What are these London riots really about?

Its seems news services throughout are completely plastic and stilted into clear demarkations. On either side of this news-ertainment line comes:

1) Morons looting shops, no responsibility. Bad People.

2) Victims of class discrimination whom are the real victims. Forced to turn to violence for their voice to be heard (oh and a free hi fi or television set along the way).

As an outsider I am intrigued by such homogenous responses in either direction. So what is it really about? What incites people to do these things? How bad do things need to be for them to resort to this - or is that just the answer? - are things not as bad as those justifying rioting maintain?

I must say history demonstrates that over the last 40 years or so, the Brits have shown themselves as a nation that they do like to put on a good riot or two, although many of those were racially charged issues.

I would love to be educated rather than just reading second hand murdoch style news (touch wood Rupert and his sons haven't board this website too

Please let me understand rather than forming opinions on ill researched inaccurate news services.

It's what happens when governments collude with media magnates who own 40% of all published media. Said monopoly creates a culture of envy within society, where a lowest common denominator prevails. Minorities become disenfranchised. Provided they can get away with it, i.e. not get arrested, they express their discontent and attempt to redress the balance.

These kind of events never happen in the middle of February - why's that?

Possession is the motivation, hanging up the whole damn nation...

J

I remember the Brixton riots in 1981 had a racial and political edge to them (at least according to The Clash), though it was no Paris, 1968 (Street Fighting Man), or Syria, 2011. 

On the news last night I saw a row of looted shops along a high street; only the bookstore was untouched.

The only credible analysis I've seen leak through in the TV coverage came from a group of young girls (~10-13yrs). One said, "they just want to show that they have some power."

I imagine the frustration of getting no respect and having no future probably feels much the same whether one has political or class consciousness or not. (There may be leaders who have a political motivation -- who's sending those Blackberry messages that tell people where to go?)

So there is the behavior, which has one set of motivations -- fun, releasing frustration, the thrill of striking back, the opportunity to get something desirable that is denied. Then there are the economic and social forces that shaped that environment.

I've been in a riot (Tompkins Sq, 1988), running full tilt from the police (no looting, thank you), and it is exhilarating. So it's not surprising that young people get into it when it's unleashed in their neighborhood.

As with most incidents like this, there are multiple factors: you've got the underlying economics, a shared social mood, a concentration of potential participants, (weather may play a role in bringing people to the street -- had it been hot?), then a trigger (a police shooting), then leaders act, and finally, the crowd conveys a social licence to act outside the lines.

I think this is one of the unexpected (or predictable) costs of austerity plans that only look at fiscal deficits and ignore cultural and social deficits. It seems out of the blue when it happens because the people involved are invisible to the mainstream media. I won't be surprised to see similar incidents in the U.S. at some point. 

Britain has the worst numbers in rankings of all OECD countries in terms of income equality, social mobility etc. This has ben a long time in the making and cannot be blamed on the current administration, but really goes back to Maggie's extremist policies in the 80s and its continuation by suceeding administrations. There may be politcal groups trying to incite it, but this can only work if there are those desperate enough to answer their call. It's clearly not the kind of rebellious well-educated political-minded leftist middle-class youth uprising of the 60s, these are poor, hopeless people lacking any faith whatsoever in the political and economic system - for good (or rather, bad) reasons.

In short, these are kids who know they have no future and no real advocate acting out their frustration and trying to take what they can get.

I'm not condoning these actions at all, but longstanding bad policy making is at the root of this problem.

rioting and protesting is one thing.

destroying other peoples property and small businesses is another.

There is a simple line between right and wrong here.

I can sympathize with the frustration, but that doesn't justify breaking in, stealing and burning property.

The largest question is, most of these actions are being done by teenagers. where are the parents here?

I'm still waiting for some UK feedback...

But i would make a distinction between these street protests in UK or paris or anywhere in the west, compared to the Arab spring and street protests since the sham election in Iran, the protests in Egypt that felled a government, and Libya, and Syria, and more.... In the arab dictatorships the street protests are the real deal and evidence of widespread opposition to government that does not represent the people. 

The street protests in the west where there have representative governments, are also people out of tune with their governments but they are likely in a very tiny minority, as compared to the arab states where the majority is opposed to the government but do not have civil remedies, so only some small vocal minority literally risks their lives to protest.

How many protesters have been killed in Syria this month? How many were killed on England? These are not remotely similar, as much as the activists would like casual observers to think they are

JR

PS: Since many like to make fun of Fox news editorial slant... I saw one talking head on FN suggest that if UK had a second amendment and gun laws like ours the shop keepers could better defend themselves against looting.  Not the point as i see it, but no doubt appealing to who he thinks his FN audience is.  I can't argue with their ratings success, while i don't buy that particular talking point. 

