A while back, someone got upset because I called cops “filthy parasites” and said I was just “name calling.”
Well, let’s see…
- an organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host’s expense
- (derogatory) a person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.
Let’s look at this one part at a time.
Cops are organisms. I don’t believe anyone disputes that fact.
Cops live on other organisms, perhaps not physically but certainly at their expense.
Cops benefit by deriving nutrients at the host’s expense. When a cop buys food with his paycheck, he is getting nutrients at his host’s expense, since the money used to buy the food was stolen from the hosts (you and me). His food purchase (and every other purchase he makes) reduces the amount of resources you have with which to benefit yourself. His existence costs you.
So, yes, a cop satisfies the first definition to a T.
What about the second part?
A cop is a person.
They rely on other people for their existence as a cop. Without other people believing cops are “necessary,” the “job” wouldn’t exist.
Cops exploit others. They “make full use of and derive benefit from” other people. This goes back to the first definition.
They do so habitually– on a daily basis as a condition of holding that “job.” If they stop exploiting people, they lose the “job.”
Now, do they give “nothing in return?”
That depends. A rapist gives “something,” but it is something unwanted and harmful. Of course, the same could be said of a tapeworm.
The lack of consent makes the difference. I don’t consent to rape, nor do I consent to being policed.
In spite of objections to the contrary, the reality, by definition, is that cops ARE parasites.
I consider all parasites to be “filthy.” If you don’t, that’s fine with me.