A Critical Theory of Police Power: The Fabrication of Social Order

by Mark Neocleous

Anyone who considers questions of power cannot help but be struck by the ubiquitous nature, emotional force and political pull of the concept of order. The Fabrication of Social Order examines the role of policing in the fabrication of order.After an initial exploration of the original relationship between police, state power and the question of order, Neocleous focuses on the ways in which eighteenth century liberalism refined and narrowed the concept of the police, a process which masked the power of capital and broader issues of social control. In doing so he challenges the way liberalism came to define policing solely in terms of the question of crime and the rule of law. This liberal definition created a limited and fundamentally misleading understanding of policing which remains in use today. In contrast, Neocleous argues for an expanded concept of police, adequate to the expansive set of institutions through which policing takes place. These institutions are concerned not just with the maintenance or reproduction of order, but with its fabrication, especially the fabrication of a social order based on wage labour. This project, he argues, should be understood as the project of social security. Grasping this point allows a fuller understanding of the ways in which the state polices and secures civil society, and how order is fabricated through law and administration.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, History, Sociology, Police, Education, Law

240 pages, Paperback

First published June 20, 2000

Reviews

[Lukáš · Rating 3 out of 5]

Arguably, some of Neocleous' most inspiring and best work. The author teases out a genealogy of the police apparatus in Western Europe in order to show the power structures that are concealed behind its current, commodified liberal face. The links that appear between the economy, society and politics that become visible through this cut offer a relatively disturbing picture of the ways how "society" is fabricated and our understanding of the police apparatus is too narrow to fully appreciate the way it "works", instead of sticking just with the ideologized representation of what it is and ought to be.

[sinback · Rating 4 out of 5]

Looks at the police (well, European and US domestic police) and how they are situated in the titular fabric of social order, as well as what "social order" is and where our current obsession with it comes from (spoiler alert: it's liberalism). There are a number of interesting reformulations Neocleous proposes in this book when he examines the social and political role of the police, the police state, and the welfare state (Neocleous says the delineation between the police state and the welfare state has meandered pretty freely over the past 200 years or so, which is a good thing for any abolitionist to think on imo.)

One thing Neocleous does a lot of, which temporarily bumped my review on this book up from 4 stars to 5, is examine the words we use to talk about police, their etymologies, how they are shaped in other languages, etc. I am personally really tickled by etymology and many other readers are too, so you might like that. (For example, "police" were invented to enforce "policy"; "propriety" describes the way diligent members of the bourgeoisie act re: "property" - little things like that.)

However, one star has been deducted again after acknowledging this delight, to bring the book back down to a 4, because only domestic policing within Europe and the US is discussed basically at all. And even there we primarily just see discussion based in the UK specifically as well as the US. I think it would be really, really challenging to lay out as clear of a vibe check on other cultures' ways of instilling social order too, especially in a book which was short enough for a layperson to deal with, so I don't fault Neocleous on that. But it would be cool for abolitionist discourse to have more of that and sadly this book ain't where to find it.

[Eren Buğlalılar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Polis deyince aklınıza suçluları yakalayıp adalete teslim eden üniformalılar geliyorsa, gelmesin.

Mark Neocleous polis kavramının Avrupa'da ortaya çıkışından başlayıp, bu kurumun ne işe yaradığını kitabında pek güzel anlatmış. Emekçilerin geleneksel hakları, kapitalizmle birlikte nasıl birer suça dönüştü? Hukukun üstünlüğü ne demektir, polis ve hukuk ilişkisi eskiden beri nasıl olagelmiştir?

Polisin ve hukukun bu kadar tartışıldığı bir zamanda ve ülkede, ufkunuzu genişletecek makul uzunlukta bir çalışma.

Yazarın üslubunun okumayı zorlaştıran bir kurulukta olduğunu ve zaman zaman anlamı derinleştirmeyen tekrarlara kapıldığını da belirteyim. Öte yandan bilgi edinme sürecinin kendisinin her zaman zevkli olması da gerekmiyor zaten.

[ØMVЯ · Rating 5 out of 5]

Comprehensive view concerning the institution of police, introducing trivia such as the Latin origin of 'security' - 'to be without concern', yet also goes deep into the historical beginnings of how states started observing domestic activity and enforcing legal procedure.

The book also denotes the content from a Marxian perspective and references Slavoj Zizek in passing.

[Maria · Rating 4 out of 5]

O meu eu anarca de 16 anos teria amado intensamente este livro, muito bom!

[Jayden gonzalez · Rating 5 out of 5]

“It is in this spirit of excess that the book contains no proposals for reform. The reader searching for how to make the police and social policy more democratic (more representative, more democratic, more accountable, less racist, less oppressive, and so on) is best advised to read another book.”

[Ahmet Akın · Rating 5 out of 5]

Polis erki ve Avrupa tarihindeki geçmişten günümüze yansımaları üzerine harika bir inceleme. İktidar ve onun baskı aracı olarak icat ettiği polis erkine farklı bir bakış açısı getiriyor.

[Neal Spadafora · Rating 5 out of 5]

A phenomenal book. Further review forthcoming 😎

[Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best book in considering the concept of Police I've ever read. Very useful and exceptionally good at overturning common sensical arguments

[laila k · Rating 5 out of 5]

He valid