Plain and simple.

Mobsters. Bunch of hooligans. Any excuse to loot and destroy.

Bad apples of the society.

JohnRoberts said:

Since many like to make fun of Fox news editorial slant... I saw one talking head on FN suggest that if UK had a second amendment and gun laws like ours the shop keepers could better defend themselves against looting.  Not the point as i see it, but no doubt appealing to who he thinks his FN audience is.  I can't argue with their ratings success, while i don't buy that particular talking point.

Click to expand...

John - I have to agree with you... that point is lunacy.

The UK doesn't need shop owners with shotguns under the counter. It needs people to understand the consequences of breaking the law, and for the police force and the law system to be enabled to catch and prosecute fairly, those that decide to break the law.


By the way - I read on BBC today, that some of those caught looting have been sentences to 10 weeks prison. I'm still trying to work out what I think of that. (10 weeks seems a little short...)

JohnRoberts said:

I'm still waiting for some UK feedback...

Click to expand...

Thermionic is over here, & posted above.

sahib said:

Bunch of hooligans. Any excuse to loot and destroy.

Bad apples of the society.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much it.

Of course afterwards we need to look at society & ourselves to see why we have so many bad apples - we've been building an underclass for at least two decades now.

It's quiet tonight - nobody likes to riot in the rain.

By the way - I read on BBC today, that some of those caught looting have been sentences to 10 weeks prison. I'm still trying to work out what I think of that. (10 weeks seems a little short...)

Click to expand...

Prison and ASBOs act like badges of honour for some.

These people need to do some hard work. They need to be made to clean up and repair the things that they have destroyed, however long that takes.

Hopefully they find a better reason than a hockey team losing - we riot over that shit in Canada apparently.  Oh and when Axl Rose doesn't show up for concerts...

Criminologically the important thing with young offenders is a quick reaction of the justice system and dealing differntly with and seperating from each other casual delinquents (some criminal activity at one point of adolecence is pretty normal behaviour) from chronic offenders. 10 weeks in jail for a 14 year old without a criminal record for stealing a DVD player from a shop that was forced open is a pretty harsh sentence, but not for a 17 yo with previous convictions breaking the shop open with the help of others in a concerted manner...

living sounds said:

Criminologically the important thing with young offenders is a quick reaction of the justice system and dealing differntly with and seperating from each other casual delinquents (some criminal activity at one point of adolecence is pretty normal behaviour) from chronic offenders. 10 weeks in jail for a 14 year old without a criminal record for stealing a DVD player from a shop that was forced open is a pretty harsh sentence, but not for a 17 yo with previous convictions breaking the shop open with the help of others in a concerted manner...

Click to expand...

Good point. Let's hope they are that selective in the punishment.

Riots like this go far back in Britains history.  There were a good many of course during the Industrial Revolution of the 18th & 19th centuries that were fueled by poor living and working conditions for the working classes.  Scotish villages were sacked in the 13th century by the King's men, Northern English towns by the Scots in return.  Vikings, Normans, Liverpool Fans (sorry Liverpool ) etc. ...

Of course, no one who is sensible minded can condone the sacking of towns and cities, stealing of property and the murder of the 3 young men in Birmingham who were trying to protect their property.

However, the media in the U.K. have today reported several Politicians mentioning a lack of good, honest role models for the youths who commited these crimes.

But I think it is important to remember recent stories such as the M.P.'s that were caught fiddling their expenses and claiming £1000's extra.  This was theft of taxpayer's money.

It is important to remember the high ranking members of the Metropolitan Police who were recently found to have sold people's private information to the media.  This is corruption and theft of people's privacy and the theft of tax that wasn't paid on the corruption money.  Justice was also obstructed and a select committee was lied too.

The Prime Minister evaded questions in the House Of Commons regarding the appropriateness of meetings with News Corp emplyees and the  possible BSkyB takeover.

What about the bank bailout and the millions of taxpayer £'s that wound up helping to pay bonus's to the banking C.E.O.'s? 

So where are the good, honest roles models for the disaffected youth? 

And what really happened when Mark Duggan was killed by the Police?  We were told that he had fired first at a Police Officer, the bullet had hit the officer's radio which miraculously saved his life and Mark Duggan was then shot twice and died at the scene from the bullet to his chest.
The police had apparently only fired two shots in self defense.
Duggan's family and friends asked for information regarding his death but were left hanging.  Feelings of anger welled in the neighbourhood.
This kindling provided an excuse for anarchy.  A way to express anger at the lives without much hope and the lives lived with no good role models.  Other youths in other cities merely followed suit.  It doesn't take much.

