Characteristics of a Police/Security State

[PatrickHenry]

There is some doubt as to what exactly constitutes a "Police State."

There are classic examples: Nazi Germany, the communist regimes of Eastern Europe in the Cold War. The USSR. The PRC under Mao. Haiti under Papa Doc. And many others, I am sure. I hope I didn't leave out your favorite. If I did, please post it with the reasoning of why it was or is a Police State.

The paranoid among us(I am one ) sense that a Police State is possibly an imminent threat in America. If you think that this is likely, please say why. Same token, you who think the chance is remote that America could shift into the Police State mode: say why.

What are the characteristics that identify a Police/Security State? How does a Police State work? What are the strengths and weaknesses? What could bring about the demise of a Police State?

[giuliano]

scroll down to the thread about terror warnings.

the constant warnings, keeping citizens in a state of fear, anxiety and dependence on heavy-handed security tactics and broadening govt powers is a classic sign of a police state.

"it can't happen to us - we're america!"

[Comrade]

You left out my favorite, Iraq under Hussein.

I don't think America is in imminent threat of becoming a police state. The idea that we are being given terror alerts in order to terrorize us into supporting Bush doesn't hold water. Couldn't the sentiment that these threats mean Bush isn't doing well on the war on terror, and so we should stop supporting him? Its a fun idea, like most conspriacy theories, but flawed and more like a flight of fancy of people who hate Bush.

A police state, in my estimation, is a country whose government uses force to validate its rule and typically impose some sort of ideology on the public. Representative governments don't fit into this because the people have checks on the politicians with voting and petitions and popular support type stuff.
It denies people's rights (and I'm not talking about everyone's "right" to health care), stifles dissent (hence the police part of police state), often violently, and usually uses the same Gestapo tactics to force production in the economy (forcing people to work as slaves, etc.).

Police states are typically also headed by either a dictator or by a small oligarchy or Politburo-esque body (non-elected officials).

The only use of force I've seen lately is the much touted police putting down a violent riot, which is what the police are for. The Patriot Act has problems but it isn't the doomsday bill a lot of people have claimed, and I don't see people's rights being violated. I get boat loads of diseent thrown in my face every day, theres no censorship going on. Our economy is capitalistic, 75% of all jobs are small businesses, not coming from Halliburton. Bush was elected, and so was Congress.

Lots of things could bring about the demise of a police state. Revolution, foreign invasion (for conquering or liberating), the despots pull a Grinch and grow their hearts three sizes and give the country back to the people, kind of like Gorbachev and the USSR...
Pretty much anything that can take down any government could take down a police state.

[PatrickHenry]

Didn't Iraq under Hussein have "elections?"

Does propaganda have a role in a police state? What constitutes propaganda?

How about weapons in the hands of citizens?

How about the right to assemble and petition re: grievances?

[Young]

Comi - We're trying to stop it before it happens, Americans are passified and it would be difficult to move them towards Revolution to "Reclaim" the Gov't & Country with the Media in the pockets or Owned by the same Major Corporations that want Us to be like Lords & Peasants.

[Comrade]

Originally posted by PatrickHenry, Didn't Iraq under Hussein have "elections?" Does propaganda have a role in a police state? What constitutes propaganda? How about weapons in the hands of citizens? How about the right to assemble and petition re: grievances?

No, Iraq didn't really have elections. They had these things where people went out and punched a hole in the Saddam Hussein part of the ballet at gunpoint. All criticisms of the electoral college aside, voters still have an influence in how the votes get allocated, hence the 2000 election contentions and all the campaigning.

You can define propoganda a lot of ways. It could simply be anything that supports one view over another, most people tend to see it as misleading (and thus they use that word on anything they disagree with).

Citizens have a right to weapons. Felons, and all that stuff, don't, of course. An armed citizenry is the best defense against lots of things. Crime, an attempted coup, Canadian invasion, etc.

The right to assemble, I think we have it pretty good. You can assemble so long as you keep things calm, don't start setting fires and rocking cars and such. Thats when the police come in to break it up. Petition, I really don't know. I'd say that petitions should be able to force Congress or the courts to take a look at a specific issue. Greivances should be dealt with through the courts, and the courts should have the ability to enforce law on the government itself.

For instance, about firearms, if I ever seen blue UN helmets in this country (those morons who wrote Kofi the jew hater for oversight on our elections committed treason, you never ever invite armed foreigners to have a part in our election process), I'm going to get a bunch of guys together and we're going to make sure they leave.

[Comrade]

Originally posted by Young, Comi - We're trying to stop it before it happens, Americans are passified and it would be difficult to move them towards Revolution to "Reclaim" the Gov't & Country with the Media in the pockets or Owned by the same Major Corporations that want Us to be like Lords & Peasants.

