police (n.)

1530, at first essentially the same word as policy (n.1); from middle french police (late 15c.), from latin politia "civil administration," from greek polis "city" (see polis).

until mid-19c. used in england for "civil administration;" application to "administration of public order" (1716) is from french (late 17c.), and originally in english referred to france or other foreign nations. the first force so-named in england was the marine police, set up 1798 to protect merchandise at the port of london. police state "state regulated by means of national police" first recorded 1865, with reference to austria. police action in the international sense of "military intervention short of war, ostensibly to correct lawlessness" is from 1933. police officer is attested from 1800. police station is from 1817.

police (v.)

"to keep order in," 1580s, from middle french policer, from police (see police (n.)). meaning "to keep order by means of police" is from 1837. related: policed; policing

policeman (n.)

1790, from police (n.) + man (n.).

"one who cannot do anything either becomes a policeman or school teacher."

"weak sepoy is powerful in the enclave of the untouchables." -- old gujarati reflections on the british raj.

the first observation refers to the work ability of teachers and police. in either work it is like that poem line: "theirs not to question why, theirs but to do and die." die in retirement, that is. in the order of hierarchy from the highest to the lowest, each one simply conveys the order. now this observation was made before the machines came in use to cast things from moulds, when craftsmen made things from the raw materials, and hence they had to use their brains to put things together every time, without the mould to make cast from. and little by little, every profession is being mechanized, requiring lesser or no use of the brains. the second observation is of the state of mind of one's resentment to being an underling, and worse yet, an extension of the machine in the factory rather than a human person. and in reaction to it one takes it out on the weak. in india, the weak were, and still are -- the poorest untouchables, and in the u.s., being former british colony, the weakest are the poor and poor black americans.

the two democracies, one the oldest and the other the biggest are paper democracies. the "we the people" are still the subjects of the 'raj' as far as their mindset is concerned. being subjects, they are subjected to the dos and don'ts, right or wrong; and between them and the ruler now transformed into the rule of laws is a plethora of minders in every walk of life. religion is losing its power wherever it is separated from the state. the policing and teaching are still two of the dreaded professions. police are not easily laid off as is with many other professions, in which if one does not satisfy the customer one is reprimanded or even gets fired. teachers are slowly losing their ground. in most countries the corporal punishment and beating students for not learning good is outdated. in contrast, the police force has acquired more ground as more people are reduced to the state of poverty making them powerless. police observes the weakness and strength reflected in appearance of the person they confront, and the shape and the size of the house they invade. the indian and american police do not rough handle a "well dressed" person. the police do not go in the gated communities of the rich.

and then, the hollywood and bollywood movie cops are the role models of the real police. which of the two, the police or the actor, began to act violently first may be debatable, but each one seems to be a reflection of the other, and, too, the movie actors ‘scripted’ violence is overseen by directors with a handful of script to follow. it seems, it all goes in circles, this passing the blame on to someone else.

now what is overlooked is the conditioned reflex of organ of the mind. a minding without an awareness of what is to be minded, why and how makes for the robotic motions. robots act in a precise way as programmed. police force was programmed to safeguard the governance of the state. this state of mind of police as well as the people at large is that of the colonial era. it was then, that the police was protecting the colonizers from the colonized. the colonizers were not related to the people they subdued. they were outsiders who would not have survived without the police force. though originally from the local area, these police in the service of the foreign power were housed in police quarters away from the people, the rulers were observant of the segregation of the classes among the subjects, the rich and the poor. the rich were the favored citizens and the poor were the twice despised. it is still the same, the poor bear the brunt of all those who are better off.

what is different now is the change of the actors playing the rulers in the remake of the same old play. as in the remake of the old movie there are some changes and improvisations due to the available newer methods and means, the governance of the state has gone through some ornamental changes, keeping the theme the same. so, too, the policing has been improvised in the manner a classical pianist improvises the composition of an old master, keeping the theme familiar to the ears of the patrons. the patron of the police is the state; and the state in conceptual texts is “of the people, by the people, for the people” now as reported in the news, there have been instances of the second world war time japanese soldiers living in hiding in the philipines, all these years being unaware that, that war had ended. the police of the former colonies, too, are likewise unaware that their patrons are now different. the city police is now under the jurisdiction of the city mayor. or that just like everybody else, the police, too, are finding it difficult to let go of the momentary instances of the exhilaration of the feeling of being powerful.

