Principles based in trust and relationships versus Sadeian absolute control

by Julia Evans on August 14, 2011

Hello,

Sadeian power (Absolute power as the Privy Council uses) is implemented through the top-down enforcement of judgments or the Government’s One Standards within relationships of certainty of control, competition, & win/lose based in envy.  This produces ‘taint’ (Many past postings which are in the urgent queue for action) and scapegoating (ditto)). It never fails.

The other form of governance, based within relationships, is implemented through relationships of trust, love, respect for difference, a common humanity, which is described in my 2007 article posted on this web-site, ‘policing by consent’ my 13th August post (reference The Tablet Editorial), & principles of acting – see ‘regx2 group’ category.  The only certainty is that the assumptions your action is based in will fail – see Giles Fraser referenced in my 11th August posting and other postings on limits.

The following Financial Times reference draws the difference between these two approaches as related to policing.

Sadeian power:

Video interveiw, pages of paperwork and a multi-agency conference.

the police force as a paramilitary arm of the state

“peelers” worked the streets when the tabloid press was in its infancy, human rights applied to the few and lawyers stuck to criminal, rather than compensation, cases.

Already the media is picking over shaky footage of a riot officer striking a suspected looter with a baton while on the ground, asking whether it represents police brutality.

Mr Fahy does not want to return to the 1970s, when he started on the beat and shuddered at the sight of blood in police cells and signed “confessions”.

But the safety-first culture means the police become the “service of last resort”, he said.

Mr Fahy later admitted to the Financial Times he feared “the scapegoat culture”. “We cannot prevent bad things happening,” he concluded.

Governance based within relationships of trust and consent:

return to the era when dealing with an errant youth required a clip round the ear

a vision of a police force not as a paramilitary arm of the state but working with the people.

The constable has discretion and is answerable to local people,” says Mr Fahy. “The price of that is inconsistency.”

“We cannot prevent bad things happening,” he concluded.

This is the choice facing everyone living in England (I believe that Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales have different governance processes probably dating back to the Roman conquest.)

Are you going to bray for tighter controls to protect you and your property from harm

Or

Are you going to converse with your neighbours, your elected representatives, your family, friends & enemies

So that the imposition of Sadeian governance is resisted.  The choice is yours….

Julia

***

Quotes from: The Financial Times August 14 2011

Editorial: Cuts require change of police role, says chief

by Andrew Bounds

There 1,000 police officers on the streets of Manchester and Salford alone on Tuesday night during the worst rioting for 30 years: 337 fewer than the number who will be cut over the next four years by the Greater Manchester force.

Peter Fahy, chief constable, said after the riots that the cuts should be reconsidered as the police were a “bulwark” against disorder.

…It was time to return to the era when dealing with an errant youth required a clip round the ear rather than a video interview, pages of paperwork and a multi-agency conference.

“Peel (Sir Robert Peel) … had a vision of a police force not as a paramilitary arm of the state but working with the people. The constable has discretion and is answerable to local people,” says Mr Fahy. “The price of that is inconsistency.”

However, Sir Robert’s “peelers” worked the streets when the tabloid press was in its infancy, human rights applied to the few and lawyers stuck to criminal, rather than compensation, cases.

Already the media is picking over shaky footage of a riot officer striking a suspected looter with a baton while on the ground, asking whether it represents police brutality.

Mr Fahy does not want to return to the 1970s, when he started on the beat and shuddered at the sight of blood in police cells and signed “confessions”.

But the safety-first culture means the police become the “service of last resort”, he said.

When a patient checks out of hospital without permission nurses ring the police. When a child storms out of a care home, staff, unable to physically restrain them, ring the police. When a person with mental health problems leaves a day centre in distress, workers call the police.

Mr Fahy later admitted to the Financial Times he feared “the scapegoat culture”. “We cannot prevent bad things happening,” he concluded.