I know perfectly well what you think you are doing.

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by Comrade, Iraq didn't really have elections. They had these things where people went out and punched a hole in the Saddam Hussein part of the ballet at gunpoint.

Is there a source for this statement or is it your opinion?

[Comrade]

I learned this from the History Channel (this one wasn't over the latest election, but over how he conducted his last election), watching the news, reading articles, lots of places...The same places that gave me the 100% statistic on who voted for Saddam.

[Young]

Saddam got 99& of the Vote....I watch the History channel too. Comi is right about that, but when Iraq has No weapons the War turns into Free & help the Iraqi's...the Jews are God's chosen people, and I'd help Americans living in Poverty before i'd invade a Country based on lies so i could create a nice lil Oil market with the new Iraqi puppets that i installed, and yea they may have elections, but they may write Saddam in...they Hate Us that much, and i don't care for those who hate Us.

[Zeebadee]

Having an unelected government official with the power to simply declare a U.S. citizen a "combatant" and, without ever presenting a shred of evidence, have that citizen locked up in a military jail, denied every right that is guaranteed under the Constitution, is certainly evidence that we are well on the way to becoming a police state. The most amazing thing about this fact is that there are people in this country that really believe that giving this power to the government will make them more secure!!!

[Comrade]

Which unelected government official is this, and are there checks on his power?

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by Comrade, Which unelected government official is this, and are there checks on his power?

John Ashcroft, and no, there aren't.

[Young]

Bush controls the Checks.

Ashcroft lost an election to a dead man...but Bush thought hey...what a great guy...can we get him.

[Comrade]

And has Ashcroft done this?

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by Comrade, I learned this from the History Channel (this one wasn't over the latest election, but over how he conducted his last election), watching the news, reading articles, lots of places...The same places that gave me the 100% statistic on who voted for Saddam.

That doesn't really work for debate, but I'll take your word for it(can't speak for the other members)

What about identification (Your papers Plz)?
How about torture for the accused?
Summary execution?
Secret police/surveillance?
Secret court proceedings?
Secrecy generally?
Bureaucracy?
Prison system?

What are the centralizing tendencies of a P/S State?

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by Comrade, And has Ashcroft done this?

Jose Padilla has been in a military jail for more than 2 years now, uncharged, unindicted, and without access to any legal counsel. He's a U.S. citizen that was arrested in Chicago and declared a "combatant". Do a simple Google, pick out whatever links you deem reliable, and check it out.

[Young]

Blacking out documents, using the source protection song & dance like they were pleading the 5th, and creating terrorism to further their intentions.

[Comrade]

I have no problem with my government knowing who I am and being able to identify me.

Torture for the accused? Confessions from torture are worthless. Torture as an interrogation technique is a lot more complicated, and should only be used if you know someone knows something (on the order of where a suitcase nuke is in new york) but is refusing to tell.

Summary execution is wrong. The only time people can shoot each other without having a trial is during times of war (and they're only justified if it is not the "aggressor", like US vs. terrorists in the war on terror).

Secret court proceedings. Private trials for private citizens, public trials for public officials.

Secrecy-- On matters of national defense it is 100% needed and I don't grudge the government the secrecy it needs to keep things working.

Bureaucracy-- Everyone hates bureaucracy except statists, and I'm not a statist.

Prisons-- I believe that keeping some criminals away from society is good, but I believe a lot of crimes, like drug use, would be better punished by fines and community service type stuff.

P/S states tend to centralize because they don't trust anyone who isn't part of their (the people in charge) "circle," so they put everything under the charge of a few collaborators.

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by Comrade, I have no problem with my government knowing who I am and being able to identify me. Torture for the accused? Confessions from torture are worthless. Torture as an interrogation technique is a lot more complicated, and should only be used if you know someone knows something (on the order of where a suitcase nuke is in new york) but is refusing to tell. Summary execution is wrong. The only time people can shoot each other without having a trial is during times of war (and they're only justified if it is not the aggressor, like US vs. terrorists in the war on terror). Secret court proceedings. Private trials for private citizens, public trials for public officials. Secrecy-- On matters of national defense it is 100% needed and I don't grudge the government the secrecy it needs to keep things working. Bureaucracy-- Everyone hates bureaucracy except statists, and I'm not a statist. Prisons-- I believe that keeping some criminals away from society is good, but I believe a lot of crimes, like drug use, would be better punished by fines and community service type stuff. P/S states tend to centralize because they don't trust anyone who isn't part of their (the people in charge) "circle," so they put everything under the charge of a few collaborators.

With citizens like this, no wonder Bush thinks he can get away with anything he wants to do.