Sure, let’s replace the bastards with worse bastards that are only there for profit and would make less profit if crime were to go down! That’ll fix it! 🤦
The thing is, individual citizens can’t reform the police, or ambulance services, fire brigade, or power utilities, all of which have been gutted by the ANC. All they can do is to pay, out of pocket, for private sector replacements. No one is arguing that this is better than having working public sector versions in the first place, but that’s not achievable until the national government gets totally overhauled (if it ever happens).
Even public sector versions that ARENT working would be a much better situation. The only thing worse than a secretly corrupt cop is an openly for-profit private “security force” paid for by and therefore OFFICIALLY beholden to the rich and their interests above all.
I think you’re trying to frame this in a Western or American context - it really doesn’t apply here.
You’re thinking only the rich have security, you can drive to some of the poorest areas in SA and you’ll see local residents utilising private security.
It’s not that these institutions are not working - they are NON EXISTENT. Imagine if the police simply stopped working, not barely functioning, I mean literally completely non-functional.
And it’s not just the police force, it’s electricity, water, sanitation, education, healthcare, almost every sector is either borderline non-functioning or completely non-functioning.
I think you’re trying to frame this in a Western or American context
No, I’m framing it in a “rich people look out for themselves. That’s how they became rich” context that’s true worldwide.
You’re thinking only the rich have security, you can drive to some of the poorest areas in SA and you’ll see local residents utilising private security.
No, I’m saying that since the rich are the ones paying, the rest only get security if it pits the interests of the rich people. That poor people’s interest sometimes align with that by happenstance doesn’t make rich people de facto owning the police a good idea. Especially not when the rich people themselves are committing crimes.
I really don’t understand why you’re trying so hard to frame this in a rich versus poor issue.
In South Africa you can go to the middle of gangland which is easy to find because crime is so rampant, and you’ll find security companies whose residents are their customers not some rich person whose decided to fund security for poor people.
I don’t think you understand how serious crime is here that everyone no matter the wealth class is being affected to such a degree that private security companies in both rich and poor areas are the only effective combat against the wave of terror.
Oh dude let me inform you about the state of crime in South Africa - we’ve had instances where police stations have been firebombed by criminals raiding the weapons store, any property not being guarded being stolen from lawn chairs to vehicles, the unusually high rate crime: 21000+ murders per year, 42000+ rapes per year and that’s officially reported stats from the SAPS.
I’ve seen people being kidnapped, I have even had family and friends who have been kidnapped, women raped and murdered in my locality, countless hijacking and aggravated robberies. I am part of the local CPF so I am on constant communication with police and security companies.
Often the police are completely reliant or heavily rely on security companies. These security companies are often the only people standing in the face of lawlessness. Not necessarily in the wealthiest areas either.
That you need to point this out illustrates my point: the private security armies are there to protect the people who pay them and their interests. If the boss has interests in a less wealthy area, that might be protected too. Maybe.
That’s not law enforcement, that’s an anarcho-capitalist nightmare!
Pretty much saying that poor people have an interest in hiring private security so there’s security companies in poorer areas too this is not a rich thing this is a crime is rampant issue. But I guess you live here so you understand the situation on the ground.
Sure, let’s replace the bastards with worse bastards that are only there for profit and would make less profit if crime were to go down! That’ll fix it! 🤦
The thing is, individual citizens can’t reform the police, or ambulance services, fire brigade, or power utilities, all of which have been gutted by the ANC. All they can do is to pay, out of pocket, for private sector replacements. No one is arguing that this is better than having working public sector versions in the first place, but that’s not achievable until the national government gets totally overhauled (if it ever happens).
Even public sector versions that ARENT working would be a much better situation. The only thing worse than a secretly corrupt cop is an openly for-profit private “security force” paid for by and therefore OFFICIALLY beholden to the rich and their interests above all.
I think you’re trying to frame this in a Western or American context - it really doesn’t apply here.
You’re thinking only the rich have security, you can drive to some of the poorest areas in SA and you’ll see local residents utilising private security.
It’s not that these institutions are not working - they are NON EXISTENT. Imagine if the police simply stopped working, not barely functioning, I mean literally completely non-functional.
And it’s not just the police force, it’s electricity, water, sanitation, education, healthcare, almost every sector is either borderline non-functioning or completely non-functioning.
No, I’m framing it in a “rich people look out for themselves. That’s how they became rich” context that’s true worldwide.
No, I’m saying that since the rich are the ones paying, the rest only get security if it pits the interests of the rich people. That poor people’s interest sometimes align with that by happenstance doesn’t make rich people de facto owning the police a good idea. Especially not when the rich people themselves are committing crimes.
I really don’t understand why you’re trying so hard to frame this in a rich versus poor issue.
In South Africa you can go to the middle of gangland which is easy to find because crime is so rampant, and you’ll find security companies whose residents are their customers not some rich person whose decided to fund security for poor people.
I don’t think you understand how serious crime is here that everyone no matter the wealth class is being affected to such a degree that private security companies in both rich and poor areas are the only effective combat against the wave of terror.
Oh dude let me inform you about the state of crime in South Africa - we’ve had instances where police stations have been firebombed by criminals raiding the weapons store, any property not being guarded being stolen from lawn chairs to vehicles, the unusually high rate crime: 21000+ murders per year, 42000+ rapes per year and that’s officially reported stats from the SAPS.
I’ve seen people being kidnapped, I have even had family and friends who have been kidnapped, women raped and murdered in my locality, countless hijacking and aggravated robberies. I am part of the local CPF so I am on constant communication with police and security companies.
Often the police are completely reliant or heavily rely on security companies. These security companies are often the only people standing in the face of lawlessness. Not necessarily in the wealthiest areas either.
That you need to point this out illustrates my point: the private security armies are there to protect the people who pay them and their interests. If the boss has interests in a less wealthy area, that might be protected too. Maybe.
That’s not law enforcement, that’s an anarcho-capitalist nightmare!
deleted by creator
Pretty much saying that poor people have an interest in hiring private security so there’s security companies in poorer areas too this is not a rich thing this is a crime is rampant issue. But I guess you live here so you understand the situation on the ground.