Is there a reason for the riots?

[danny la rouge]

Nothingness is merely an alternate state of somethingness, padawan.

It's also coiled in the heart of being like a worm.

And nobody wants to be like a worm.

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

anyone posted this video (originally from sky)?
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/exclusive-teen-gang-reveals-looting-spree-041951519.html

 

[Maidmarian]

There's a big problem though, that resides in the fact that our system of governance is over-mighty. It's built such a nice nest for itself that it is resistant to the sort of methods of protest that worked in the past. Now protest can be ignored to a far greater extent than, say, 20 years ago. That kind of wears on activists, that awful feeling that however hard you strive, however much local support you have, you're unlikely to be able to make anything but a fleeting difference. Now, that "fleeting difference" may be one that sets some lives straight, brings hope, but how often can activists find it in themselves to keep repeating the same battles time and again, especially when so many new concerns keep springing up that need addressing?

Because anything else is unthinkable.

 

[ddraig]

Yep, shows some of the shit the police have to put up with just for doing their job...

cunt

 

[ViolentPanda]

absolutely not, as you well know. i was explaining why i believe acab. i was referring to what underlies my violent hatred towards the filth. i was referencing the formative experiences that have led me, a basically nice bloke from a good background, to cheer when police are killed or injured.
the reason i've done this is to shed light on the motivations of those who want to attack the police. people like me

I've been knocked around by coppers (anything you've heard about the coppers in Brixton in the '70s and '80s being mostly thoroughgoing violent racist shitcunts is true), and seen mates (always black) beaten shitless by them, but I don't hate them. I hate the fucking awful institution that employs them and provides such an effective environment for cuntitude to prosper. I also hate the regime that almost slavishly supports the police in return for the police acting politically and effectively policing/defending policy delivery.

Individually, I can't bring myself to hate them. Loathe them for having so little sense of self that they'd join such an institution: Yep. Give one or two of them an offer of some one-on-one full-contact fighting tuition: Absolutely. Smash one particular ex-CID DCI in the face with a shovel for robbing a mate of 17 years: You betcha. I don't think they're all bastards, though. Most of them are too pathetic for that, and for the most part as individuals hating them would be like hating a sack of shit for being a sack of shit, IYSWIM.

 

[danny la rouge]

the obligatory 'calm down'. That's the prelude to violence from the police - the suspect was agitated, your honour. I thought he might be armed...

Exactly. Time and time again.

"Calm down"? Was the filmer uncalm? No. So, habitual lies.

 

[CyberRose]

I'm not sure that most insider trading is perpetrated by the poor. But maybe CyberRose has some statistics that prove otherwise.

No , I'm afraid not. Crimes that "makes them money" isn't a poor person's preserve. Expenses fiddles, corporate crime etc etc ---- see what I'm getting at ?

So you two are saying that those crimes you mention make up the majority of all crimes?

All I'm saying is that imo, the biggest cause of crime is social inequalities. If you disagree with that fine, but you could at least say why you don't believe social inequalities are not the biggest cause of crime (like by saying what you do think is the biggest cause of crime?)

 

[ViolentPanda]

There is no doubt that the police don't like being filmed. If they were unfailingly acting within the law, there would be no reason for them to object to being filmed. One may draw a conclusion from that.

Occam's Razor in action. Pity most of the stuffed turkeys in Parliament can't handle such concepts.

 

[danny la rouge]

So you two are saying that those crimes you mention make up the majority of all crimes?

All I'm saying is that imo, the biggest cause of crime is social inequalities. If you disagree with that fine, but you could at least say why you don't believe social inequalities are not the biggest cause of crime (like by saying what you do think is the biggest cause of crime?)

Greedy thugs wanting to maintain their wealth and power.

 

[CyberRose]

Heh Good morning...Sleep well?

No I was up all night worrying about what people in this thread were saying about me!

You have been pointed in the direction of evidence time and time again by myself and others on this thread

As far as I'm aware, nobody has posted any links? If I've missed something then I'm sorry but you can see how fast this thread is moving so please can you post this evidence up again. I'm giving you opinions here, if they are wrong I have no problem in holding my hands up and saying so, but so far all I've had in response is other peoples' opinions (altho I stand to be corrected...)

I don't just think you are wrong, I know you are wrong. You have repeated implied that ethnic minorities are disproportionately more likely to be criminals and that this is why they are subject to more police harrassment.

Actually I said ethnic minorities are more likely to be from a deprived background compared to white people (that is proved btw) and that is why they are more likely to be stopped (imo, of course. I can't disprove institutional racism as much as you can prove it)

 

[CyberRose]

thanks for that. it's tricky when fascists don't have swastikas carved into their foreheads, however comments like this make it easy to identify you nonetheless

cunt

Well thank god for that! I've been worried that people would have said some really bad things about me!

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Exactly. Time and time again.

"Calm down"? Was the filmer uncalm? No. So, habitual lies.

I'm afraid this is what annoys me most about apologists like agricola and detective-boy before him. This is police harassment and thuggery by the numbers. It is instantly recognisable to any of us who have experienced it ourselves. It is dishonest not to acknowledge that this kind of thing happens routinely in the way that it appears to be happening in that video - in other words, the highly unlikely scenarios of mitigation that agricola suggests, and d-b would no doubt suggest too were he still here, are simply not the case at all.

