Riot! / The Tottenham Summer after the Arab Spring

[Holbytla]

Yes but that still doesn't make things comparable or justifiable. And if that is indeed the case, then it is up to the more intelligent and wealthy to step up to the plate and affect change.

Either that or let's throw all the rules out the window and go back to survival of the fittest and be done with society as is.

Hell I'm pissed off too and I think it is high time someone lights a fire under some asses to get the world onto a better track. That doesn't mean I have the right to rob, rape, pillage and plunder to send a message, even though there are some heads I would dearly love to knock together in DC.

Someone owns the properties that are being destroyed, and I will wager it isn't the politicians, who appear to be the focal point of the rage. How tolerant would anyone here be if it were their homes or businesses that were being destroyed in the name of frustration?

[axordil]

I would never claim mob violence is justifiable. But I think there is a connection to be made when it comes to understanding how people react in circumstances where they feel they have nothing left to lose. Whether one group really is worse off in absolute terms is irrelevant: we don't judge our positions in absolute terms, we judge them according to our particular situation.

Ironically, the LACK of fear of reprisal makes it easier for this sort of thing to happen: the price of something resembling a free society, perhaps.

[Holbytla]

If you are in a bar in whatever country in the world, it is a natural reaction to want to slug someone who is harassing or robbing you or doing whatever to piss you off.
However I would be less likely to start a barroom brawl in a country where there was a chance I would be executed by firing squad than in a country more liberal leaning, so yeah.

You are correct when you infer that the relevance doesn't seem to matter. That is because people are basically self centered and can hardly see beyond their noses.

Starting an uprising in Syria is borne by dire need. Starting an uprising in England is not knowing how to affect change without destroying that which you seek. One is just, one is misguided.

People in the west want their MTV, HDTV, DVD and to be left alone. Jobs would be nice as well.

People in the dictator realms want food, water and a chance to live another day without being raped, tortured or murdered.

There is a lot of feeling of frustration and hopelessness in the world as there should be, but they don't all stand on equal ground nor are they all solved by the same means.

[Pearly Di]

Some of the sentiments being expressed in this thread are wildly out of sync with the mood in England right now.

Nobody in the UK is pulling the racism card with these rioters. Our media aren't (thank heaven). No one is. Many of the rioters are WHITE.

There is universal condemnation of the violence - not only from our political leaders of all stripes but from legions of ordinary Brits of all colours and classes. I've been watching Black and Asian Britons on TV expressing shock, anger and disbelief at the destruction that has been unleashed on their communities. People are being mobilised to protect their communities. Londoners have banded together to help clear up the mess.

Only an idiot would deny the realities of social deprivation and massive family breakdown/societal dysfunction which have played a part in this. But the copycat effect has not convinced me that this is wholly about the oppressed and dispossessed rising up against their oppressors. I've seen too much footage of people clearly taking pleasure in laughing at the fear of others to believe that.

So I think it's pretty insulting to the people of Syria, Yemen, Tunisia, etc., to be compared with the young British yobs who assaulted and robbed a young Malaysian student during the London riots.

And whatever the flaws of our police - and they have 'em - at least the violence has now been contained without resorting to water cannon and plastic bullets, as happens in other European countries, and which would only, I'm sure, light the conflagration further.

[axordil]

So I think it's pretty insulting to the people of Syria, Yemen, Tunisia, etc., to be compared with the young British yobs who assaulted and robbed a young Malaysian student during the London riots.

Straw man. No one is comparing the oppressed people of those states to a particular group of criminals amongst the rioters. But by the same token: the Arab uprisings all had, and continue to have, strong, perhaps even dominant economic drivers, not merely those political ones we like to empathize with. If the young men in Egypt and Tunisia had honest-to-goodness livelihoods, I suspect the protests would have fizzled, frankly. Rarely do those who think they're doing "okay" riot, protest, or otherwise rise up.

but they don't all stand on equal ground

Again, easy to say from here, as opposed to from within the mind of a 17 year old without a job or a prospect of getting one, no matter where they are. We have perspective.

[Ghân-buri-Ghân]

A few corrections for those who might have a certain concept about who these rioters and looters are. The first arrestees have included teachers, soldiers, health workers... how does that fit with the uneducated mob?

The actions may be reprehensible, but the root cause, it appears, simply can't be ignored. It would seem that the genie has been let out of the bottle, and all that pent-up rage is being expressed. Rage is never pretty. People, generally, aren't. And we are seeing this, on the streets of London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol, Nottingham, Gloucester...

Copycats? Yes. But why? Why have so many people discovered the "joy" of rioting now?

I would tentatively suggest that anybody who fails to see a cause and effect between the wanton screwing of the rank and file British public, and the wanton violence occurring is being incredibly blinkered. There has been a self satisfied elite that has gorged itself as the masses have suffered, and the masses, ugly as the mob is, and not, perhaps, understanding quite why they are reacting so, are reacting so.

The cockiness of the ruling classes is seriously shaken. They pushed too far, and the masses are pushing back. Their omnipotence is like the Great Oz... don't look behind the curtain...

But there really is a positive note, which Pearly-Di touches on. Communities are fighting back against the mindlessness, and are realising that it is up to them to protect themselves. The establishment, and its despised (in so many communities) organ, the police, are being shown to have no legitimacy; they cannot provide security. The state is crumbling (perhaps), and I say... good riddance!

Er... perhaps

[Pearly Di]

Axordil - I was responding to Sir Dennis's straw men.

Nobody, not even our right-wing press, has generally characterised the rioters as being from particular ethnic minorities, or unemployed, or poor.

Like I said, there is a recognition that anger and frustration result from social deprivation. And Ghân is right about us all being landed in the crap by an arrogant political elite.

