Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
Today at 12:50 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 04:17 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Yesterday at 07:11 PM

What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
Yesterday at 06:39 PM

New Britain
Yesterday at 05:41 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
Yesterday at 05:47 AM

Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 09:56 PM

عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 04:01 PM

Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:06 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
February 01, 2024, 12:10 PM

Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM

Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Riots in London

 (Read 49975 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 11 12 1314 15 ... 17 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #360 - August 11, 2011, 10:48 PM

    You said you hate leftists-- if taken literally this would mean you hate me as well. If you don't want it taken literally, rephrase it or simply stop generalizing-- I think overgeneralizing is the whole problem on this thread in the first place. Some/many of the rioters are just thugs/punks engaging in criminal activity--> therefore we should treat ALL of the rioters as if they are--> therefore the riots do not in any way represent and legitimate form of social or political protest and let's call out the military/militarized police to bust heads and shoot people.


    Ok fine, Im SORRY. I didn't actually mean I hate people, but was meaning the arguments. My bad.

    Love you.

    Formerly known as Iblis
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #361 - August 11, 2011, 10:50 PM

    What lead you to the conclusion that this a spontaneous rebellion against capitalism? how can you be so sure it was only a minority that wanted to cause trouble and loot? were any of them raising signs against capitalism? were they chanting anything against it? how can you know that any of them were rioting for ideological reasons?


    Most of these thuglets couldn't spell capitalism if you held a gun to their face.

    Formerly known as Iblis
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #362 - August 11, 2011, 10:51 PM

    Wow, awesome, insightful post carefully addressing the content of my reply. Fuckin awesome. Bout sums up the posts I've seen in this thread so far which mostly consist of brain-dead vilification of the rioters and calls for the capitalist thugs to come in and save the day through mass repression.


    It defeats me to be honest. I don't think anything I say would make a difference to your outlook.

    Out of interest, how many deaths are an acceptable cost in the wider cause?



     

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #363 - August 11, 2011, 11:08 PM

    What lead you to the conclusion that this a spontaneous rebellion against capitalism?


    Analysis of hundreds of years of capitalist society and thousands of years of class society and the conflicts that arise under it. There's nothing new under the sun in this respect.

    Quote
    how can you be so sure it was only a minority that wanted to cause trouble and loot?


    Where did I say that? Since I posted this after my reply to you you may have missed it:

    Finally, let's address the motivation of the rioters, as has often been done on this thread since it began. We will take it as a given that some portion of the rioters were criminals before the riots began and are simply using the riots as convenient cover for criminal activity. We will also assume that some portion of the rioters may not have a criminal history but are essentially involved in the riots not out of any anger at the police, political or economic establishment, but simply for fun or to steal shit or whatever.

    But since no comprehensive survey has been done as to the motivation of the rioters to my knowledge, and we don't know what portions these two groups make up of the rebels, I'm fucking flabbergasted as to how many people here seem quite certain that is the motivation for ALL the rioters.


    Quote
    were any of them raising signs against capitalism? were they chanting anything against it?


    Not that I've seen so far, but that would hardly be unusual in a spontaneous underclass rebellion with no clear ideological unifier.

    Quote
    how can you know that any of them were rioting for ideological reasons?



    Fact is that many people involved in the riots have told reporters, with varying degrees of clarity and articulation, that they are rioting in protest of the police, of government policies, of the economy, or whatever. Now it's easy enough for people to dismiss these explanations as rationalizations or outright lies, but unless the people being interviewed are actually known to the person doing the dismissing, just seems like a way to reinforce what their perception of the rioters is already.


    It's pretty sad how ideology can totally blind people (both left and right) from seeing what's right in front of them.


    Indeed, but it is also sad when people refuse to put events within the socio-political context they are best analyzed with.
    It defeats me to be honest. I don't think anything I say would make a difference to your outlook.


    Fuck my outlook. How about just replying to the points I raised or answering the somewhat rhetorical questions I laid out?

    Quote
    Out of interest, how many deaths are an acceptable cost in the wider cause?


    I reject your question for the following reasons:

    1. I never asserted that these deaths were "acceptable" in the service of a "wider cause", therefore your "question" was merely a smear.

