The Authority of CCP State Police is Illegitimate
Sep 21, 2024
Many people like to compare CCP State with the United States, especially the “Fifty-Cent Army” or “communist pink” supporters, who love to compare CCP State police to American police, claiming that the latter are even harsher than the former.
These people tend to focus on the surface-level behavior of law enforcement in both countries without diving into the issue of the legitimacy of authority. They ignore a fundamental fact: the CCP regime itself is an illegitimate dictatorship.
From this perspective, CCP State police, as an enforcement agency, derive their authority directly from the CCP regime. However, the CCP is a dictatorial regime that did not gain its ruling power through recognized democratic procedures or broad social consensus. As a tool of this regime, the authority of the CCP State police is also illegitimate, as it is an extension of the regime’s control over society.
In contrast, the authority of American police is based on the rule of law. Although the U.S. law enforcement system has its own set of issues and criticisms, such as police brutality and racial discrimination, the power of American police is exercised within the framework of a rule-of-law state. This means that their authority is derived from the Constitution and the democratic system. Even when abuses occur, the foundation of their authority is protected by democratic procedures and the rule of law.
This distinction between legitimate and illegitimate authority is crucial because it highlights the fundamental differences between the systems. Under the CCP’s rule, the role of the police is not only to maintain law and order but also to suppress dissent and quell resistance to the regime. These enforcement actions often do not follow the principles of universal rule of law but instead center around maintaining and defending the regime’s power.
Of course, this does not mean that the U.S. police system is free of problems—there are certainly instances of serious abuse of power or violent enforcement. However, it’s important to note that American citizens can challenge and question police actions through legal channels, protests, and media scrutiny, which in turn drives institutional reform. This mechanism is built on the legitimacy of the government and the rights of citizens.
In contrast, CCP State’s police system rarely accepts public scrutiny, and because of the authoritarian nature of the CCP regime, any challenge to its authority can be suppressed under the pretext of “threatening national security.” This operational style fundamentally differs from a rule-of-law state, underscoring the deep institutional differences between CCP State and the U.S.
Therefore, when discussing police authority, merely comparing the enforcement intensity of both countries is superficial. The more important question is: what is the foundation of these powers? What is the purpose of law enforcement? Ignoring these core questions can lead to misleading comparisons that remain shallow and miss the broader picture.
