Hey Tents,
Must admit, when I read your post, for a second I wondered if I hadn’t blacked out last night, somehow hacked your account, and written it myself. So supportive it was of my own end of the argument.
And I wasn’t going to stoop to potshots so early on but… How can I resist things like:
Followed almost instantly by:
There had to be a catch…
The short run…? The Roman ever-lovin’ Empire…? I mean, that short, almost negligible -(blink and you miss it)- 1300 years…? Or the Zhou Dynasty - 1066 BC-256 BC. Or…or… The Ottoman Empire - 1299-1923…? [Gets out calculator] That’s 2734 years of successful repression-based governance. Compared to what…? Democracy…? Fuck that mayfly bullshit, sign me up for repression thank you very much.
That’s it. Job done. I rest my case, who’s for a cold one down the pub…? I’m buying.
No, I’m sure he’s got a trick or three up his sleeves. Better write some more stuff.
I think the reason why me and Tentative seem to be singing much the same tune is that all coercion looks the same, but it’s not. I mean okay, you could say the Romans were coercive, but at the same time they had some barbarian tribes standing in line to voluntarily join the Roman Empire, the great pax romana - and voluntary action - action of your own volition, is the very antithesis of coercion - so what gives…?
Legitimacy.
Say you’re walking down my street when I rush out with a big stick and force you to tidy up my garden, whilst beating you black and blue. Help !!! You cry, and lo and behold, the public at large rush to your aid (well, ideally anyway ). Why…? Because I have no legitimate claim to authority, let alone stick-wielding, garden-forcing authority. The public agrees with you. However, if you are dressed in a stripy jumper and a black wool cap, toting a large bag with SWAG stencilled on the side and a policeman bops you over the head with his truncheon, and you cry HELP !!! The public does not help you, because they recognize the legitimacy of the policeman’s bopping-power. They do not agree with you.
This is legitimacy in a nutshell: Public opinion as to someone’s right to bop you over the head for some greater good. Coercive force, when coupled to recognized legitimacy, is no longer the big, bad 1984 kind of coercion, but tamed, er, ‘nice’ coercion.
Prod any political scientist and he’ll tell you: “The ultimate power of any governing force resides in its monopoly of organized violence.” These forces are the cell-walls of society - keeping out what should be out, and keeping in order whatever’s inside. We recognize the legitimacy of governmental controlled force, and all other things’s being equal, when the policeman says “move along” we’re not obeying him or her so much as obeying the legitimate power they embody - the uniform, not the fleshy bit underneath.
And notice, more often than not - When someone catches the wrong end of a truncheon/batton/taser upside the head, and cry “police brutality” it is usually only the degree of coercive force used that is challenged, not that coercive force was used at all. The people accept that in some situations, legitimate coercive force works toward the public good.
Anyway, hope that helps you out.
In summary, repression on the part of a governing body (whose legitimacy is increasingly questioned) works to quality-control those who will eventually overthrow them, and to maintain an interim period of social stability - not a very pleasent stability admittedly, but stability nonetheless - until the heroes of the new regime finally get their arses in gear. And coercion is, however unfortunately, just another screwdriver in the toolbox of society; well, okay, a hammer - its legitimacy dependent upon exactly whom is holding the handle, and the situation in which things are bashed.