    2. As I don't believe you're a pacifist, I don't think you have the answer to this question either, another reason to believe it was merely a smear.

    3. The question presumes that the riots are centrally-planned, organized and executed, and that each rioter is acting in the service of a broader organization for a broader, specific purpose, which of course they are not. If they were that would be a different story, and we could say that although "collateral damage" is inevitable in any war, that the leadership must still be accountable and do everything they can to avoid the taking of innocent lives. But again, not the case.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #364 - August 11, 2011, 11:13 PM

    Quote
    I reject your question for the following reasons:

    1. I never asserted that these deaths were "acceptable" in the service of a "wider cause", therefore your "question" was merely a smear.


    Don't be so touchy, its not a smear, its a legitimate question.

    In the cause of an ideological action, you have stated that the deaths of innocent people are regrettable but not reason enough to condemn widespread random violence, looting, burning, destruction of property and livelihood. So does there come a point in which an upper limit of dead is reached? If so, what is that limit?




    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #365 - August 11, 2011, 11:22 PM

    Don't be so touchy, its not a smear, its a legitimate question.

    In the cause of an ideological action, you have stated that the deaths of innocent people are regrettable but not reason enough to condemn widespread random violence, looting, burning, destruction of property and livelihood.


    No I did not. I said it's not reason enough to vilify all the rioters, nor did I mention ideology.

    Quote
    So does there come a point in which an upper limit of dead is reached? If so, what is that limit?


    Assuming I constructed my argument the way you attributed it to me (and I didn't as made plain above), I do not know-- I suppose whenever the brutality of the rebellion exceeds the brutality of the state, then I would be compelled to condemn them.

    Now since I was so kind as to answer your cynical and unfair question, would you be so kind as to finally address the points I made in my post rather than simply responding "I despair"?


    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #366 - August 11, 2011, 11:28 PM

    The riots in London were really perpetrated by opportunist criminals, the overall picture it seems is that this may have been a ticking time bomb of general frustation amongst the working class, don't get me wrong the government's surprise at these riots may underline a deeper problem in the British society, especially in working class areas which is why I'm equally as pissed at the government who we pay maybe 15% of our annual income to sort out shit like this. The riots were inexcusable, at the end of it, the local economy of towns will be even more fucked. It just puts the general working class people in a bigger hole.

    "The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves."
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #367 - August 11, 2011, 11:30 PM

    Quote
    No I did not. I said it's not reason enough to vilify all the rioters, nor did I mention ideology.


    Laying down the template of anti-capitalism motivation is an ideological construct.

    I didn't say anything to vilify the rioters. I said that I disagree that violence that feeds on innocent peoples lives, livelihoods and wellbeing is an acceptable cost.

    On the news today, two brothers from the same family killed by a rioter, along with a friend. Describing that as an example of 'chickens coming home to roost' is, well what can I say.


    Quote
    I do not know-- I suppose whenever the brutality of the rebellion exceeds the brutality of the state, then I would be compelled to condemn them.



    OK, thanks.



    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #368 - August 11, 2011, 11:34 PM

    The riots in London were really perpetrated by opportunist criminals, the overall picture it seems is that this may have been a ticking time bomb of general frustation amongst the working class, don't get me wrong the government's surprise at these riots may underline a deeper problem in the British society, especially in working class areas which is why I'm equally as pissed at the government who we pay maybe 15% of our annual income to sort out shit like this. The riots were inexcusable, at the end of it, the local economy of towns will be even more fucked. It just puts the general working class people in a bigger hole.


    Is that the general middle class tax rate? Fuck. I gotta leave Canada.  wacko

    Formerly known as Iblis
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #369 - August 11, 2011, 11:37 PM

    It depends what income bracket you would classify as 'middle-class' and that does not include mortgages, obviously. It's actually 20% if you earn £35000 or less.

    "The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves."
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #370 - August 11, 2011, 11:38 PM



    hehe, nice one.

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #371 - August 11, 2011, 11:49 PM

    The riots in London were really perpetrated by opportunist criminals,


    Evidence these were a preponderance of the rioters?

    Quote
    The riots were inexcusable, at the end of it, the local economy of towns will be even more fucked. It just puts the general working class people in a bigger hole.


