“As an occupation, policing necessarily involves people in a violent institution, demands they forfeit their freedom to a hierarchical chain of command and constraints imposed by their oath of office, and asks them to participate in an idolatrous view of the nation-state as the place where God’s action in history is primarily to be experienced and seen.” –Andy Ramos-Baker, The Gospel or a Glock? Mennonites and the Police

Questioning or criticizing cherished roles, beliefs, ideas or systems has long been a way to get a rise out of people (intentionally or unintentionally), and of course we all know that the two taboo subjects one should never discuss in polite company are politics and religion. What readers may not realize is that the institution of policing converges—quite conspicuously in my opinion—at the intersection of both subjects. Not surprisingly, one sure-fire way to set-off defensive and egoic alarm bells is to be thought of as not being true to the boys in blue. Fortunately (or perhaps unfortunately) this suggestion to steer clear of touchy topics that may cause destabilization is a threat that has always sounded like a good time to me.

THE COPS I DON’T HATE
I would like to be very clear up front. When I sometimes say that I hate ‘COPS’ one thing I am not talking about is the documentary/reality show from the 90’s that followed the lives of various law enforcement officials over the span of 37 seasons; that show is apparently still going strong despite being briefly canceled in 2020 following the egregious murder of George Floyd. Although I must confess that there are lots of legitimate reasons to despise carceral state propaganda (i.e. “cop shows”)—which undoubtedly shapes public perception by fueling support for aggressive policing and turning violent law enforcement into an entertainment-driven distortion—the scene from the Bob Odenkirk directed comedy, Let’s Go to Prison, where the protagonist (played by Dax Shepard) ends up in prison and inexplicably observes the inmates obsessively watching COPS and cheering whenever suspects get tackled or arrested, rings true in a very literal and personal way for me. Odenkirk and the writers must have done their research for that movie because I can testify (pardon the pun) that watching COPS in prison was one of the highlights of the week when I was incarcerated in LCP; let me  tell you, nothing like a good cop chase and a few games of spades to pass the time until lock-down!

Honestly, having first hand experience with individual cops working in their official capacity can be beneficial when exploring a difficult subject like this. But with that said, another subject I’m not discussing when I say that I dislike police or cops is your individual best friend or relative. I’m not talking about your beloved spouse, child, cousin, or your funcle, Tony, who is so hilarious and delightful every year at the reunion. Hearing someone say ‘they hate cops,’ though, can admittedly be confusing and easily misinterpreted as a venomously unwarranted attack and even a clear admission of a contemptuous spirit. At least this is how I always fear coming across when I catch myself callously throwing the phrase around to garner supportive giggles. I totally get it.

Continuing with this line of thought, however, I do wonder how we are to understand phrases like the ones below, which we should all be somewhat familiar with:

I hate school! – This is a phrase I’ve also uttered more times than I can count in my life, and although reaching this position can certainly be the result of multiple various and negative, isolated, individual experiences with teachers and students, I suggest that it is most often an expression of dismay surrounding the entire phenomenon known as compulsory schooling. At least this was the case for me and many of those I have spoken to. When I think back upon my early childhood public education up through high school I seriously cannot remember more than one or two teacher’s names, but what I DO remember are things like rigid ciricula, standardized testing, and pointless/uninteresting and de-contextualized busy work that did little in providing a  “stimulus to create, and participate in, an improved, more civilized society,” as Whitehead has notably recommended.

I hate hospitals, they’re a nightmare! – Anyone out there ever hear this one? Working in healthcare for a while I definitely have. Are people referring to individual doctors or nurses or marketing people when they say things like this? Once again, no one denies that personal experience plays a role in someone’s opinion and I’m sure anyone who says they ‘hate hospitals’ must have had some terrible experiences at hospitals. But again, it’s my suspicion that this is more of a complaint about things like rushed, profit-driven care models, or what is perceived to be “bureaucratic inefficiency,” and less one about the physical building itself or nurses and staff being horrible human beings for that matter.

I hate social media! – What is being condemned in this popular and contemporary declaration? Are individual users being disparaged here? When I say ‘I hate social media’ am I also, at the same time, saying that I hate your grandmother who is currently just innocently scrolling through their instagram feed to see a video of their grandchild in a play? Or are we talking about the individuals who work at social media companies, like Meta? Do we hate individual software engineers, product managers, and data scientists who (knowingly or unknowingly) go to work everyday and allow algorithmic harm on their social platforms which prioritizes engagement over well-being and pushes all sorts of extreme content? Well, in this case maybe individual tech billionaires deserve some of our ire… but seriously, and hopefully, if we can begin to understand the very ecological, process-relational and systems insight that individuals indeed do adapt to their environment, then maybe we can also begin to sufficiently understand how the relational environment must be our focus here, not the individual isolated actors as such.

THE LAW ENFORCEMENT ENVIRONMENT/SYSTEM
Whenever one of my offensive remarks about cops (which, trust me, are not as flagrant or frequent as I am making it seem) ruffles feathers (which admittedly does happen though) one of the first cards I play is the one with a systems theory symbol on it (consider reading Donella Meadows) to show that it is quite possible to analyze policing as a system, with its own structures, incentives, feedback loops, and emergent behaviors, and not reduce things to the individuals who occupy roles within the policing system. This distinction is crucial when criticizing the institution of policing while recognizing that individual officers are not wholly defined by their profession. To put this another way, we are very much able to hate on bad ideas, and seek to eradicate them, while still loving our enemies. In fact we might do this in the way a doctor does when she attempts to heal someone by treating a harmful disease; most would agree that by doing this the doctor is not, simultaneously, attempting to eradicate the person.

