What do you think?
Rate this book
Defund the Police: An International Insurrection
The police are viewed as guardians of public safety and enforcers of the law. How accurate is this? Given endemic police violence which is often aimed at racialised and minoritised groups and the failure of many attempts at reform, attention has turned to community-generated models of support. These include defunding the police and instead funding alternatives to criminalisation and incarceration. This book is the first comprehensive overview of police divestment, using international examples and case studies to reimagine community safety beyond policing and imprisonment. Showcasing a range of practical examples, this topical book will be relevant for academics, policy makers, activists and all those interested in the Black Lives Matter movement, protest movements and the renewed interest in policing and abolitionism more generally.
- GenresNonfiction
274 pages, Paperback
Published April 25, 2023
45 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 24, 2026
5 stars
**Highly Recommended**
short review for busy readers:.
A highly recommended read for those interested in community service or anyone who has ever thought/said: "Defund the police? That's stupid. What do they want, to let murderers walk around free?" Eye-opening, highly informative and very, very, very frightening about the nature of the police, police corruption and violence internationally, but also why police reform is, and will continue to be, ineffectual and pointless.
in detail:
It's taken me a while to write this review because this book offers so much insight and information -- and dispels so many myths we are told about the police being our "friend and helper" -- that it takes a while to settle.
And there is a LOT of information in this volume written by an Australian academic taking in current and historical case studies from around the world. Most often from: Australia, the UK, the US, Canada, India, and various countries in Africa, South America and Europe. The tone straddles the line between academic and lay-reader books.
What are the police? Essentially they are a civilian military designed to uphold and maintain the status quo.
What does that mean? It means they are NOT there to solve crime. They are NOT there to help or protect the populace. They are there to make sure society and societal hierarchy stays as it is.
This was the idea at the inception of the police in the 17th century and is still what they're there for: protecting the interests of the top of society. This is why any and all well-meaning reforms, sensitivity classes, minority recruitment drives, etc ultimately fail.
The Defund movement questions this fundamental idea as being out-of-synch with today's fairness and equal rights ideals. They also question the increased criminalisation of those groups who make the top uncomfortable (protesters, the homeless), and the use of legalised lethal force on a civilian populace.
To answer one of the most frequent misconceptions about Defund, there are really two camps.
A) abolitionists who want to see all police gone and
B) those who want to see a greatly reduced police force, only called out for the worst crimes/problems.
The focus of both is on diverting a significant amount of funding away from this civilian army and into community services that do not carry penalisation or threats to life and limb. Especially in minority areas where they are "over-policed and under protected".
As a military force, the police are trained in attacking and controlling. This is expounded when ex-military personell become police, bringing military ideas and methods with them. The book mentions how the British police were radically militarised after dealing with The Troubles in Northern Ireland, for example, when men trained to deal with insurgents began work as local police and couldn't not see normal citizens as possible terrorist cell members.
But let's look at the biggest misconception that comes out at any mention of Defund: violent crime.
Violent crime is not the police's number one concern, nor is it the most frequent of calls to the police. That honour goes to social problems and minor insurance related reports such as car accidents.
Defund questions if the police are the right body to deal with these minor incidents or very delicate social problems, such as so-called "quality of life offences". That is: homelessness, people with mental health problems having a crisis, domestics, child safety, strikes and protests. Wouldn't other groups or local systems be better?
However, the police are called out when violence against the populace is wished: to break strikes, end peaceful demonstrations, forcibly remove the homeless, deal with "crazies," or to enforce draconian governmental edicts, for example. And they normally arrive in a highly armed, extremely aggressive manner which very often makes a tense situation worse.
When violent crime DOES happen, again, the police are still not really the best ones to handle it. This is because of "the right of discretion" when deciding what cases are worth the police's time. These decisions often follow social hierarchy ideas in which victims are divided into "worthy" and "unworthy".
Even in cases like murder, where you'd think they'd HAVE TO investigate, it is still up to the discretion of the local police if they do and how vigorously.
This means that murders of the impoverished, the handicapped, LGBTQ, ethnic minorities, sex workers and older women are often poorly investigated or not at all, as they are not seen as worth the police's effort/time/money.
Minority groups have said this for decades. The police have no interest in protecting them or solving violent crime against them, if indeed, they are not charged with the crime they're reporting (as apparently often happens in Pakistan and parts of Africa)!
