Society/Culture Bentham and the Philosophical Nature of Preventive Policing - On Philosophical Grounds

[Gethelred]

Okay, time for Resource 3: Bentham and the Philosophical Nature of Preventive Policing.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356065722_Bentham_and_the_Philosophical_Nature_of_Preventive_Policing

This provides a brief - for a journal - historical review of the origins of modern policing in London, and discusses the nature and issues of solving crime as it appeared in modern society.

 

[Gethelred]

So the role of crime and justice has undergone transition as society itself has transitioned, responding to the perceived needs of society as determined by it's democratically elected representatives. It's subject to discussion and argument and protest and reform and revolution. But it operates subject to rules determined by society.

The problem is that capitalism's imperatives have subsumed the ability for process and whatnot to be democratic. That's the whole point: that capitalism is now determining in no small way who goes to jail on the basis of whose work is undervalued versus whose work is overvalued.

I'd never argue that the state is always good and right. But at least when it acts to restrict the liberty of an individual for the good of society as it deems it, their actions are grounded in democratic legitimacy.

This is what is being challenged: are the state's actions here grounded in democracy if it's the market deciding who goes to jail?

To what other authority should police subject themselves to?

Again: the point of this thread is not to advocate for solutions but to provide a theoretical and philosophical underpinning to arguments for and against contemporary and historical policing. I'm going to get out some Jeremy Bentham in a little bit, for some sun to go alongside all of this shade.

I do not want to jump beyond depicting what was or what is in here. That's a task for other threads.

 

[tandino]

The problem is that capitalism's imperatives have subsumed the ability for process and whatnot to be democratic. That's the whole point: that capitalism is now determining in no small way who goes to jail on the basis of whose work is undervalued versus whose work is overvalued.

This is what is being challenged: are the state's actions here grounded in democracy if it's the market deciding who goes to jail?

It's inherently grounded in democracy. Capitalism is a function of democratic will, it didn't just fall from the sky. It can only operate with the approval of (or at least the acquiescence of) broader society through democratically elected bodies.

I do not want to jump beyond depicting what was or what is in here. That's a task for other threads.

I don't want to clog up the thread so I'll probably leave it there.