![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This is a reply to:
Morgan, Matthew. 2014. “The containment of Occupy: militarized police forces and social control in America.” Global Discourse. 4 (2–3): 267–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2014.888618.
Notes
1. I use the term ‘violence’ to distinguish police behaviour that results in physical injury or harm from the more liberal-legal construction of ‘force’ used by Bittner (Citation1970) and the more expansive phrase ‘police power.’
2. For a discussion of the occupational ideology, vocabulary of motives and motivations for police violence, see Kappeler, Sluder, and Alpert (Citation1998, chaps. 4 and 5).
3. Legitimately applied force is not merely a liberal, legalistic calculation by the police, but also includes a normative and situational reckoning that can be informed by racism, stereotypes and prejudice.
4. In many cities across the United States, the police took no overt action against Occupy protesters. These cases warrant critical review in terms of the reasons for inaction, but also the effect selective police action had on the larger movement. In other words, why did Occupy collapse in many areas even in the absence of police violence?