In Fall 2011, an American marine — who was involved in the brutal 2004 assault on Fallujah, Iraq — excoriated the NYPD for getting rough with Occupy protesters in Times Square, New York City. Standing in his fatigues and occasionally pointing at the medals pinned to his chest, Sergeant Shamar Thomas chided the police repeatedly, “This is not a war zone!” He paced back and forth in front of a cluster of police of cers. “If you want to go kill and hurt people,” Thomas screamed at the cops, “go to Iraq! Why are you hurting US citizens?” Classically, the state is understood as a monopoly on violence, or the legitimate use of force over a given territory. In this sense, the state does not minimize force, and its agents — the police — do not eliminate violence. Instead, it legitimates violence through its monopolization of “legitimate” policing. To put it in David Correia and Tyler Wall’s (2018: 6) apt and blunt phrasing, “police are violence workers.” As violence work, policing exceeds the institution of the police. Indeed, the latest bout of American invasions that cluster under the label “global war on terror” have been framed as a policing operation by American of cials as well as several scholars. The latter have argued that there has been a convergence between policing and the military apparatus along with a recent conceptual collapse between the “enemy” (war) and the “criminal” (policing) (Hardt and Negri 2001; Peter Andreas and Richard Price 2001; Virilio quoted in Neocleous 2014; Kahn 2013). Thomas’s castigation of the police can be understood as reestablishing that distinction, and with it, he demarcates an “inside” territory of the nationstate where violence must be regulated, and an “outside” — Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, and elsewhere — where overwhelming violence can be enacted and justi ed. Thinking with Rancière (2010) we may say that Thomas urges a particular distribution of the sensible; by partitioning the world into “here” and “there,”

中文翻译：

---

暴力工作和警察命令

2011 年秋季，一名参与 2004 年对伊拉克费卢杰的野蛮袭击的美国海军陆战队员谴责纽约警察局在纽约市时代广场对占领抗议者粗暴对待。身穿军装的沙马尔·托马斯中士不时指着胸前的勋章，反复斥责警察：“这不是战区！” 他在一群警察面前来回踱步。“如果你想去杀人和伤害人，”托马斯对警察大喊，“去伊拉克！你为什么要伤害美国公民？” 传统上，国家被理解为对暴力或在特定领土上合法使用武力的垄断。从这个意义上说，国家并没有最小化武力，它的代理人——警察——也没有消除暴力。相反，它通过垄断“合法”警务来使暴力合法化。用 David Correia 和 Tyler Wall (2018: 6) 恰当而直率的措辞来说，“警察是暴力工作者。” 由于暴力起作用，警务超越了警察机构。事实上，美国最新一轮以“全球反恐战争”为标签的入侵被美国官员和几位学者描述为一场警务行动。后者认为，随着最近“敌人”（战争）和“罪犯”（警务）之间的概念崩溃，警察和军事机构之间存在趋同（Hardt 和 Negri 2001；Peter Andreas 和 Richard Price 2001） ；Virilio 在 Neocleous 2014 中引用；Kahn 2013）。托马斯对警察的谴责可以被理解为重新建立这种区别，并以此划定民族国家的“内部”领土，在那里必须规范暴力，和“外部”——伊拉克、阿富汗、也门、索马里、巴基斯坦和其他地方——在那里可以制定和证明压倒性的暴力。与 Rancière (2010) 一起思考，我们可以说 Thomas 力求特定的可感分布；通过将世界划分为“这里”和“那里”，