Of course, we now know, courtesy of the independent investigation, that Duggan did not fire a weapon at all and that the bullet in the police radio came from a police gun.  If only two shots were supposed to have been fired by the police, and both hit Duggan, then who shot the police radio?  And when?

We need to try and understand some root causes behind acts such as the riots and find better solutions for the problems.  As well as a swift punishment for those who commit the crimes.

> no one who is sensible minded can condone the sacking of towns and cities

Many of us are descended from Vikings or similar raider-cultures. It's situational. You better not sack my village nor ravage my cattle! But sack someone else, someone I'm not kin with, what the heck? Need help?


> Possession is the motivation

The reference is now obscure yet VERY relevant.

I hadn't heard it in 30 years. This stanza popped into my head recently:

The President, he’s got his war
Folks don’t know just what it’s for
Nobody gives us a rhyme or reason
Have one doubt, they call it treason
With chicken feathers all without one nut

Click to expand...

Doesn't say which President, which war. Way things are, could be Lyndon, could be George, or George the son, or now I am thinking Barry. Line 3 says stuff can be hidden, line 4 says dissent can be hushed.... war is good leverage for a President.

Marvvy piano intro too. Worth a listen:

http://dharmalady.com/2006/03/30/les-mccann-eddie-harris-compared-to-what/

However I'm not sure Possession is the motivation is the "rioters" main intent. Any taking is secondary to the trashing of folks next-rung-up.

The 'Riot Act' of 1714 was an Act of the British Parliament that authorised local authorities to declare any group of twelve or more people to be unlawfully assembled, and thus have to disperse or face punitive action.
The act would be read out loud to any such group that the authorities didn't like the look of.  The group were to disperse within one hour of being "Read The Riot Act' by a magistrate:

"Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the act made in the first year of King George, for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King!"

The act made it a felony punishable by death for "any persons unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled together" to cause (or begin to cause) serious damage to places of religious worship, houses, barns, and stables.

The death penalty was reduced to transportation for life by the 'Punishment of Offences Act'.  The rioters would be sent to the colony in America or, later, to the new one in Australia.

The last time the act was read in the United Kingdom was in Birkenhead on 3 August 1919, during the second police strike when large numbers of police officers from Birkenhead, Liverpool and Bootle joined the strike.

http://warp.net/records/general/stock-destroyed-pias-sony-fire-london-riots

sad.

The riots seem far too coordinated to me to have been spontaneous. Is this another form of terrorism - turn our own people against us?

Cheers

Ian

Having spent much of my life in inner-city areas of London, I believe the situation's been brewing for a couple of decades. I've personally witnessed exactly the kind of attitudes which bred the behaviour exhibited by the rioters many times, over a long period. What's different here, i.e. what tipped the scales over the threshold, is that the factors combined at the same moment, enabling the riots to happen. They had the intent, a supposed excuse (Duggan didn't fire, but he did have a Hechler and Koch gun on his person - not something you use at the school rifle range, is it?) and modern technology helped them organise the whole thing.

I've seen gangs of kids behaving exactly the same way, many times, over many years. If the precipitating factors are present, plus the crucial criterion of 'can we get away with it?', it'll happen. Pandora's box was opened years ago. Putting the genie back in the bottle will take resources and many, many years. Considering the current government are the most detached from the street youth since Thatcher, I'm not holding my breath.

J

It is human nature to desire simple explanations for things, and this is no different. My knee jerk reaction is to look for a man behind the curtain somewhere pulling the levers, but after thinking about this some more, there may be a simpler answer. Words have consequences. Just like congress openly threatening to not honor our debts probably contributed to the downgrade, the non stop class warfare used by politicians to shift blame away from themselves and onto productive segments of society, has likely also had a cumulative effect in the minds of unhappy people everywhere.

Mix together hot temperatures, and unhappy people with poor impulse control, with the concept that nice cars and businesses are valid targets because these wealthy fat cats gained those spoils at their expense. I believe at least some of this behavior is the unintended consequence of the self serving class warfare preached by so many political hacks.

I sure hope this is unintended. They are just trying to manipulate voters for personal gain and hopefully not damage businesses and destroy private property.

Free speech is too important to blame or restrict, but I strongly believe words have consequences. I recall being taught as a child the old "sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt you", now I'm not so sure that the hyperbolic political rhetoric does not have at least a few casualties to be accountable for.     

JR