Mu Conversations: A MAP-Law Enforcement Collaboration?

[Jim Burton]

This could be a provocative Mu article, if it falls into the right hands (although the subject matter might be something which is technically possible - discuss)

https://www.map-union.org/perspectives/ ... ns-map-leo

Dan Finkelstein

I fully appreciate this might feel like boiling the ocean, or even asking the Free Palestine movement to get into bed with the Directors of Raytheon, but here I would like to raise the possibility of a MAP Law-Enforcement Collaboration. If anything, as a conversation starter.

The precedents have always been strong. B4U-ACT, a collaboration between MAPs and clinicians has been going for almost a quarter of a century, and even successfully obtained state funding during its formative years under the late MAP thought-leader, Michael Melsheimer. By playing the long game, and thinking outside the box, MAPs managed to foster an identity and genuine, organic growth in ways previously unimaginable. It was an unprecedented success.

So, might there be a case for a project where MAPs collaborate with strictly-vetted LEOs?

[JGHeaven]

I don't see any benefit.

LEO's don't define the law, they have no impact on the law, they only enforce it to the letter.
I was reading recently about the police being criticised for enforcing a law against people harming nobody and their response was that they will continue to enforce even silly laws until they are changed.

So I don't see any benefit in engaging with LEO's since the relationship can only go one way. LEO asks you to report on anyone breaking the law, you report anyone you suspect, they get arrested. How is that moving the needle other than bolstering LEO stats?

If you want to engage with anyone, engage with law makers, legal organisations, law firms, policy makers, think tanks.

Or to put it another way. Don't waste your time with the monkey, go straight to the organ grinder.

[notetaker]

If you want to engage with anyone, engage with law makers, legal organisations, law firms, policy makers, think tanks.

Or to put it another way. Don't waste your time with the monkey, go straight to the organ grinder.

Agreed. It's next to impossible to reason with someone whose major purpose is to come down on anyone that breaks laws. Henchmen don't think for themselves, that's why they're called henchmen.

[JGHeaven]

Agreed. It's next to impossible to reason with someone whose major purpose is to come down on anyone that breaks laws. Henchmen don't think for themselves, that's why they're called henchmen.

That is a very good way to put it.

[G@yWad69]

It benefits in absolutely zero way, shape, or form to collaberate with the very people locking us up, destroying our social lives, and then beating us in prison or inciting other prisoners to be violent towards us. Thats like slaves working with slave catchers. Absolutely ridiculous. The only way I would “work” with the feds is to view PIM in the cybercrimes devision(for obvious reasons). But even then, I wouldnt be able to get the bad taste out of my mouth that I am helping get people locked up for decades over willing selfies and anime girls

[Jim Burton]

How exactly did MAPs manage to find sympathetic Mental Health Professionals, and can this also be applied to Law Enforcement and Probation Officers - people who work in the system, not necessarily the system itself?

This is what the blog author wants to know, and I don't see it being addressed thus far.

[BLueRibbon]

How exactly did MAPs manage to find sympathetic Mental Health Professionals, and can this also be applied to Law Enforcement and Probation Officers - people who work in the system, not necessarily the system itself?

This is what the blog author wants to know, and I don't see it being addressed thus far.

I guess the difference is that mental health professionals ostensibly seek to help their clients, whereas LEO exist to enforce laws that are very much aimed at incarcerating MAPs (or at least getting them on a sex offender register).

It's not the same, IMO.

[Jim Burton]

It is my understanding that systems used to control and discipline groups (psychiatry, law enforcement) can be subverted from the bottom up, as to work efficiently, a system must make use of its constituent parts (in this case, individuals).

I'll put forward as evidence for this - the total ideological capture of western psychiatry and law enforcement by homosexuals - such that we now have LGBT clubs and virtue-signalling operations in most European law enforcement agencies. In our example, note that the lax attitude of law enforcement officials in the Netherlands predated the legalization era of the 1990s, spanning from a general shift in attitudes during the 60s and 70s, and unwillingness to prosecute for practical, budgetary or other reasons.