    I will grant you this MAY be true in this particular situation, but one must be careful with that kind of reasoning. I often see it employed to discourage resistance of any kind-- see people in labor unions use it to discourage workers from striking in general, even when they're in a good position to do it, see leftists who support the Democratic Party use that to discourage people from voting for third-party candidates, and there are also plenty of historical examples of it (conservative elements of the NAACP arguing against civil disobedience and boycotts during the US Civil Rights movement as it would just put Black people in a worse position), etc. Sometimes the argument is actually correct and a particular action is ill-advised and will result in blowback that is counterproductive in the long-run, but more often than not, it's just knee-jerk conservatism.

    Laying down the template of anti-capitalism motivation is an ideological construct.


    Bzzt. Wrong. Look, if someone punches back at someone punching at them (and try not to make too much of my analogy here) does that mean that they are acting in the service of the "ideology" of self-defense? And if an advocate of self-defense happens to analyze the man's actions in the context of his self-defense ideology, does that mean that the self-defense advocate is necessarily assigning an ideological motivation to the man who's punching back?

    Quote
    I didn't say anything to vilify the rioters. I said that I disagree that violence that feeds on innocent peoples lives, livelihoods and wellbeing is an acceptable cost.


    Again, point out where I said it's acceptable.

    Quote
    On the news today, two brothers from the same family killed by a rioter, along with a friend. Describing that as an example of 'chickens coming home to roost' is, well what can I say.


    This is not an argument, it's an appeal to emotion and a smear.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #372 - August 12, 2011, 12:07 AM

    Hey Q-Man,
    How's it going?
    I knew you might see this thread and support the rioters.  Tongue
    Personally, I think the protesters in Tottenham on Saturday were good people, but the looters in the days/nights that followed were opportunistic, thieving scumbags.  The hoodies who robbed that injured Malaysian student were assholes.  The black dude who helped him stand up may have had good intentions initially.

    "Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so." -- Bertrand Russell

    Baloney Detection Kit
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #373 - August 12, 2011, 12:10 AM

    For the record, I never stated I supported the rioters.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #374 - August 12, 2011, 12:15 AM

    But what's made them into opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone? They certainly weren't born that way and I'm not convinced it's because of an entitlement culture as Pat Condell says either or everybody would be the same who was lower class and that's not the case.  Huh?

    "The greatest general is not the one who can take the most cities or spill the most blood. The greatest general is the one who can take Heaven and Earth without waging the battle." ~ Sun Tzu

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #375 - August 12, 2011, 12:24 AM

    But what's made them into opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone?


    Eh, I'm starting to think that's the natural state of humanity. What pisses me off though is that the opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone in the right class get to rule over everyone with hardly a peep from their socially-controlled slaves in the middle and working-classes, but when it comes to opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone in the lower classes, people start foaming at the fuckin mouth and calling for blood to be shed by the agents of the ruling class opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone.


    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #376 - August 12, 2011, 12:32 AM

    001_wub
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #377 - August 12, 2011, 12:38 AM

    Good point and well put and indeed they exist at top as well as the bottom but what made them that way wherever they are on the scale, including the don't give a shit what happens around them middle-class slaves and foaming at the fuckin mouth working-class calling for blood to be shed too?  All these are natural states huh?  Huh?

    "The greatest general is not the one who can take the most cities or spill the most blood. The greatest general is the one who can take Heaven and Earth without waging the battle." ~ Sun Tzu

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #378 - August 12, 2011, 01:02 AM

    Eh, I'm starting to think that's the natural state of humanity. What pisses me off though is that the opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone in the right class get to rule over everyone with hardly a peep from their socially-controlled slaves in the middle and working-classes, but when it comes to opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone in the lower classes, people start foaming at the fuckin mouth and calling for blood to be shed by the agents of the ruling class opportunistic, thieving asshole scumbags who don't give a shit about anything or anyone.




    And this is why we need religion.

    /my dad

    how fuck works without shit??


    Let's Play Chess!

    harakaat, friend, RIP
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #379 - August 12, 2011, 01:09 AM

    Good point and well put and indeed they exist at top as well as the bottom but what made them that way wherever they are on the scale, including the don't give a shit what happens around them middle-class slaves and foaming at the fuckin mouth working-class calling for blood to be shed too?  All these are natural states huh?  Huh?


