who are the rioters?

[bud]

the killing of a black man that triggered the riots also created the myth that it's black men and asians who are behind the riots and looting. here is a good article in the guardian which tries to look deeper into the people behind the riots and looting.

Anyone who has witnessed the disturbances up close will know there is no simple answer to the question: who are the rioters? Attempts to use simple categorisations to describe the looters belies the complex make-up of those who have been participating.

...

Take events in Chalk Farm, north London. First the streets contained people of all backgrounds sprinting off with bicycles looted from Evans Cycles. Three Asian men in their 40s, guarding a newsagent, discussed whether they should also take advantage of the apparent suspension of law.

"If we go for it now, we can get a bike," said one. "Don't do it," said another. Others were not so reticent; a white woman and a man emerged carrying a bike each. A young black teenager, aged about 14, came out smiling, carrying another bike, only for it be snatched from him by an older man.

They were just some of the crowd of about 100 who had gathered on the corner; a mix of the curious and angry, young and old. It was impossible to distinguish between thieves, bystanders and those who simply wanted to cause damage.

...

In Tottenham on Saturday many of those who gathered at the police station to protest against the shooting of Mark Duggan were, like him, black. But others were Asian and white.

By the following day, as the looting spread to other north London suburbs, there appeared to have been a slight shift in the demographic, which started to look younger. In Enfield most of those who gathered in the town centre were white. The youngest looked about 10-years-old.

Those taking part in the battles in Hackney's Pembury estate on Monday included many women. Teenage girls helped carry debris to form the burning barricades or made piles of rocks.

...

When another group finished ransacking a pawnbroker's and started cleaning out a local fashion boutique, an angry young black woman berated one of them. "You're taking the piss, man. That woman hand-stitches everything, she's built that shop up from nothing. It's like stealing from your mum."

A girl holding a looted wedding dress smiled sheepishly, stuck for anything to say.

Jay Kast, 24, a youth worker from East Ham who has witnessed rioting across London over the last three nights, said he was concerned that black community leaders were wrongly identifying a problem "within".

"I've seen Turkish boys, I've seen Asian boys, I've seen grown white men," he said. "They're all out there taking part." He recognised an element of opportunism in the mass looting but said an underlying cause was that many young people felt "trapped in the system". "They're disconnected from the community and they just don't care," he said.

[M.Dancer]

Wow...did they ever look deep...!

[bud]

Wow...did they ever look deep...!

what's wrong with you?

[M.Dancer]

what's wrong with you?

Well obviously I am mocking what you think is a 'deep' article.

It's as deep as a saucer

[msj]

Well obviously I am mocking what you think is a 'deep' article.

It's as deep as a saucer

That's strange because he said it was a "good" article that took a "deeper" look into who the rioters are.

Shall I mock your lack of comprehension?

[M.Dancer]

That's strange because he said it was a "good" article that took a "deeper" look into who the rioters are.

Shall I mock your lack of comprehension?

Go ahead...

And I shall mock you back if you think that an article that is claimed to have looked deeper...isn't claimed to be deep itself.

Here is well a very shallow article which tries to look deeper, it doesn't, but hey, this post isn't about JoooS!!

!

Your ability to mock would be deep as a sheet of glass.

[msj]

Go ahead...

And I shall mock you back if you think that an article that is claimed to have looked deeper...isn't claimed to be deep itself.

Here is well a very shallow article which tries to look deeper, it doesn't, but hey, this post isn't about JoooS!!

!

Your ability to mock would be deep as a sheet of glass.

Well, not only is he using the relative term "deeper" but he also qualifies it with a "tries to look deeper..."

Given the crap that I have seen come out of the media in the past few days, yes, it doesn't take much to be deeper.

You're in the media biz aren't you?

Maybe that's why you would rather post your mockery than try to add any kind of substance to the issue.

Edited August 10, 2011 by msj

[Michael Hardner]

There was certainly some insight added. Was it deep enough ? Maybe not but an entire thread of sniping on it is pretty tiresome.

How about this: is this the beginning of the revolution ?

[Thorn]

That's strange because he said it was a "good" article that took a "deeper" look into who the rioters are.

Shall I mock your lack of comprehension?

It didn't look deeper. It just pointed out that looters come in different colours.

Most are young, most are male. It is an ethnically diverse lot, but from my viewing of the scenes on a variety of shows the majority appear to not be white, but in all likelihood that reflects the ethnic makeup of those poorer areas which are under attack. Most likely these are NEETs, as several articles have pointed out. There is a large body of young Britains who have never had a job, and are not in employment, education or training. Despite decades of the empowerment of the welfare state (or perhaps because of it) there is a large core group of young British people who are shiftless, do not really try very hard at anything, and enjoy fighting, binge drinking, and taking advantage of an opportunity for a free ride.