As Peter Senge describes it, “Systems thinking is a discipline for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns of change rather than static ‘snapshots,’” and one very important insight that systems thinking brings to us is that, oftentimes, structure determines behavior. With this in mind perhaps we can begin to understand the behavior of actors within a system as being heavily shaped by the system’s rules, power dynamics, and feedback loops (e.g. balancing and reinforcing loops). These feedback loops can be positive or negative and may very well reinforce harm by sustaining systemic dysfunction. For example, a positive feedback loop observed in law-enforcement might take the shape of increasing militarization and budgets after high-profile violence, and we can imagine a negative feedback loop looking like suppression of accountability mechanisms.

Another important characteristic of systems to keep in mind as we go is that they produce outcomes that are not necessarily the intent of individual officers but are indeed predictable results of the system’s design. These are called emergent properties. To put it simply, if we have a system of justice based on retribution rather than shalom or restoration, for instance, well then it should not be surprising that what we get along with this are things like racial profiling and surveillance, increasing brutality and violence, codes of silence, and plenty of old fashioned corruption. Mennonite theologian, Andy Ramos-Baker, in their paper on Mennonites and the Police, describes this structural shaping and reinforcing in a very theologically clear way:

“As an occupation, policing necessarily involves people in a violent institution, demands they forfeit their freedom to a hierarchical chain of command and constraints imposed by their oath of office, and asks them to participate in an idolatrous view of the nation-state as the place where God’s action in history is primarily to be experienced and seen.”

Until we have a justice environment/system that is designed around restoration, rather than one based on vengeful retribution, practitioners seeking to live a life of active nonviolence (Christian or not) must consider some serious questions before calling the cops that we currently have. 

CALLING THE COPS
For most people, “calling the cops” is another way of simply calling for help, and the good Lord knows that we all need help sometimes. Dialing 911 for police in the system we’re currently embedded in isn’t a neutral act, however, and doing this might very well feed into and reinforce a system of violence that Jesus would have side-eyed harder than a Pharisee at a tax collector’s potluck. Before we reflexively summon the boys in blue (or their reality TV counterparts on COPS), we might do well to remind ourselves that every 911 police dispatch, while it may originate as an innocent and necessary ‘call for help,’ is also is a potential vote to fund more Glocks over grocery programs. As Andy Ramos-Baker notes, militarized policing as it currently exists asks us to idolize the state’s violence (peace through oppressive force) as “God’s action”—a heresy the early martyrs literally died resisting.

But what if ‘calling the cops’ was different? What if cops actually were peacemakers, mediators, and caretakers who sought restorative justice and were not outraged by grace for the unworthy criminal? In other words, what if Jesus were a cop? Would Jesus show up to a domestic dispute with a gun, a taser, and handcuffs? I like to imagine that law-enforcement would look a bit different if it were designed with Kingian nonviolence and restorative justice in mind. Actually, let us briefly envision a COPS reboot, shall we?

I suggest that the acronym for our satirical reboot stands for: Compassion Oriented Problem Solvers (C.O.P.S). Viewers might delight in watching these sort of peace officers fire their analytical and deductive but fun-loving weapons hitting targets like root causes of poverty and trauma over putting handcuffs/bandaids on symptoms. A show like this might tie right into MLK’s understanding that  “True compassion…” requires more “than flinging a coin to a beggar; it comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.”

Episode 1 might begin this way: Officers respond to a “stolen bike” call only to discover, after some thoughtful questioning, the need for a community bike-share program. At the end of the episode the peace officers help paint donated bikes rainbow colors and begin the process of setting up an organized racing team for the community (I’ll design the logo!).

Episode 2 might deal with the age-old neighborhood dispute. Peace officers (carrying zero lethal weapons) arrive at a local feud over noise and property lines. They collectively decide to hold a mediation session in which everyone identifies shared concerns (e.g., lack of community spaces) and end up helping to draft a neighbor agreement to create a park/common area and plant a community garden.

Episode 3 – a very sad but touching episode (get your tissues out!) – would have to be the domestic violence call. Officers arrive on the scene (once again, armed only with a self-dying cross-like compassion and visible sorrow) in aid of a woman who has reported an abusive partner. After safely relocating her to a survivor-led shelter, officers enroll the abuser in an accountability program (counseling, not jail). Through the course of the episode viewers watch as the survivor gains independence and the abuser begins restoration.

Although this fun fantasy cop show of ours may sound foolish, one thing it would realistically do is attempt to grieve over and redemptively address the root causes of actual problems like poverty, mental health, and abuse. By prioritizing healing over punishment, and building community power instead of dependency on armed force, we are practicing Kingian nonviolence. But until our spin-off cop show gets made Alexis-Baker’s challenge above stands and we should take heed in knowing that every time we avoid calling the cops we’re being forced to creatively improvise and write fanfiction for the KIN-DOM of Heaven. And unlike COPS, this is a show where the bad boys actually do get redeemed.

Tags:Christian Anarchismcopsecologylaw-enforcementMLKnonviolencepoliceprocess philosophysystems theory