    Let's let revolutionary socialist Q battle it out with cynical nihilist Q and see who wins before I answer that question.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #380 - August 12, 2011, 08:33 AM


    Bzzt. Wrong. Look, if someone punches back at someone punching at them (and try not to make too much of my analogy here) does that mean that they are acting in the service of the "ideology" of self-defense? And if an advocate of self-defense happens to analyze the man's actions in the context of his self-defense ideology, does that mean that the self-defense advocate is necessarily assigning an ideological motivation to the man who's punching back?


    People killing 68 year old men in Ealing, or killing 3 innocent men in Birmingham, who were carrying out self defence against looters and violence in their neighbourhood, burning innocent families out of their homes, looting and burning down the small businesses of immigrants, are not carrying out self defence against anyone. They are victimising and persecuting innocent people. The 'self defence' thing is an ideological bias itself.


    This is not an argument, it's an appeal to emotion and a smear.


    You answered it honestly. The algebra of chickens coming home to roost.

    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #381 - August 12, 2011, 09:49 AM

    There are always reasons for the way people behave - that doesn't excuse it of course - but there are reasons. To say they are just criminals and we need to get tough with them - while ignoring other factors, isn't going to solve the problem. Yes, they are criminals, but what has created such an violent, angry and apparently amoral underclass is a question that must be addressed. Of course I doubt the rioters have thought about it in a careful rational manner, but when you have a society where the people who you are supposed to trust at the top, being dishonest and taking what they can, whether it's MPs expenses, Police taking bribes, or Bankers ruining the country and then getting bailed out at the expense of the ordinary person, it creates an attitude of "Well no-one else gives a fuck - why should I?" - it makes the words of the authorities seem shallow, empty and hypocritical. On top of that are the economic, social and family issues such as the absence of a father figure or a stable home - the lure of gang culture and the despair of any prospect of jobs or education or facilities. All this creates a tinder box of anger, resentment and hopelessness.

    Of course most people would not turn to rioting and crime - but there are some that always will.

    In better times they are a smaller group and have more reason not to behave like this - in the circumstances we are now going through their numbers swell and they have less reason to stop them.

    As I say it is simplistic to say it is just criminality that need to be met with a harsh response - that may be true in some cases - but without addressing the many other issues it will solve nothing.

    But equally to say it is some sort of uprising of the Proletariate against the evil Capitalist system is just as simplistic. There are undoubtedly evils of the Capitalist system - but to say this is the main or underlying problem is wrong imho, not least because no man made system is going to be perfect and I certainly don't believe Communism is the answer. It may solve some problems, but as has been seen, creates a lot more.

    No easy answer imho.

    Maybe we need an Islamic State  grin12
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #382 - August 12, 2011, 10:50 AM



    One of the best articles I have read in the last week:

    Quote

    The Riots That Will Define My Generation


    This Post is brought to you by Talal Rajab, of The Urbanite

    Having been bought up and raised in North London, right bang in between Tottenham and Enfield, this weekend’s events have left a sour taste in my throat.  Seeing the streets that you call home in disarray, the shops that you visit burnt down and the community that you love given a bad name hurts.  Shop keepers have lost businesses, people have been made homeless and the decades of community work that has gone in around this area has been rendered meaningless within the space of 48 hours by the actions of idiotic thugs.

    What hurts even more, however, is the misinformation and ill-advised comments that I have witnessed on various media platforms and social networking sites over the weekend regarding the trouble in North London.

    From the shotgun reaction from certain sections of the media, who quickly labelled Mark Duggan a ‘gangsta’ who shot at police without waiting for verification of the facts, to the completely idiotic muppets on twitter and Facebook who called for fellow North London residents to ‘rise up against the f***ing feds’, what we have witnessed here is a merry-go round of claims and counter-claims that has finally escalated into the apocalyptic headlines that we see today.  Some of these claims clearly need to be addressed.