Other points of police brutality such as the abuse and torture of prisoners, deaths in custody and the violent killings of people in crisis are discussed with a plethora of cases and examples from around the globe.
If this book doesn't convince you that we have a global police problem that's just getting worse, nothing will.
**Highly Recommended**
short review for busy readers:.
A highly recommended read for those interested in community service or anyone who has ever thought/said: "Defund the police? That's stupid. What do they want, to let murderers walk around free?" Eye-opening, highly informative and very, very, very frightening about the nature of the police, police corruption and violence internationally, but also why police reform is, and will continue to be, ineffectual and pointless.
in detail:
It's taken me a while to write this review because this book offers so much insight and information -- and dispels so many myths we are told about the police being our "friend and helper" -- that it takes a while to settle.
And there is a LOT of information in this volume written by an Australian academic taking in current and historical case studies from around the world. Most often from: Australia, the UK, the US, Canada, India, and various countries in Africa, South America and Europe. The tone straddles the line between academic and lay-reader books.
What are the police? Essentially they are a civilian military designed to uphold and maintain the status quo.
What does that mean? It means they are NOT there to solve crime. They are NOT there to help or protect the populace. They are there to make sure society and societal hierarchy stays as it is.
This was the idea at the inception of the police in the 17th century and is still what they're there for: protecting the interests of the top of society. This is why any and all well-meaning reforms, sensitivity classes, minority recruitment drives, etc ultimately fail.
The Defund movement questions this fundamental idea as being out-of-synch with today's fairness and equal rights ideals. They also question the increased criminalisation of those groups who make the top uncomfortable (protesters, the homeless), and the use of legalised lethal force on a civilian populace.
To answer one of the most frequent misconceptions about Defund, there are really two camps.
A) abolitionists who want to see all police gone and
B) those who want to see a greatly reduced police force, only called out for the worst crimes/problems.
The focus of both is on diverting a significant amount of funding away from this civilian army and into community services that do not carry penalisation or threats to life and limb. Especially in minority areas where they are "over-policed and under protected".
As a military force, the police are trained in attacking and controlling. This is expounded when ex-military personell become police, bringing military ideas and methods with them. The book mentions how the British police were radically militarised after dealing with The Troubles in Northern Ireland, for example, when men trained to deal with insurgents began work as local police and couldn't not see normal citizens as possible terrorist cell members.
But let's look at the biggest misconception that comes out at any mention of Defund: violent crime.
Violent crime is not the police's number one concern, nor is it the most frequent of calls to the police. That honour goes to social problems and minor insurance related reports such as car accidents.
Defund questions if the police are the right body to deal with these minor incidents or very delicate social problems, such as so-called "quality of life offences". That is: homelessness, people with mental health problems having a crisis, domestics, child safety, strikes and protests. Wouldn't other groups or local systems be better?
However, the police are called out when violence against the populace is wished: to break strikes, end peaceful demonstrations, forcibly remove the homeless, deal with "crazies," or to enforce draconian governmental edicts, for example. And they normally arrive in a highly armed, extremely aggressive manner which very often makes a tense situation worse.
When violent crime DOES happen, again, the police are still not really the best ones to handle it. This is because of "the right of discretion" when deciding what cases are worth the police's time. These decisions often follow social hierarchy ideas in which victims are divided into "worthy" and "unworthy".
Even in cases like murder, where you'd think they'd HAVE TO investigate, it is still up to the discretion of the local police if they do and how vigorously.
This means that murders of the impoverished, the handicapped, LGBTQ, ethnic minorities, sex workers and older women are often poorly investigated or not at all, as they are not seen as worth the police's effort/time/money.
Minority groups have said this for decades. The police have no interest in protecting them or solving violent crime against them, if indeed, they are not charged with the crime they're reporting (as apparently often happens in Pakistan and parts of Africa)!
Other points of police brutality such as the abuse and torture of prisoners, deaths in custody and the violent killings of people in crisis are discussed with a plethora of cases and examples from around the globe.
If this book doesn't convince you that we have a global police problem that's just getting worse, nothing will.
November 4, 2023
5 stars. Chris Cunneen has provided us w an amazing exploration of the pressing global discourse on policing and community safety, steering discussions away frm conventional perceptions of law enforcement and challenging readers who perhaps aren’t super aware of the problems of policing to reconsider the very essence of public safety.
