Far-right response to Southport Outrage And Ongoing Violent Disorder

[The39thStep]

Now it looks like Little Tommy Ten Names and his backers massively overplayed their hand and have been thoroughly humiliated both by the left on the streets and also the forces of the state in terms of organised investigation and upstream disruption, can we go back to taking the piss out of them on this thread?

View attachment 437710

I miss Greggs

 

[Pickman's model]

I miss Greggs

Masterchef will return

 

[PTK]

Well the BBC did a piece on it:

Why Scotland may have avoided far right unrest

Violence has flared in England and Northern Ireland - so why has Scotland avoided similar scenes?

www.bbc.co.uk

I question this statement by John Curtice.

“Sir John also says the message of the party in government is very different in Scotland. The SNP is described as a "civic nationalist party", which says it welcomes people irrespective of birth or ancestry as long as they are willing to commit themselves to Scotland.”

Is that not the official line of the government in London too? Have Prime Ministers in the past thirty years ever said anything other than this?

 

[Pickman's model]

I question this statement by John Curtice.

“Sir John also says the message of the party in government is very different in Scotland. The SNP is described as a "civic nationalist party", which says it welcomes people irrespective of birth or ancestry as long as they are willing to commit themselves to Scotland.”

Is that not the official line of the government in London too? Have Prime Ministers in the past thirty years ever said anything other than this?

Yes, they've not mentioned scotland

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Is that not the official line of the government in London too? Have Prime Ministers in the past thirty years ever said anything other than this?

yes and no.

i don't think any british PM / front bencher has said anything that directly contradicts this, but i'm not sure that any has actually said this or anything like it in so many words.

theresa may said "If you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere"

and we have had the 'hostile environment' with people not being able to prove they are british enough, front benchers who are children of immigrants proposing policies that wouldn't have let their parents in, or stirring up prejudice against other ethnic minorities, and so on.

 

[danny la rouge]

I question this statement by John Curtice.

“Sir John also says the message of the party in government is very different in Scotland. The SNP is described as a "civic nationalist party", which says it welcomes people irrespective of birth or ancestry as long as they are willing to commit themselves to Scotland.”

Is that not the official line of the government in London too? Have Prime Ministers in the past thirty years ever said anything other than this?

I think Curtice overall, and the piece itself, hits the right balance:

"I think there's a balance here. You don't want to be going down the route that Scotland's exceptional, saying: ‘We will never do things like this’. Nor do you want to go down the route of saying: ‘Actually, it's just the same as the rest of the UK’. It's clearly not.

"There's been pro-immigrant rhetoric [from politicians] and that's increasingly borne out in the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, which is more pro-immigrant. It's now more pro-immigrant than south of the border.”

… there is an "inherited fault line" on Irish immigration, Irish Catholicism and Scottish Protestantism in the west coast, which goes back to the 19th Century.

“In various manifestations, that has actually created more public disorder than any other issue," he says.

"The fault lines are different and where the fault lines are different you probably shouldn't expect the same kinds of behaviour in the same way.”

——————

I think that’s right: we’re not immune, we’re not saints, but our fault lines are different. Better? No, but different.

 

[Gramsci]

Read the Olusoga piece in Guardian and he puts these riots in context of British history of anti immigrant riots. Which it had been assumed would not happen again. Also that class and race go together.

Another article in Guardian puts forward that the knee jerk quick sentencing is making the same mistakes as happened after the 2011 riots ( which were completely different issue}

‘People just like rioting’: why swift justice may blur real motivations behind UK rampage

Experts raise concerns that speed of court hearings could cloud complex reasons behind large-scale disorder and curtail search for lessons

www.theguardian.com

Whether justified or not the State/police don't like it when people have a go at them.

Keir Starmer has promised “swift justice” for those who engage in disorder, having overseen the controversial use of 24-hour courts and ramped-up sentences for more than 2,000 adults and children convicted over the 2011 riots as director of public prosecutions.

Legal experts are urging the current government to learn the lessons of that response, and not to repeat the Conservatives’ failure to fully investigate the drivers of that disorder.

Tim Newburn, a criminology professor at the London School of Economics, said that “procedural speed” and punishment had been prioritised over a deeper assessment of how and why the 2011 riots spread.

Having lived through riots in 80s this seems to me to be correct.

 

[A380]

Of course the state doesn’t like it when people have a go at them. That’s the main purpose of a state to preserve itself.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

… there is an "inherited fault line" on Irish immigration, Irish Catholicism and Scottish Protestantism in the west coast, which goes back to the 19th Century.

as an aside, some years ago, i worked for a company where head office was glasgow. the equalities bit that new starters got fed included something about sectarian comments and songs, which was a bit wtf from the perspective of working in berkshire...

 

[Serge Forward]

Welby has waded in: Far right ‘unchristian’, says archbishop of Canterbury as he condemns riots

That'll upset the "we are a CHRISTAIN country!!!!!!11!!" loons. That said, I always thought the bible was chock full of all that smiting of "the others", etc?

 

[A380]

as an aside, some years ago, i worked for a company where head office was glasgow. the equalities bit that new starters got fed included something about sectarian comments and songs, which was a bit wtf from the perspective of working in berkshire...

