ACAB as an actual term is a bit more ideological in nature, specifically, in regards to the task the police actually do, which is primarily protect the state and private property, no matter whether it’s good or bad.
If the state tells the police to disrupt a protest about climate change? Then that is their job, and if they don’t do it, they’re effectively not doing what they’re supposed to.
You’re a bit off in the ACAB definition. It’s not that the state makes them do bad things (they do, but that’s irrelevant). It’s that all cops protect bad cops, making themselves bad cops as well. If a department has 30 cops, 3 are “bad” and 27 are “good,” then the bad ones should be forced out. That doesn’t actually happen though, so you have 30 bad cops.
This system is also heavily self reinforcing. If you add a 31st good cop that tries to do something about bad cops, they are either forced out or intimidated into compliance. That still leaves you with all bad cops.
ACAB as an actual term is a bit more ideological in nature, specifically, in regards to the task the police actually do, which is primarily protect the state and private property, no matter whether it’s good or bad.
If the state tells the police to disrupt a protest about climate change? Then that is their job, and if they don’t do it, they’re effectively not doing what they’re supposed to.
You’re a bit off in the ACAB definition. It’s not that the state makes them do bad things (they do, but that’s irrelevant). It’s that all cops protect bad cops, making themselves bad cops as well. If a department has 30 cops, 3 are “bad” and 27 are “good,” then the bad ones should be forced out. That doesn’t actually happen though, so you have 30 bad cops.
This system is also heavily self reinforcing. If you add a 31st good cop that tries to do something about bad cops, they are either forced out or intimidated into compliance. That still leaves you with all bad cops.