Cunneen has adeptly deconstructed the prevailing image of the police as guardians of public safety and law enforcement, as the “thin blue line” separating society frm chaos and disorder, and presented us w a comprehensive analysis that does a deep dive into the systemic issues surrounding endemic police violence, particularly its disproportionate impact on racialised and minoritised communities. By scrutinising the failures of past reform attempts, Cunneen shifts attention toward community-generated and mutual aid models of support, urging a departure frm the current system that is clearly failing so many.
One of the book’s main strengths, I found, lies in its diverse and extensive array of global case studies and examples that starkly illustrate the multifaceted implications of police divestment and abolition. By showcasing practical alternatives to criminalisation and incarceration, Cunneen has offered up a roadmap fr redefining community safety beyond the conventional bounds of policing, and this is so relevant in our current political and societal landscape across the globe.
Likewise, w its incredibly meticulous research, ‘Defund the Police’ navigates through the complexities of the defund movement, showing how clear it is that abolition must come about. It is a vital resource that not only presents a panoramic view of the existing challenges but also empowers us readers to engage w, and actively contribute to, the transformative dialogue surrounding policing, abolition, and community safety.
In essence, Cunneen’s work is an indispensable cornerstone fr anyone seeking to comprehend and engage in the discourse surrounding policing in our evolving world. Its comprehensive coverage, supported by tangible examples and a compelling and well-paced narrative, renders it a crucial read fr those navigating the intricate dynamics of contemporary societal movements (such as Black Lives Matter or even going further back to AIM and the Blak Power movement here in Australia) and the reimagining of law enforcement and community wellbeing.
Cunneen has adeptly deconstructed the prevailing image of the police as guardians of public safety and law enforcement, as the “thin blue line” separating society frm chaos and disorder, and presented us w a comprehensive analysis that does a deep dive into the systemic issues surrounding endemic police violence, particularly its disproportionate impact on racialised and minoritised communities. By scrutinising the failures of past reform attempts, Cunneen shifts attention toward community-generated and mutual aid models of support, urging a departure frm the current system that is clearly failing so many.
One of the book’s main strengths, I found, lies in its diverse and extensive array of global case studies and examples that starkly illustrate the multifaceted implications of police divestment and abolition. By showcasing practical alternatives to criminalisation and incarceration, Cunneen has offered up a roadmap fr redefining community safety beyond the conventional bounds of policing, and this is so relevant in our current political and societal landscape across the globe.
Likewise, w its incredibly meticulous research, ‘Defund the Police’ navigates through the complexities of the defund movement, showing how clear it is that abolition must come about. It is a vital resource that not only presents a panoramic view of the existing challenges but also empowers us readers to engage w, and actively contribute to, the transformative dialogue surrounding policing, abolition, and community safety.
In essence, Cunneen’s work is an indispensable cornerstone fr anyone seeking to comprehend and engage in the discourse surrounding policing in our evolving world. Its comprehensive coverage, supported by tangible examples and a compelling and well-paced narrative, renders it a crucial read fr those navigating the intricate dynamics of contemporary societal movements (such as Black Lives Matter or even going further back to AIM and the Blak Power movement here in Australia) and the reimagining of law enforcement and community wellbeing.
December 3, 2023
I’ll preface this review by saying I do not support the use of excessive force by law enforcement and do not support officers who behave unethically and harmful to society. They give the rest of us a bad name and reputation, and bring shame to our community. I read this to better understand DTP motivations and recommendations for a paper I’m writing. There were a few things that were factually incorrect (such as talk about not being able to sue a LEO for excessive force, which in Canada at least, is absolutely permitted and in fact easier to do than charge criminally due to the burden of proof being less onerous), and a lot of missing context. I found myself asking “why did x happen” when reading about statistics and examples - I would’ve loved a bit more background information on some of the real life examples being given, but I suppose they weren’t provided for a reason.
If you are a supporter of DTP you will enjoy this read, but if you are not, you won’t 🤷🏻♀️
If you are a supporter of DTP you will enjoy this read, but if you are not, you won’t 🤷🏻♀️
February 1, 2026
The saddest thing about this book is the fact that the title and slogan ‘Defund the Police’ seems so radical, even unthinkable to many, that the many people who would really benefit from reading it, will never get to even open it. What we find when we do read it is a competent discussion and assessment of policing in society from its beginnings to present day, a discussion that is almost sure to have you questioning the whole way we think about ‘policing’ our society. It ends by making a distinction between moderate reforming (real reform!) and abolition, and what they would mean in practical terms. This is such a good and informative read!
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews