The Aftermath
Hi all, I'm back! Wasn't that some fuss while I was away? Everyone I met was fascinated to talk to someone who came from where the troubles were. Now that is ironic. Take note US readers ;-)
My locality, Ilford, was amongst the areas reported as having disturbances so I had to go to see what there was to see. And what was there to see? precious nothing, one shop with a window boarded up. Turns out that most of the action was around the back doors where people were breaking in to steal. And they are looking for social reasons for rioting? Do me a favour. Lowlife thieves, the lot of them.
posted by Ham at 00:02 --
Comments here: 3
Comments on "The Aftermath"
-
Anonymous said ... (20:01) :
-
Ham said ... (20:41) :
-
Winifred said ... (00:28) :
post a commentWith due respect, your snap judgement of these problems is symptomatic of what may have caused the riots. The "Stalinisation" of the conversation is as frightening as the level of disorder. It's on the same level as George Bush's "With us or against us" proclamation.
Here's the perfect example of both the whitewashing of the underlying problems and the refusal to accept any other explanation:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/09/london-riots-bbc-interview_n_922857.html
When the "conversation" didn't fit the anchors predetermined meme, she simply cut off the gentleman. When he refused to follow her narrative - and destroyed both her argument and attitude, she shut off the interview.
Granted, there are and always will be some who use these situations to their own venal advantage. But until Britain gets past their predetermined conclusions they are doomed to repeat the uprisings.
While I don't doubt there may be underlying social conditions producing the circumstances and environment where this behaviour can take place, that doesn't change what these people are - thieving lowlife who believe that taking other people's property is morally acceptable.
The interview you link to is interesting for many reasons. First, I think you are right that the news agenda is written and in my view tends to create a feeding frenzy likely to affect the subject which is being reported, especially in this type of incident. However, Darcus Howe has his own agenda http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darcus_Howe - which he is clearly entitled to do, but I think he is wrong, plain and simple, to draw a line between Brixton in 81 and the recent unrest.
Mmm. Lots of reasons I think for the range of people involved in the chaos. No simple solutions either.
We didn't have the riots up in the North East of England but I was near the local police station and had a chat with a couple of bobbies on the beat. We were watching loads of policemen getting onto buses. They told us they were being shipped down to Manchester. Obviously not enough police to deal with the situation in those areas. At least one of the reasons the problems got out of hand.
I think Ghandi had it right though
- Wealth without work
- Pleasure without conscience
- Knowledge without character
- Commerce without morality
- Science without humanity
- Worship without sacrifice -Politics without principle