And I could point out that despite what's been said of late about Britain's economic fortunes, its unemployment rate is lower than the Americans, and it has far more robust social services to help people. Further, the cuts discussed earlier have not yet been felt at the end level, so are not the cause of this.

These are simply shiftless, uneducated (through choice), largely lazy people taught that they have a right to just about anything they want taking advantage of the lack of law and order to grab whatever they can. You need look little further than that. In ever instance where I've seen riots taking place in western countries the one predictable element is that where the riots continue for some length of time, larger numbers of shiftless people join in to have 'fun'. Had the British police cracked down on the first day that would have been the end of it. But since they held back, more and more young, shiftless people realized they could do as they wished, and flocked to join in. And then as it continued further, its spread to other cities was inevitable. These people apparently have little fear of the police, and little fear of hesitant courts which seem more concerned with attempting to rehabilitate than to punish.

[Guest American Woman]

There was certainly some insight added. Was it deep enough ? Maybe not but an entire thread of sniping on it is pretty tiresome.

How about this: is this the beginning of the revolution ?

Just as the sniping - including from bud - was tiresome in this thread. Rampant antisemitism remains prevalent

I would say the "evidence" provided in this thread wasn't of a higher caliber than the comments bonam had run across and cited..........

[M.Dancer]

You're in the media biz aren't you?

Maybe that's why you would rather post your mockery than try to add any kind of substance to the issue.

Yeah...that's it...lets call a shallow, cursory look at a handful of hooligans trying, to look deeper ...

....at least the Guardian wasn't so pretentious to call their passing glance "looking deeper"

[M.Dancer]

There was certainly some insight added. Was it deep enough ? Maybe not but an entire thread of sniping on it is pretty tiresome.

How about this: is this the beginning of the revolution ?

No, multiple threads on the same subject adding nothing to the debate is definitely not the beginning of the revolution...in fact, I am sure that the revolution began and ended october 23, 2001

[capricorn]

Most are young, most are male. It is an ethnically diverse lot, but from my viewing of the scenes on a variety of shows the majority appear to not be white, but in all likelihood that reflects the ethnic makeup of those poorer areas which are under attack. Most likely these are NEETs, as several articles have pointed out. There is a large body of young Britains who have never had a job, and are not in employment, education or training. Despite decades of the empowerment of the welfare state (or perhaps because of it) there is a large core group of young British people who are shiftless, do not really try very hard at anything, and enjoy fighting, binge drinking, and taking advantage of an opportunity for a free ride.

And I could point out that despite what's been said of late about Britain's economic fortunes, its unemployment rate is lower than the Americans, and it has far more robust social services to help people. Further, the cuts discussed earlier have not yet been felt at the end level, so are not the cause of this.

These are simply shiftless, uneducated (through choice), largely lazy people taught that they have a right to just about anything they want taking advantage of the lack of law and order to grab whatever they can. You need look little further than that.

I think you would appreciate the following editorial that touches on some of your points.

The idea that social deprivation is an explanation for the rioting is meant to sound sympathetic, but it is actually superbly patronising. It treats the less well-off sections of society almost as automatons who apparently do not bear true moral responsibility for their behaviour in recent days, since they were only responding to the fact that they live in less-than-pleasant urban areas and lack the economic advantage of other sections of society.

The pitying left-wingers who long to hug these put-upon working-class folk need to bear in mind that no matter how poor people are, no matter how lacking in advantage, they are still moral agents capable of making choices between right and wrong, between forging ahead with their lives or lashing out against their neighbourhoods. The claim that their poverty makes them violent is more outrageous than the right-wing law'n'order lobby's claim that they are just "thugs" - at least the law lobby recognises the rioters' capacity to make moral decisions; the leftish lobby just depicts them as the inevitably messed-up end-products of Bad Experiences.

There's another reason the poverty-causes-rioting argument doesn't carry water - because we had very similar disturbances in Britain at the end of last year, but back then the protagonists were mainly middle-class students rather than urban ruffians. In fact, back then it was the trustafarians and the better-off bits of youthful Britain, those currently sympathising with the urban rioters, who went on the rampage.

In November and December 2010, students with pink hair and trendy pop-band t-shirts also smashed up London, kicking in the windows of McDonald's restaurants and throwing metal bars through the doors of banks. What made them do it - poverty? What poverty?

