I think a lot of Americans actually like the idea of a security state apparatus. They want a sky-daddy to protect them.
post
DHS formed in the wake of 9/11 because federal agencies could not get their shit together and collaborate. Whether by design or rapid evolution, it became less of a coordinating agency between disparate federal intelligence agencies and more of a mysterious extra-judicial entity with a military arm. Oh and TSA. Let's not forget about humble ole' TSA.
We've sure tried to forget them, but even though they miss 95% of the bomb exercises they are put through, they insist that we dont move on from them.
Itd be faster and just as effective if we made a bonfire of our money at the airport and all just emptied our wallets into it as we passed by them.
It does make sense to have someone who coordinates all the different federal police and intelligence forces in the country. The US has TSA, ATF, FBI, CIA, NSA, DEA, Secret Service, Federal Marshals, even the USPS has a police force.
Without some kind of coordination you have undercover agents of one service being wiretapped and followed by another service. Plus, you get the kinds of things that happened around 9/11 where each agency had a slice of the picture but they weren't sharing info so nobody had the whole picture.
I think in a sensible country ATF would be the alcohol branch, tobacco branch and firearms branches of the federal police force. DEA would be the drug enforcement arm of that federal police force. It seems really strange to me that the FBI is basically the federal police force, but for some reason when it comes to firearms-related crime, that's someone else's department.
Also, in a sensible country, someone would be policing the police. I don't actually think any country has properly figured that out though. In reality, it seems like an important role for the police is to enforce the status quo, and ensure that the people on top remain on top and the people on the bottom remain there. That allows police to place themselves slightly below the people on top, but importantly significantly above those on the bottom. Because of that, I don't think the rich and powerful in any country really want a fully controlled police force, otherwise they can't do the extra-judicial things that maintain the hierarchy.
The whole position and power of the DHS needs to be reviewed and reworked. In most other countries, this is handled by the equivalent Department of the Interior. The department doesn't need to have it's own unchecked military force to get the job done.
This is your reminder that KGB meant (in Russian) basically the same thing as Department of Homeland Security.
The people who will fight this the hardest will be the long toothed democrats unfortunately
Many of us remember the creation of DHS and we said then, and many experts also said then, that the department was going to be bad for Americans. In fact, it has been just as bad as we expected.
Does anyone actually feel safe because of TSA compared with previous airport security? I sure don't. We certainly got safety by having locked reinforced cockpit cabins. But the agents who are doing the scanners, they miss weapons all the time. And of course they don't get paid well so if they wanted to smuggle weapons in I'm sure they could do so easily enough.
And that's before we started talking about ICE.
Honestly, I'm more scared of TSA than anything they are supposedly preventing.
They do prevent a lot water bottles and belt buckles that would otherwise be a serious threat to the safety of good law-abiding citizens.
Security theatre is security theatre. However, prior to TSA airlines were responsible for security. They contracted that security out to the lowest bidder:
https://www.npr.org/2021/09/10/1035131619/911-travel-timeline-tsa
That being said, my argument is not that TSA is better. I'm not arguing at all. I'm just offering some additional information to highlight what came before TSA.
At this point, it's going to be neigh on impossible to do away with the DHS. Few have any idea of just how much stuff has been crammed into that department. Everything from law enforcement down to FEMA and even the fire trucks and boots your local fire department use.
That monster is huge.
Huh, almost like that was the point -- make it so sprawling people can't comprehend getting rid of it. Too bad a lot of us remember a world before the DHS, and it wasn't rampant street terrorism in the USA like they'd have you believe.
If the fire department was put in it then it can be taken out.
Or just disband certain departments of the DHS.
The slogan doesn't have to exactly match the execution.
"Defund the police" was a major contributor to Trump winning again. That's not a message a lot of the country reacts well to.
Same thing here. Win before you start saying shit like this.
ICE is under DHS. DHS is also doing a bunch of wildly unpopular political "investigations". There are also a lot of concerns about surveillance in general, which DHS is definitely doing (like buying adtech data on everyone) It is not at all controversial to call for scrapping the whole department. Maybe the messaging needs refinement.
Defund the police was a popular slogan in 2020, the year that Trump lost. Also, 65% of Americans polled thought burning down the Minneapolis East Precinct was justified.
Also, DHS is much smaller & newer than the idea of police departments. America existed for a long time without DHS, so I don’t even think these are equivalent things at all.
Most of the country still thinks the Dems want to defund the police, and most don't want it. They also aren't going to be too well informed about how DHS fits into the country: it sounds like it's protecting them, and taking it away is being "soft on crime" or "open borders". That turns the conservatives out, too.
Abolish the police state, don't stop at DHS.
Gotta slowly reverse boil the frog - these are definitely great first steps and will hopefully warm the public up to demilitarizing, then defanging, then defunding/abolishing the police state.
Nope, unless they promise to immediately fix every problem they're not worthy of supporting
/s
End the Patriot Act.
A lot of us remember an America without it and the DHS. They are both 9/11 knee jerk reactions that have been nothing but bad for us, exactly like the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions. We would have been so much better off to just take the (L) after 9/11 but W kept trying for a (W).
DHS has always been a dystopian reminder of the ruination of America that began with the response to 9/11. I never agreed to give up any freedom for their security theater. They just did all that shit to us.
The duplicative nature of DHS isn’t incompetence, it’s deliberate deception. DHS was created to put down dissidents in America, not terrorists.
Realistically what does the dhs even do? Wouldn’t it be more efficient to abolish them and give their authority and funding to the states?
No party is more progressive than Democrats when they know their bills have absolutely no hope in hell of passing.
It's not the party, though. There are progressive members of the party, and when they introduce bills like this, the rest of the Democrats cough uncomfortably, and sidle away quietly, leaving the brave progressive to bear the full brunt of the right-wing outrage machine. (See, for example, the Green New Deal.)
💯
It was created in my lifetime and it totally fucking sucks. If we have to cut things because of budgetary concerns, it's a great candidate.
It's crazy how many people think we've always had DHS...
There are a lot of adults alive today who’ve had it their entire lives
top 50 comments