 

[Maidmarian]

@ CyberRose : Can't speak for kabbes , but what I'm saying is that , yes , social inequalities are influential, but it remains true that "the poor" are FAR more likely :
To be detected
To be charged
To be found guilty

This has the effect of over-representation of "the poor" in the stats.

(apols , but my laptop is dying & it's taking ages, so I'm trying to use shorthand).

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm sorry you're hurt. I am not, however, the one calling people "selfish arseholes", or telling anyone they can "fuck off" if they don't like it.

I'm afraid I find your posts to be so vague that I have difficulty telling what your message is, other than we're all to blame, and we all have to do something. And that you were down on me blaming neoliberalism. "It's always someone else's fault", was the mantra.

Well, I'm sorry, but we're not all to blame. Not everyone supports the neoliberal project. Not everyone accepts the Thatcherite consensus. And not everyone sits back while it goes on. There is, however, a programme that is to blame: neoliberalism. It has it's champions. They are to blame. Individually, and collectively. (I can list some of the names if you like). However, I'm more interested in the programme. It needs to be hindered, sabotaged, and eventually destroyed.

I'm not sure why you bring up your first thread on Urban75. However, I agree that it's important to do what you can in your family and local community. Like what, though? Vague platitudes? Or something that has some idea of what it is that's gone wrong? Something, in other words, that isn't apolitical, ahistoric miasma. Juggling workshops aren't going to cut it.

I've told you what I think needs to be done. I thought you understood. You seemed to agree.

Well, it looks like we actually disagree. Which is fine. I certainly don't require to agree with everyone I converse with.

We're not all responsible. That much should be glaringly obvious. However, we are all implicated, and we can't, as social beings, avoid being implicated, because there's no neo-liberalism-free Utopia we can escape to.
What then matters is the degree to which we acquiesce to that implication; whether we try to minimise our compliance and/or seek to subvert it; whether we compromise and, if so, to what degree and for what reason(s).

 

[ViolentPanda]

'I also saw in Ealing a row of torched cars - well mostly torched cars. They left the lowly nissan and Fiats alone and did for the Audi's, Lexus, BMW's, and VW's '

posted on a blog by 'eyewitness', (the politics of envy in his view)

Back when this part of south London was first being gentrified, you'd see similar, where "posh" cars would be scratched, while "ordinary" cars wouldn't. Then as now, I think it's a question and message to the gentrifiers - "Why are you here? You're not wanted".

 

[ViolentPanda]

Because anything else is unthinkable.

Oh, I absolutely agree, I'm just trying to make the point that more and more activists (at least of my acquaintance) are "burning out", because where they might have done most stuff under the aegis of a political party 30 or even 20 years ago, now thy're hopping between half a dozen different and important local causes, and all the time being asked/requested/begged to take on more and more because the state (and, it has to be said, local authorities) has in effect dumped people and projects with no regard to what that means for anyone in the community.

 

[CyberRose]

@ CyberRose : Can't speak for kabbes , but what I'm saying is that , yes , social inequalities are influential, but it remains true that "the poor" are FAR more likely :
To be detected
To be charged
To be found guilty

This has the effect of over-representation of "the poor" in the stats.

(apols , but my laptop is dying & it's taking ages, so I'm trying to use shorthand).

With all due respect I haven't posted any stats about this. This is my opinion and I have no problem "admitting" that.

All I am saying is that for me the biggest contributor to levels of crime is social inequalities (and therefore as a result creates criminals from that section of society). Altho you say social inequalities "influences" crime, you seem to be suggesting that there is another cause that you feel makes a greater contribution, but you haven't said what exactly.

Now just let me be perfectly clear, I am not saying all poor people are criminals and I am not saying all criminals are poor people. But if I believe the biggest contributor to crime is social inequality, then I also have to say that I think most criminals come from a poor background (and again pointing out this is for crime for an income). The problem is, I can use crime as a reason to argue that social inequalities must be addressed, but whilst ever you play that factor down, then you give people like the Tories the excuse to ignore it and concentrate on "fake" causes of crime like 'the breakdown of society/family', 'gangsta rap' or 'social networking' which in turn allows them to avoid the real issue (imo) because ideologically they have no interest in addressing social inequalities but have a high stake in maintaining them...

 

[ViolentPanda]

Exactly. Time and time again.

"Calm down"? Was the filmer uncalm? No. So, habitual lies.

It's also a provocation, like when a Scouser says it to you, and it makes you want to lamp them.

 

[Maidmarian]

Yep ---- true ---- lots of oldies still working on it though.

(Bugger !!!! --- that was @ VP btw)

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's also a provocation, like when a Scouser says it to you, and it makes you want to lamp them.

Oh it's a calculated way to make someone who clearly is calm less calm. Dismiss what they say, dismiss the manner in which they say it, and instruct them to become something they clearly already are.

 

[ViolentPanda]

So you two are saying that those crimes you mention make up the majority of all crimes?

