this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
401 points (99.8% liked)
Memes of Production
387 readers
2089 users here now
Seize the Memes of Production
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.
Other Great Communities:
founded 1 week ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lynchings. What you are describing are lynchings.
So you need somewhere to "redeem" these people. That is called a prison or a mental institution. You need people to capture and hold these people to be redeemed. Those are called police. You need a system to determine who can't be redeemed in a way that is fair and thorough. That is called a justice system. The irredeemable are killed in things called executions.
I agree the system we have is bad, but solutions rapidly turn into reinventing the wheel.
If you'd describe those as lynchings, what would you describe what happened to George Floyd? Or Breonna Taylor? Our cops lynch people all the time, but have the position of authority to avoid all consequences. How do you ensure that the people who are allowed to use guns on people are "fair and thorough"?
I would describe those as murder, not collective community vigilantism.
Personally I would take guns away from most police. They would have to serve on the force for 4 years with no use of force complaints and then they would be allowed to carry a 6 shot revolver if necessary for their job. Ideally only calm, experienced officers who have earned public trust through years of practice in deescalation would carry and they would only be called in when deadly force is absolutely necessary to save lives.
Even with rules that describe appropriate behavior for law enforcement, we still run into issues. A lack of guns doesn't stop what happened to George Floyd, and maintaining accountability against cops when they're the only ones legally allowed to use violence is difficult. It's a dangerous power dynamic, and I'm not convinced there's a real answer. Most crime is the result of poverty, so I personally think that the best direction to go is a heavy focus on addressing the roots of poverty. Basic income is one option that can help, perhaps rent control and better public infrastructure/transportation. I'm for the idea of tax-funded housing you can apply for at no cost to you. At least, as far as what we can do on a practical level within our own system, as much as I would prefer more radical solutions.
The unfortunate reality is that someone is going to have a monopoly on violence and it's better to have a choice in who. Accountability is tough but possible. Body cameras and the ubiquity of smart phones has made it a lot easier to prove what really happened. These camera records need to be stored and processed by an independent federal agency though. Qualified immunity obviously needs to be dramatically curtailed. Cops should have to live in the neighborhood they patrol whenever possible. Eliminating anyone with the slightest hint of white supremacist leanings from candidacy. There are definitely things that can be done to cutrail the potential abuses of power.
No, it's not and you're attempt to frame it using negative connotations is obvious. What you are actually trying to say is vigilante justice or extrajudicial killing. But without law, it could also not be as such. You can host a communal tribunal and provide a verdict based on the overall consensus of the community.
Also you can keep people at home, you don't have to house them in purpose built facilities, there isn't that much crime once you remove material conditions. It's not a full time industry. And if they're not an active danger you can let them go out freely and rehabilitate them without confining them. Likewise you do not need police when the community is in charge of its defence.
That's basically the model they use in the Zapatista Chiapas. Seriously this isn't complicated but you are incapable of imagining any system beyond the one you know, even when such systems are literally being applied in the real world and with greater effect than the police/prison model.
That still has the essential problem of guilt being determined by popularity, not facts. Witches had trials like this before they were burned. There needs to be a system of rules to minimize bias and regulation of evidence to provable facts. That is why we have the jury trial system. Yeah, it still needs improvement but it's a hell of a lot better than what you are describing.
Shoplifters and drug dealers, sure. But serial rapists and people who shoot someone in the face for looking at them funny? No way. They need to be locked up and we need someone to put them there. There will always be a certain amount of these people in any society and we have to account for that.
So basically "castle doctrine" states where people shoot kids who knock on the wrong door? Kyle Rittenhouse is an example of realistic "community defense".