: Strategic & Revolutionary Hypotheticals: Part 1

: Los Angeles, CA - USA

: 28–August 2020

: @BPDisciples

: Let’s think through some hypotheticals together and see what reasonable implications we can draw from them.

: #BlocFileThread #BlocFileStrategy

Pay less attention to what law enforcement is legally permitted to do and more attention to what law enforcement is capable of doing, and whether you’ve taken sufficient measures to defend against the latter. Always assume nothing is off-limits for the surveillance police state.

Whether the police have a warrant, rest assured they will spy on you and use the data they collect to track you and thwart any attempt at acting against the interests of the police without ever having let a court get wind of their illegal surveillance. Why? Because they can.

Think of it this way: pretend you are a police officer in a militarized police state—essentially, a soldier. The enemy? Well, none other than the civilians of the state whom have been placed in your charge. Civil unrest is incipient and teetering on revolution, meaning you and

your buddies with whom you always train, squad mates and the rest of those in your unit are what stands between the insurrectionists and their goal of replacing the state—your employer, which means you are now their direct enemy. As such, every civilian is now a potential threat.

Let’s put this into perspective: LA has a population of roughly 4-million with a police force of around 9,000 sworn officers and 3,000 civilian employees (source attached). That’s only one officer per every 433 civilians! Even if, let’s say, just a quarter of Los Angeles were to

revolt, that’s still only a single officer per every 108 revolutionaries, meaning it wouldn’t even take a quarter of Angelinos revolting all at the same time in order to all-too-easily overwhelm LAPD and ransack every last piece of gear they have on hand, hypothetically speaking.

It wouldn’t matter if every single officer on deck was a former Navy SEAL, sheer numbers would ensure they remain barricaded in their stations or risk falling within what I’d guess would be less than an hour in a coordinated operation. Now, having said this...

Remember, in this little hypothetical of ours, you’re one of the officers, and you and the entire department are well aware of your rather precarious position in the event of revolution. Thus, there are likely two prevailing emotions running through you and your fellow officers:

fear and exhilaration. Because you all know if it ever came down to it, it’s all over and there’s no telling what a crazed mob of civilians might do to you, especially when you are the very reason they are revolting. You know, because you’ve been ABUSING and KILLING them. Yeah...

Alright, so as LAPD, what are your options?

As we already mentioned, the problem is numbers. But there is no way LAPD can come anywhere close to employing the amount officers needed to hold off a full-fledged revolution. It would bankrupt LA overnight. The California National

Guard would need to be mobilized in the event of a revolution, obviously. But that’s getting ahead of ourselves. In this scenario in particular, the revolution hasn’t started yet, though there is certainly calls for it. As LAPD, you must prevent this from happening, and you must

do so unconventionally.

Why unconventionally?

Here’s the thing about revolutions—they no longer recognize your authority or that of the state. If they did, there wouldn’t be calls for a revolution. This means revolutions are an ‘extra-legal’ force acting to overthrow the state.

Remember, I once talked about this in another thread from the perspective of the protester-turned-revolutionary: https://twitter.com/bpdisciples/status/1296037233821065216

One cannot contain nor defend against an EXTRA-legal force, i.e. state enemy, using only LEGAL permissions aimed at dealing with INTRA-legal forces. Thus, the moral gray area of the state is determining at which point it becomes acceptable to use extra-legal measures for

containment. This will forever be an unanswerable question. Police aren’t supposed to use extra-legal force (even though we know they do) per the intra-legal code of law. Extra-legal is the job of the military, against enemies of the state, which as a revolutionary, one is indeed

that...sort of.

The thing is... the defense in theory is that a citizen can’t really stop being a citizen by virtue of their crimes, which technically can still be looked at as intra-legal crimes, regardless of what the citizen has actually said and done. Thus, we have revealed

the magnanimous moral gray area for both civilian and police officer, because there becomes a point at which neither know quite what to do, neither want to do it, but both fear for their survival. And it is this gray area which allows for mass atrocities to occur. Conclusively...

This is not a defense of anything the police are doing, have done or will do. I am simply saying that at the same time, the odds are extremely in our favor and also extremely precarious, as if this wasn’t obvious already. However, knowing WHY they are this way should greatly aid

in planning for the future and strategizing appropriately. I will continue this thread soon in a separate “Part 2”, in which I will continue our hypothetical situation as a police officer and what measures you and your department might be taking in light of these circumstances.

In the meantime, remain vigilant. /END