The sash my stockbroker pater wore…

 

[Puddy_Tat]

That'll upset the "we are a CHRISTAIN country!!!!!!11!!" loons. That said, I always thought the bible was chock full of all that smiting of "the others", etc?

from the perspective of an atheist, i'd say that you can usually find something in the bible - or at least in one translation of it - that can justify almost any viewpoint / action.

but it can be amusing to quote leviticus 19 33-34 at racists

 

[two sheds]

That's Old Testament though

 

[Kaka Tim]

as an aside, some years ago, i worked for a company where head office was glasgow. the equalities bit that new starters got fed included something about sectarian comments and songs, which was a bit wtf from the perspective of working in berkshire...

"up to our necks in homemade jam"

 

[The39thStep]

Of course the state doesn’t like it when people have a go at them. That’s the main purpose of a state to preserve itself.

Preserve the ruling order on behalf of the bourgeoisie.

 

[A380]

Preserve the ruling order on behalf of the bourgeoisie.

I think it’s more the ruling class ( and of course the state as meme) protecting themselves/itself and the bourgeoisie are just one of the tools used to deliver that end.

 

[Pickman's model]

Of course the state doesn’t like it when people have a go at them. That’s the main purpose of a state to preserve itself.

The highest law is the health of the people

 

[Puddy_Tat]

That's Old Testament though

i thought the new testament was too woke for the right wing types

 

[A380]

The highest law is the health of the people

That ended well for him…

 

[Skinny Ethel]

bobbies are going bigstyle hear looking for cctv my local was only one open ĺast week had a reggae night lookin for cunts that may of been walkin past. This pubs sound reguarding people of colour sex lgbt were all welcome in here. But there all welcome in here

 

[The39thStep]

I think it’s more the ruling class ( and of course the state as meme) protecting themselves/itself and the bourgeoisie are just one of the tools used to deliver that end.

The ruling class is the bourgeoisie in a capitalist society

 

[hitmouse]

The highest law is the health of the people

There's a union banner that has "the welfare of the people is the highest law" on it, it's only this post that prompted me to look up where it comes from.

 

[ddraig]

Meet the men promising to protect English mosques facing threats

A community group has sprung up in England's north-west after mosques in several cities were targeted.

www.bbc.co.uk

Protect

“The group is there to notify each other of problems in our areas so we can tell people to be careful. But if they do come towards our places of worship, the community will come out and we protect those places,” says the group’s founder.

He says that communities were caught out by the scale and suddenness of the trouble, and fear it could return any time, so part of the group’s function is to check the many rumours of further unrest to see if there is basis to them.

But when help is asked for by a mosque or community centre, he says the word will go out.

“We will go there to defend, not with weapons, but just physically standing in front (of places). If anyone is attacking the mosque, we won't allow it,” says Protect’s founder.

“If I've got family members inside that mosque and it's getting attacked, then by all means - even if I do get injured, by a brick or a firebomb or whatever it is - I’ll protect them,” he says.

But why not leave the protection of communities and mosques completely to the police?

“The police are doing an amazing job, and they’re trying their utmost to keep us safe, but they're already understaffed and they've got their hands full with these riots,” the Protect founder says.

“We've seen what happened in some other places, the police couldn't cover it, they weren't ready for it. Somebody needs to be there just by having a presence with the police as well,” adds one of those running the group.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

The highest law is the health of the people

also on lewisham council's coat of arms

 

[ska invita]

from the perspective of an atheist, i'd say that you can usually find something in the bible - or at least in one translation of it - that can justify almost any viewpoint / action.

but it can be amusing to quote leviticus 19 33-34 at racists

"I am God, your God" is a good last line to throw in after any point you make in an argument.

 

[PTK]

Of course the state doesn’t like it when people have a go at them. That’s the main purpose of a state to preserve itself.

Surely the main purpose of the state is to protect the interests of the capitalist class?

 

[A380]

Surely the main purpose of the state is to protect the interests of the capitalist class?

In a capitalist state yes. But as stated the primary objective of any state is to preserve that state.

 

[ddraig]

Pic from Cardiff counter demo

 

[Gramsci]

Read the Olusoga piece in Guardian and he puts these riots in context of British history of anti immigrant riots. Which it had been assumed would not happen again. Also that class and race go together.

Another article in Guardian puts forward that the knee jerk quick sentencing is making the same mistakes as happened after the 2011 riots ( which were completely different issue}

‘People just like rioting’: why swift justice may blur real motivations behind UK rampage

Experts raise concerns that speed of court hearings could cloud complex reasons behind large-scale disorder and curtail search for lessons

www.theguardian.com

Whether justified or not the State/police don't like it when people have a go at them.



Having lived through riots in 80s this seems to me to be correct.

And to quote myself.

Reading this Guardian article again was struck that the plod after these rushed court appearances took it upon themselves to post up on their FB the picture of the woman convicted.

This women was imo in the vulnerable category. Her crime had been helping to push a wheelie bin at cops and being so stoned that she fell over. The crime of the century.

She has sad history of domestic abuse etc.

Kind of feel that the cops took this opportunity to further humiliate her on social media knowing full well she would be pilloried.

This is the same establishment going on about how given these riots social media is at fault and should be clamped down on.

It all seems one sided to me.

The judge found that Vint had no racist or ideological motivation for her offence, but that her sentence had to be increased because of the riot’s scale, impact and the “backdrop of other violent incidents” across the country.
The court heard that Vint’s life had been blighted by drug and alcohol abuse and domestic violence, and that she had become homeless after fleeing an abusive relationship and seeing all five of her children taken into care.

 

[Lotte]

Yeah, that's not up there with trying to burn down a hotel. Not that she should have gotten involved in the riots, but the sentence for her is way harsh.