    Firstly, we need to let the IPCC get to the bottom of what really happened between Mark Duggan and the police last Thursday.  On the one hand we have accounts that Duggan was a dangerous thug from the media, conveniently fed to them by the police along with this photo of Duggan looking as menacingly as possible, whereas on the other hand we have accounts from people around the area that described ‘starrish Mark’ as a family man and well known member of the community.  At the end of the day none of us know what happened and the endless speculation and rumours have only escalated what must already be a gruesome time for the young man’s family.

    Secondly, social commentators need to cease making comparisons between what happened in the 1980s and what is happening today.  Despite their many failings, of which I shall come to later, the Met have come leaps and bounds over the past decades and are not the same racist force that our parents and grandparents had to put up with.  SUS laws have ended and the institutionalised racism that was described in the Macpherson report has been all but stamped out.

    However, that is not to say that the police are angels.  Young residents in this area continue to hold reservations against the police and trust levels between the youth and the police continue to be at an all-time low, even before the events of last week.  This, however, has little to do with institutionalised racism and more to do with the fact that the police continue to patronise and misunderstand the youth of today.  Put simply, if you dress in a certain manner and talk in a certain way (regardless of your race) you are treated differently by the police and many people on Saturday and Sunday, wrongly I might add, saw this as their chance to ‘get back at the feds’.

    Furthermore, with continued levels of gun and knife crime in the area many youth do not feel adequately protected by the police.  One of the most common statements that I have heard over the weekend from terrified residents is that the police allowed the riots to happen.  Scenes of young people rioting and looting for hours on end in Wood Green without any police intervention lends more weight to their concerns.  I remember being robbed and attacked a number of years ago with CS spray and a hammer by two hooded youths my age and the last thought on my mind was to report the crime for fear that I would then be viewed in suspect terms by the police.  Although I now see this as a mistake, I can understand why many people younger than me hold similar reservations.  The only result of this, however, are more young people ‘tooling up’ for protection and further violent crimes.

    Thirdly, this has nothing to do with multiculturalism or government cuts and any attempt to link the two with events this weekend are nothing but political opportunism, from both the right and the left.

    In regards to multiculturalism, it is clear from the images in Tottenham that this was not just a “black issue”, despite the media predictably rolling out so-called “community leaders” many of whom are apparently leading our community yet we have never even heard of them.  Members of all races were rioting and if anyone knows this area well then they will know that Tottenham is a strong mix of black, white, Polish, Turkish and Jewish communities, many of whom took to the streets on Saturday.

    The scenes in the predominately white area of Enfield should also lay to rest those who are quick to blame multiculturalism for this mess.  Despite this Sky News have continued to roll out a very well spoken and thoughtful black guy (I will not mention his name because I think he actually makes some very good points and it is not his fault) to explain the situation in Tottenham even though he lives in South London!  Multiculturalism, for all it’s failures, does not encourage people to loot and riot and those (mainly right wing commentators) attempting to use this weekend to lament multiculturalism should be ashamed of themselves.

    As should those on the left, such as Ken Livingstone, who have tried to link the riots to the coalition cuts, arguing that they have caused ‘social division’.  This is nonsense.  Many of the kids looting and rioting would probably be unable to name our Deputy Prime Minister, let alone be aware of the effects of spending cuts in the area.  It should also be noted that many of the people rioting are not ‘under-privileged’ and economically poor.  Many tales of the riots in what is relatively the middle class area of Enfield describes seeing well dressed youths escaping with loot in their VW GTI’s.  Today we are hearing rumours of riots in Southgate and Palmers Green – hardly Compton and the Bronx.  To try and simply paint this as ‘poor people’ uprising is lazy and quite typical of some of us on the left who try to blame the coalition for everything and see economic causes when there are none.

    That is not to say that the cuts in this area have not had an effect, as can be seen in this video.  Youth clubs are being closed down, unemployment in the area is rising and local community groups are losing funding.  What we need to ensure, as a community, is that these cuts do not have a detrimental effect in the future and prevent the area from progressing socially.

    Lastly, I cannot overstate the effect that social media has had in encouraging the riots.  Many people have called this the ‘twitter revolution’, but I am afraid that the kids are once again one step ahead of our adult counterparts.  This was not merely a twitter revolution, it was a BBM revolution.  The amount of Blackberry broadcasts, such as this, that were being sent out clearly had an impact, particularly on the riots in Enfield. It seems that the riots on Sunday were clearly planned and organised, but not on the well known platforms like twitter and Facebook which rioters were aware were being monitored by the police.  They were being planned via the Blackberry, which seems like the phone of choice for today’s urban rioter.  This article here explains why.