How would we know? White-collar crime (if you balance company accounts against reports of crime) is notoriously under-reported

All I'm saying is that imo, the biggest cause of crime is social inequalities. If you disagree with that fine, but you could at least say why you don't believe social inequalities are not the biggest cause of crime (like by saying what you do think is the biggest cause of crime?)

The biggest cause of petty theft and burglary in the UK is related to drug addiction. IIRC street robbery, shop-lifting and other forms of petty theft, plus household burglary have consistenty turned up stats showing that 65-70% of the perpetrators we're addicted to a Class A.

 

[CyberRose]

How would we know? White-collar crime (if you balance company accounts against reports of crime) is notoriously under-reported

I'm not asking people to know. I'm asking for their opinion. They have clearly stated that they disagree with me that most 'income' crimes are committed by socially disadvantaged people, so I'm asking if they think these white collar criminals actually make up the majority (in their opinion, of course)

The biggest cause of petty theft and burglary in the UK is related to drug addiction. IIRC street robbery, shop-lifting and other forms of petty theft, plus household burglary have consistenty turned up stats showing that 65-70% of the perpetrators we're addicted to a Class A.

And drug addiction isn't a sign of social inequalities?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm afraid this is what annoys me most about apologists like agricola and detective-boy before him. This is police harassment and thuggery by the numbers.

The problem is that agricola etc are/were taught particular methods of "conflict revolution" that aren't particularly helpful, especially as they're based on reading body language and projecting body language, which is fine and right as ninepence if everyone is calm, but goes out of the window as soon as the blood starts pumping faster. I had a good laugh at a cop who did the "calm down" thing, hand extended, palm down. Guess where his other hand was? On his belt, resting over baton. He totally couldn't understand why I was pissing myself laughing.

 

[gavman]

There's a big problem though, that resides in the fact that our system of governance is over-mighty. It's built such a nice nest for itself that it is resistant to the sort of methods of protest that worked in the past. Now protest can be ignored to a far greater extent than, say, 20 years ago. That kind of wears on activists, that awful feeling that however hard you strive, however much local support you have, you're unlikely to be able to make anything but a fleeting difference. Now, that "fleeting difference" may be one that sets some lives straight, brings hope, but how often can activists find it in themselves to keep repeating the same battles time and again, especially when so many new concerns keep springing up that need addressing?

how many people on here can relate to going on huge peaceful marches or demos...and not getting a word of coverage?
the lad interviewed t'other night said just the same thing. he'd been on a march three months before, good numbers, well behaved, no media coverage, no response, no point

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Well, a quick google reveals some suggestive research, I'd be surprised if a proper search didn't turn up more along these lines.

Yet the costs of fraud and forgery in Britain in 2000 was £13.8bn, compared to £2.7bn for burglary, she said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3102800.stm

 

[CyberRose]

Well, a quick google reveals some suggestive research, I'd be surprised if a proper search didn't turn up more along these lines.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3102800.stm

What do you think that proves? One pound equals one offender?!

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm not asking people to know. I'm asking for their opinion. They have clearly stated that they disagree with me that most 'income' crimes are committed by socially disadvantaged people, so I'm asking if they think these white collar criminals actually make up the majority (in their opinion, of course)

But you're only really interested in their opinion insofar as you can turn it round on them and say "no, you're wrong. I'm right".

And drug addiction isn't a sign of social inequalities?

No, it's a sign of drug addiction, and it's a phenomenon that cuts right across social and cultural boundaries. Some cases of addiction may have origins in social inequalities, but to asume that all, or even a majority do, would be crass.

 

[CyberRose]

But you're only really interested in their opinion insofar as you can turn it round on them and say "no, you're wrong. I'm right".

You can't prove that

No, it's a sign of drug addiction, and it's a phenomenon that cuts right across social and cultural boundaries. Some cases of addiction may have origins in social inequalities, but to asume that all, or even a majority do, would be crass.

Never thought I'd see the day on U75 when I would be the one arguing that social inequalities are the main causes of so many of societies ills and the regulars were arguing against that. I am truly shocked by all this.

Now obviously anyone can get addicted to drugs (and do get addicted to drugs), but again I'd argue the problem is worse the more deprived your background. In my opinion...

 

[Bernie Gunther]

What do you think that proves? One pound equals one offender?!

That's just stupid talk. Why would I think any such thing?

Have some respect for yourself ...

 

[danny la rouge]

We're not all responsible. That much should be glaringly obvious. However, we are all implicated, and we can't, as social beings, avoid being implicated, because there's no neo-liberalism-free Utopia we can escape to.
What then matters is the degree to which we acquiesce to that implication; whether we try to minimise our compliance and/or seek to subvert it; whether we compromise and, if so, to what degree and for what reason(s).

Absolutely. We are all part of capital. (The purchase of labour-power incorporates labour into the commodity). But that's exactly where our strength lies.

In fact, this discussion is starting to remind me of Cleaver's Reading Capital Politically. Kizmet, if you haven't read that, you definitely should. It's available online. Reading it will help you understand why it is important to analyse current power structures. In fact, I think I'll reread it.