The United States system of policing is in drastic need of change. Some recent critics have encouraged that we avoid trying to repair the system—and abolish it altogether. In advancing this position, they often invoke ideas of “dreams,” “speculative imagination,” and “horizons” to guide efforts at fixing the problems of policing. In this essay, I caution against the overuse of this sort of idealized discourse in debates about policing. Specifically, I show how idealizations risk being counterproductive with respect to abolitionists’ activist goals, in that they suggest that if abolition is desirable, approximating abolition is also desirable; fail to clarify what the conditions of application of their view are; and operate without the feasibility-sensitivity that one should expect from a non-evaluative position. My goal is not to suggest that our system of policing is fine as is. Nor is it to diminish the importance of having a long-term revolutionary vision. By pointing out the ways in which the idealizations invoked are inconsistent with abolitionists’ activist agenda, I hope to help clarify the merits of police abolition as a guiding strategy for change and caution against the use of certain forms of idealized thinking in our efforts at police reform.

美国的警务系统急需变革。最近的一些批评者鼓励我们避免尝试修复该系统并完全废除它。在推进这一立场时，他们经常援引“梦想”、“投机想象”和“视野”等理念来指导解决警务问题的努力。在这篇文章中，我警告不要在有关警务的辩论中过度使用这种理想化的话语。具体来说，我展示了理想化如何可能对废奴主义者的激进目标产生适得其反的风险，因为它们表明，如果废除死刑是可取的，那么近似废除也是可取的；未能澄清应用其观点的条件是什么；并在没有可行性敏感性的情况下进行操作，而这是人们从非评估职位所期望的。我的目标并不是表明我们的警务系统现状很好。这也不是为了削弱拥有长期革命愿景的重要性。通过指出所引用的理想化与废奴主义者的激进议程不一致的方式，我希望有助于澄清废除警察作为变革指导策略的优点，并警告我们不要在警察工作中使用某些形式的理想化思维改革。