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2834278.html

[bud]

perhaps the article doesn't go deep enough for some, but it does provide a good perspective on the variety of people who are involved by describing who they are and what their intentions may be. someone like scotty may benefit from reading such an article so they don't throw around comments like: "they're mostly blacks and turks"

[M.Dancer]

someone like scotty may benefit from reading such an article so they don't throw around comments like: "they're mostly blacks and turks"

You mean in the thread we all ready have on the topic?

Wow mate, that's fecking deep!

[bud]

You mean in the thread we all ready have on the topic?

Wow mate, that's fecking deep!

this is an opportunity for you to run into another thread and throw your shit around.

Edited August 10, 2011 by bud

[M.Dancer]

this is an opportunity for you to run into another thread and throw your shit around.

Wow..that too is deep!

[Shwa]

The idea that social deprivation is an explanation for the rioting is meant to sound sympathetic, but it is actually superbly patronising. It treats the less well-off sections of society almost as automatons who apparently do not bear true moral responsibility for their behaviour in recent days, since they were only responding to the fact that they live in less-than-pleasant urban areas and lack the economic advantage of other sections of society.

....meh.

As soon you as you read the phrase "left-wingers" or "right-wingers" you know you are in for another bland, head-shaking load of bullshit. AS IF an ideology can provide a decent moral explanation from one slant or another. In this corner we have a "right-winger" giving us the righteous indignation on the perceived bias of the "left-wingers" towards "the cause."

Not sure what is worse - the person who serves this partisan garbage or the simpletons who drink it up like purple koolaid on a hot jungle day.

Want to know what the "less-well off" and "students with pink hair and trendy pop-band t-shirts" have in common with regards to "poverty?" Both groups feel impoverished from power so they took an opportunity to grab some when they could. And whether they truly have a choice in their situation, or find it 10 times as hard to achieve the same things as the silver-spoon set, tough shit, they don't care. They took the initiative and made their own statement loud and clear. For a few moments they rejected this horsehit left-right model and went for one of their own.

What the righteous right wingers and superior left wingers should be taking from this is that regardless of all the energy that goes into trying to make this into a victory for one ideology or another, anarchy pays no atttention. It will throw a brick through your window and punch you in the face regardless because when the mob rules, the only thing that counts is the mob.

[capricorn]

Want to know what the "less-well off" and "students with pink hair and trendy pop-band t-shirts" have in common with regards to "poverty?" Both groups feel impoverished from power so they took an opportunity to grab some when they could. And whether they truly have a choice in their situation, or find it 10 times as hard to achieve the same things as the silver-spoon set, tough shit, they don't care. They took the initiative and made their own statement loud and clear.

Yours is only one opinion of the thousands presented to explain these riots. As with any such event, it cannot be understood or adequately described without reliable information as to what led to it. I suggest few on MLW, myself included, or posters on similar message boards possess the required information to make a proper assessment. We all have our own take on it.

For a few moments they rejected this horsehit left-right model and went for one of their own.

In your post, you discount the use of left and right ideologies by some editorialists, yet you use that exact phraseology as if the rioters were consciously rejecting those same ideologies as they went on their rampage. You really think the rioters and looters are versed in the left-right model you and opinion writers allude to? I doubt it very much.

What the righteous right wingers and superior left wingers should be taking from this is that regardless of all the energy that goes into trying to make this into a victory for one ideology or another, anarchy pays no atttention.

This anarchy as you term it (I call it lawlessness) could have been extinguished early on if the UK law and order forces had not let it snowball out of control. It's interesting to look at how police services developed over the years in the UK to understand how law and order is administered there.

To find out what has gone wrong, we do not need to delve too deeply into the specific causes of the appalling events of the past few days, or establish commissions and inquiries. We know what has gone wrong. The police lost control of the streets not in Tottenham, last weekend, but many years ago. Arguably, their failure to intervene robustly on Saturday and to let the looters carry on unmolested for hours owed much to the non-confrontational nostrums that have guided the policing of ethnically diverse areas, with disastrous consequences. On this occasion, they let the impression develop that here was a chance to plunder with impunity. Once that had taken a grip across the capital, and elsewhere, it became far more difficult – if not impossible – for the police to regain control.

