. Given all that has gone on terrorwise the last couple years, that is a logical conclusion.

I placed "acts of conscience" in quotes because it is the expression most people use to refer to such activities. I used quotes because it is a quote. Sorry, journalism training is hard to shake off.

[Minstrel Boy]

47. These people crossed a line - literally -

and you can comfortably say that they got off easily because they weren't shot?

[Muddleoftheroad]

48. As I have said multiple times

I have only read what THEY wrote and, as a former journalist, I never believe just one side of a story. However, crossing a line as you put it means trespassing into a security zone. If the guards felt threatened in some way, then they are trained to respond.

I think the mere fact that they were just arrested and many got nothing more than probation says again that we are NOT in a police state.

If you trespass on my business property, you will be arrested as well.

[Mairead]

40. No, we don't 'jail lawbreakers' -- we jail SOME lawbreakers

The really big criminals are never punished, because we live in their crimes.

[Muddleoftheroad]

44. It has always been thus

Powerful (i.e., rich) folks have always gotten a better deal. They get better lawyers, etc. This is not new.

[Mairead]

38. Sorry, but that's nonsense.

Goethe captured your error perfectly: 'Niemand mehr Sklave ist, as der sich für frei hält, ohne es zu sein.'

No one is more a slave than he who falsely believes himself to be free.

The police state that is smart enough not to reveal its existence by inexplicable repression is the most effective police state.

[Jacobin]

13. subpoenaing peace activists records is closing in on one

[Estragon]

14. Two words:

John Timoney.

[G_j]

21. John Timoney = full blown police state tactics

St. Petersburg Times: Miami Crowd Control Would Do Tyrant Proud

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1130-07.htm

Miami police Chief John Timoney must be mighty proud of the social order he maintained during the Free Trade Area of the Americas summit a couple of weeks ago in Miami - sort of the way Saddam Hussein was proud of quieting dissension in his country.
--------------------
Timoney fact sheet: Related Points: Timoney and his Philadelphia
police force were responsible for over 400 arrests during the RNC as well as ...
www.mediamouse.org/fcaa/timoney.php

----
btw, It has been reported that Timoney will be in Boston for the Democratic convention. :shrug:

[G_j]

35. BTW, welcome to DU Estragon! n/t

[mot78]

16. Crossroads

If we get rid of * it can be prevented.

[Snappy]

17. If the state considers...

that you are involved in any way regarding terrorism they can take away these:

habeas corpus
probable cause
the requirement of specific warrants
trial by jury
right to counsel

The state doesn't even need to state their cause for detaining you. They merely come and get you.

[Estragon]

19. Exactly.

And if you read the text in PATRIOT about the definition of a "terrorist", it can pretty much be anyone. I forget the exact wording, but it's something along the lines of anyone that is a serious disruption to US domestic or foreign policy..

[drdigi420]

25. we have been since....

we declared war on the people that use certain drugs

when any human can be imprisoned for an act that does not physically harm another person or said person's property, the police have more power than is allowed under a non-police state

when the police can take away your freedom for:
gambling
owning certain drugs
prostitution
or
gun ownership...

...its a police state

[Lisa0825]

26. partially there....

and I completely agree about the "frog in the pot" analogy.

I saw Alex Jones in Houston (www.prisonplanet.com and www.infowars.com) and while I am not ready for a tinfoil hat, I am checking out the latest styles... anyway, some of the documented cases in his videos and books are really terrifying. Some days I lean more towards "we're there" and other days I still think we're in transition. Either way, it's damned frightening.

[renegade000]

27. this might be where we're headed...but i think it can be averted

eom

[Eric J in MN]

28. If a Democrat is elected President in 2004 and 2008, then we can have

If a Democrat is elected President in 2004 and 2008, then we can have about as much freedom as previous generations of Americans.

[Th1onein]

36. Depends what you mean by "police state"

One person's police state is another's state of freedom. I think that, for poor people in the US, this has been a police state for a long time.

[flaminbats]

39. This is a common problem with police states...

we can never be sure that we are living in one until it's too late! :scared:

[robertpaulsen]

41. If Bush steals the election again...

then lights out America! It won't be until the next decade that we'll be able to reverse the damage of renewing the Patriot Act. I'm sure they'll also come up with creative ways to insert key provisions of Patriot Act 2 into future legislation. Some may consider moving to Canada with Big Brother peeking in on your net surfing at the public library, yet somehow John Ashcroft has found a way to ship out suspicious Canadians to Syria for the torture our Constitution inconveniently prohibits. This action alone makes us a police state by proxy.

It's great to be joining this wonderful site. Hope the Ayatollah General doesn't shut it down before a Democrat gets elected!

[G_j]

42. welcome to DU! nice post

[noonwitch]

49. We're not quite there yet

And we can still stop it from happening. It's not easy-everybody has video cameras these days, and there is some technology that can't be used without invading privacy.

I'm glad I live a short boat ride away from Canada, if it does get worse.