But other factors were also at work in the mob violence.

[SirDennis]

Axordil - I was responding to Sir Dennis's straw men.

Nobody, not even our right-wing press, has generally characterised the rioters as being from particular ethnic minorities, or unemployed, or poor.

Like I said, there is a recognition that anger and frustration result from social deprivation. And Ghân is right about us all being landed in the crap by an arrogant political elite.

But other factors were also at work in the mob violence.

Ah yes, sorry about that... even when trying to be clear I leave room for doubt. I was referring to the difference in reaction to the London riots and the Arab revolts (still in progress). I believe it is elitism, perhaps touched with racism, that leads to the perspective that it is okay for people of Arab nations to rise up against their government, and especially to take Western media at its word that said governments are indeed in line for an uprising, while at the same time denying that nothing further from the truth could be said about Western governments. Gosh that's awkward. Let me have another go at it: the idea that Eastern (Arab) governments are fit for an usurping, while Western governments are not, is elitist and on some levels racist. But please understand that I am not playing a card, nor am I leveling that criticism at anyone here.

Having said that, initial reports were caged in such a way (blacks and Turks IIRC) when in fact it was mainly whites involved. The youth involved were referred to as vermin (rats), and the question "where are their sodding parents?" was on everybody's lips (incidentally, parenting is made very difficult by poverty). As well, more coincidentally than anything, there were some assumptions of that sort made at another site I frequent, though it was after I said what I said here.

On the plus side, leaving the sayings of PM Cameron aside, who continues to blame parents and lack of morals for the riots, what I have seen (well mainly heard) today is the initial shock and outrage turning to wondering how this could have happened. Many appear to be coming to the conclusion that cuts to youth services and education are largely to blame, though as people have noted here, no one seems to be condoning the violence. There appears to be a willingness to do some soul searching; that even humble shop keepers are partly to blame for standing aside while their government destroyed hope among the nation's youth.

There was an interesting comment made tonight on The Current Review by a media prof in Brittan who has made a study of the use of social media and cell phones by mob organisers in Ireland. He pointed out that we (meaning the authorities in Western democracies) have to be careful when condemning the use of social media by the London rioters, and in supporting state interference with the use of those technologies because the opposite was true on both counts when we were talking about the Arab Spring. There, at least, is one sound basis for comparison.

[axordil]

Nobody, not even our right-wing press, has generally characterised the rioters as being from particular ethnic minorities, or unemployed, or poor.

Indeed. A correspondent for NPR, a British national, remarked tonight on the relative colorblindness of the mob...though there were exceptions, as in the car mowing down the south Asian men trying to protect their neighborhood.

I think the thing which should give everybody pause is how close to the surface the mob always is. And not just in Them. There are times I think my son is the only thing keeping me from doing something unfortunate.

[River]

Hey, um, when they did this in the Mideast what did we call it? And seriously, given the events in the Mideast, why is the UK government so shocked, shocked to find that social media is involved here?

The government is exploring whether to turn off social networks or stop people texting during times of social unrest.

David Cameron said the intelligence services and the police were exploring whether it was "right and possible" to cut off those plotting violence.

Texting and Blackberry Messenger are said to have been used by some during this week's riots.

Rights groups said such a measure would be abused and hit the civil liberties of people who have done nothing wrong.

The prime minister told MPs the government was exploring the turn-off in a statement made to the House of Commons during an emergency recall of Parliament.

Mr Cameron said anyone watching the riots would be "struck by how they were organised via social media".

He said the government, using input from the police, intelligence services and industry, was looking at whether there should, or could, be limits on social media if it was being used to spread disorder.

Under social media, Mr Cameron includes Facebook, Twitter and specific technologies such as text messaging. The semi-private BBM messaging system on the Blackberry is said to have been widely used during the riots.

Home Secretary Theresa May is believed to be meeting representatives from Facebook, Twitter and RIM (maker of the Blackberry) to talk about their obligations during times of unrest.

[SirDennis]

At the risk of this morphing into a different topic:

This feeds into that idea of elitism I was talking about before, about how they seem to be saying when authorities in the East (Egypt, China, etc) do it, it is a bad thing, but when we consider doing it is ok. The argument in favour of doing it that seems to be emerging is "when they did it it was for the wrong reasons, if we do it it will be for the right reasons." I don't know why this line of reasoning bugs me so much, but it does.

Implicit in the talk about BlackBerry needing to be shut off is that all other phones use technology that can be intercepted and monitored. I know this is not a shocking revelation, but does it bother no one? That the authorities (now) openly monitor Facebook and Twitter to track down persons of interest, as well as the intention to commit a crime (ie following tweets to see where the next mob will spring up) seems to bother no one either. It is just what they do; and hey, if you aren't doing anything wrong, why should you care?

I wonder if a day will come when living off the grid (for instance, not broadcasting our every move in public) will be considered suspicious? Already dealing only in cash seems to raise eyebrows as there is no effective way to monitor your personal finances.

As the article River linked to says, "The use of social media in the unrest looks like a game-changer."

[vison]

So you don't think the end justifies the means? (As in spying on people via social media.)

Well, neither do I.

This website and 2 others are the extent of my "social media" actions. I NEVER put anything in an email I don't want made public - if you know what I mean. I don't Facebook or Twitter or anything else. I do regard it all, quite frankly, as a supreme and utter waste of bloody time.

But then I'm not fomenting insurrection.

There are people who believe with all their little hearts and souls that the governments of the US, Canada, and the UK (to name but 3) are exactly as oppressive as the governments of Egypt and Libya and Yemen and Syria.

I don't think I can go that far, actually.