as the etymology of the word: police states the first police force was created to protect the merchandize. they were called the merchant marine. and the merchants were the rich. the Word: rich is from old german reich, coming from the latin: rex, meaning regal. the east india company used its police force to force out the feuding kings and established the british raj in india. in the english colony in the new world, the rich rebelled against the english rule of law regarding the taxation, but not against the english form of the civil governance. so now every fourth year they change the actor to play the commander in chief, who still marches with the same old drumbeat. in every political move the english and the u.s. have been marching in locked steps. it is interesting to note, that this marching with the familiar drumbeat is so ingrained in the american psyche, that even the bride-to-be rehearses and then walks to the altar in the church in the locked step with the rhythm in the wedding ceremony. wedded thus, the couple will procreate only the subservient next generation. and with the hyped-up rush to show off whose infant can read, or can play piano or sitar at an earlier age, the new mothers are lured into safeguarding the way of life invented in the interests of the rich protected with the modern version of the merchant marine.

the distinction between the poor and rich is primarily to appear "better than thou" as an indicator of the survival of the socio-economic quest. ecologically biological existence recognizes no such distinction of class, creed or statuses. whether rich or poor, one has to live with the nature given form of one's being. the table manners and the visually fancy commode have no effect upon the food once down the throat. the distinctions are manmade, and without the distinctions the human culture cannot exist, especially in its modern urban form. the book of protocol, whether national or of any group assigns the script to each and every person within a given society. since it is essentially a role playing, it requires audio and visually distinct forms in order to be recognized as one particular person among many other persons, each one also being a person of a particular description. just look at the uniform of a decorated five star general, with his entire front of the jacket covered with the pins and stripes and medals. or a tiny little lapel pin of the u.s. flag on the president's jacket. or pope, queen elizabeth, a hindu guru, or even the middle eastern guerilla fighters who are all too exposed to the warfares depicted on tv and movie screen. strip them all of their uniforms and insignias, and they all will lose their luster and halo and strength. likewise, within the all mighty looking police uniform is just another human person, who would not dare to stomp his boot on another person's head, nor would he want to.

it takes two to tangle in animosity or to embrace amicably. just as the police are unaware of whose interests they are defending, the people at large, too, are unaware of their obligations that are the necessary ingredients of the very sense of being free. watch some old westerns to see how improvised are only the weapons for both side of the law, and that the law is still the same old imperial way of life. confucius stated that "the ideal citizen is one who abides by the law." in england the state uplifts the ideal citizen with the title of lordship, in the u.s. it is the medal of the freedom, and in india, the 'bharatratna', ratna meaning the jewel, the jewel in the crown that india was called.

it is a matter of fact, that in any spontaneous protest, the mob ultimately begins to loot shops and destroy the property of the state and the rich. other than looting things of use or plain value, people also desire to hurt those who are perceived in their psyche as the oppressors. since the governance of the state and greed factor driven practice of commerce have not changed, it is easy to view them as the old enemies of the people. but enemy or not, destroying things of common use, like buses, which are paid for by the city or the state with the monies collected in taxes from the very people.

there was an old tv show called andy griffith show. in it andy is the sheriff and he has a young deputy. andy is not distinctly dressed as a sheriff, nor does he discard the common sense and common courtesy. his deputy is all fired up with the acquired sense of power. though andy resolves the issues amicably, the comic aspect of the show overlooks the non violent approach of the police. now that may be a right means to solve a problem without creating another one, but that is not in the interests of the commerce sector. every walk of the urban way of life is paved with the commercial product-related information and instructions. and inadvertently, every informed step in the problem solving lands one in another problem, like the side effects of taking an american medical association approved medication, then invading the patient with a new ailment. peaceful co-existence is not in the interests of the rich, for then they cannot sell the police the stun guns and the military the drones.

violence is not in the police or military uniform, nor it is in the weapons. it is the byproduct of the sense of isolation that the comparative mode of education cultivates. trained thus, the pre-schooler children who had shared the seat on the swing and the bench in the kindergarten, gradually learn to distance themselves from each other. without distancing they cannot view their best friends as competitors in creating a socio-economic niche in the society. this breeds jealousy and ill will towards one another. depending upon the degree of the interference experienced, this results in violent thoughts and actions.