There will be a temptation to beat ourselves up as a society for not doing enough to address problems faced by these groups, especially the inadequate education and consequent lack of qualifications that makes it hard for them to get jobs, which largely go to immigrant workers from eastern Europe. That should be resisted. Billions of pounds have been spent trying to improve schools and regenerate run-down areas. The suggestion from some Left-wing politicians, such as Ken Livingstone, that the riots were due to the impact of Government spending cuts is grotesque. If anything, the biggest problem has been the creation of a sense of entitlement sustained by an overly generous (and no longer affordable) welfare system, which expects nothing in return for the benefits dispensed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8691363/London-and-UK-riots-The-long-retreat-of-order.html

The policing issue is just one other element to consider when discussing this event, but an important one nevertheless. There are lessons to be learned here.

It will throw a brick through your window and punch you in the face regardless because when the mob rules, the only thing that counts is the mob.

Well then, if that's the case then the answer is to not become one of the mob and to make sure your kids don't either.

[kimmy]

I gather that the rioters are people who want free bikes.

-k

[bud]

there are some feel good stories coming out of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gex_ya4-Oo

Edited August 11, 2011 by bud

[Shwa]

Yours is only one opinion of the thousands presented to explain these riots. As with any such event, it cannot be understood or adequately described without reliable information as to what led to it. I suggest few on MLW, myself included, or posters on similar message boards possess the required information to make a proper assessment. We all have our own take on it.

And do you think some right-wing propaganda piece is going to adequately explain anything? Come off it. You are not that much of a sucker are you? If you want a "proper assesment" read Canetti's 'Crowds and Power' which doesn't require any ideologies to explain a phenomenon as old as humanity.

In your post, you discount the use of left and right ideologies by some editorialists, yet you use that exact phraseology as if the rioters were consciously rejecting those same ideologies as they went on their rampage. You really think the rioters and looters are versed in the left-right model you and opinion writers allude to? I doubt it very much.

Did I say the rioters and looters were conscious of their collective decision? I say they rejected the dichotomy for your benefit, not theirs.

This anarchy as you term it (I call it lawlessness) could have been extinguished early on if the UK law and order forces had not let it snowball out of control. It's interesting to look at how police services developed over the years in the UK to understand how law and order is administered there.

Bullshit. The article is merely someone fishing around in a barrel full of bullshit trying to make sense of the smell. Groups of people get fed up, they are exploited by an interested cadre and go on their tear. The don't give a crap about the police or law and order unless they are captured. Otherwise, they are more interested in the goods to be gained or inflicting damage.

The policing issue is just one other element to consider when discussing this event, but an important one nevertheless. There are lessons to be learned here.

The only lesson you need to know is that unless you have more of the police, the mobs will rule from time to time. Or have you forgot current events in North Africa?

Well then, if that's the case then the answer is to not become one of the mob and to make sure your kids don't either.

A Brave New World indeed.

[Oleg Bach]

They are mostly poor black kids - who's parents are immigrants to Britan...they are under privledged and considered almost sub-human by the white British high archy - Those that actually thought that coming to Britian was an economic opportunity were mis-led - British establishment is white - and they are racists...It was the labour party of light weight communists that insisted on bringing in these immigrants for charitably commie reasons - apparently the British capitalist is not going to give up their privledge - so the rioters should just wait till they die - that could take about 50 years...

[capricorn]

If you want a "proper assesment" read Canetti's 'Crowds and Power' which doesn't require any ideologies to explain a phenomenon as old as humanity.

Thanks for the reference. But just like other observers of what's going on, I'll stick to formulating my assessment with the information currently available from various sources.

Did I say the rioters and looters were conscious of their collective decision? I say they rejected the dichotomy for your benefit, not theirs.

Thanks for the clarification.

Bullshit. The article is merely someone fishing around in a barrel full of bullshit trying to make sense of the smell.

As I mentioned the policing aspect is only one element for consideration.

The only lesson you need to know is that unless you have more of the police, the mobs will rule from time to time.

The lessons to be learned will be of greater benefit to those dealing directly with the situation.

Or have you forgot current events in North Africa?

I don't understand how you could draw a parallel between those events and the wanton lawlessness in the UK.

[Oleg Bach]

Thanks for the reference. But just like other observers of what's going on, I'll stick to formulating my assessment with the information currently available from various sources.

Thanks for the clarification.

As I mentioned the policing aspect is only one element for consideration.

The lessons to be learned will be of greater benefit to those dealing directly with the situation.

I don't understand how you could draw a parallel between those events and the wanton lawlessness in the UK.

I tried to draw a parallel between the Vancouver riots and the Arabic spring - calling it the Anglo spring - I thought it was kind of funny.. back in serious mode for a moment. Being from another era..or perhaps because my kids would never do such a thing - I thought that it might be a case of the London kids being a product of stupified ammoral pop culture - after all those lower and lower middle class kids are not exposed to any real culture - they are modern barbarians..sad to say.