    So where do we go from here.  Whilst it is too early to tell of the effects that the riots will have on the community here in the future, what is clear in the meantime is that until the police get a quick hold on the situation this will continue and continue.  Shops have already shut early in Southgate and Palmers Green today and the fact that looting spread as far as Brixton last night is further proof that this is unlikely to end anytime soon.  Serious questions also need to be asked of the police inaction in what has been a terrible month for Scotland Yard.  I guess all we can do here is clean up the mess and brace ourselves for further problems in the coming week.  Whilst we do that, however, it would help if outsiders stopped spreading misinformation, for all our sake's. 


    The saddest thing is that whilst our parents fought for noble causes such as equal rights and the end of apartheid our generation fought for Nike trainers and iPads.  This, i am afraid, will define my generation.



    http://iamtheurbanite.blogspot.com/2011/08/riots-that-will-define-my-generation.html





    "we can smell traitors and country haters"


    God is Love.
    Love is Blind. Stevie Wonder is blind. Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #383 - August 12, 2011, 03:49 PM

    People killing 68 year old men in Ealing, or killing 3 innocent men in Birmingham, who were carrying out self defence against looters and violence in their neighbourhood, burning innocent families out of their homes, looting and burning down the small businesses of immigrants, are not carrying out self defence against anyone. They are victimising and persecuting innocent people. The 'self defence' thing is an ideological bias itself.


    Way to miss the point billy. It was a fuckin analogy to show that although I may be viewing the riots through an ideological lens, that doesn't mean the riots are in the service of an ideology-- I didn't mean the rioters themselves were acting in self-defense, Jesus.

    Did you fucking huff a bunch of gas, eat some lead paint chips, then fall on your head while I was gone? Cause you always impressed me as being a smart guy, but in this thread you're acting fucking brain-dead.

    Quote
    You answered it honestly. The algebra of chickens coming home to roost.


    da finga

    I certainly don't believe Communism is the answer. It may solve some problems, but as has been seen, creates a lot more.


    Evidence that Communism creates more problems than it solves, please.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #384 - August 12, 2011, 03:56 PM

    Jesus.


    Hey, whats up?

    Formerly known as Iblis
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #385 - August 12, 2011, 03:59 PM

    Ma dick.

    But you knew that already. You see all.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #386 - August 12, 2011, 04:08 PM


    One of the best articles I have read in the last week:

    Quote
    The Riots That Will Define My Generation


    This Post is brought to you by Talal Rajab, of The Urbanite

    Having been bought up and raised in North London, right bang in between Tottenham and Enfield, this weekend’s events have left a sour taste in my throat.  Seeing the streets that you call home in disarray, the shops that you visit burnt down and the community that you love given a bad name hurts.  Shop keepers have lost businesses, people have been made homeless and the decades of community work that has gone in around this area has been rendered meaningless within the space of 48 hours by the actions of idiotic thugs.

    What hurts even more, however, is the misinformation and ill-advised comments that I have witnessed on various media platforms and social networking sites over the weekend regarding the trouble in North London.

    From the shotgun reaction from certain sections of the media, who quickly labelled Mark Duggan a ‘gangsta’ who shot at police without waiting for verification of the facts, to the completely idiotic muppets on twitter and Facebook who called for fellow North London residents to ‘rise up against the f***ing feds’, what we have witnessed here is a merry-go round of claims and counter-claims that has finally escalated into the apocalyptic headlines that we see today.  Some of these claims clearly need to be addressed.

    Firstly, we need to let the IPCC get to the bottom of what really happened between Mark Duggan and the police last Thursday.  On the one hand we have accounts that Duggan was a dangerous thug from the media, conveniently fed to them by the police along with this photo of Duggan looking as menacingly as possible, whereas on the other hand we have accounts from people around the area that described ‘starrish Mark’ as a family man and well known member of the community.  At the end of the day none of us know what happened and the endless speculation and rumours have only escalated what must already be a gruesome time for the young man’s family.

    Secondly, social commentators need to cease making comparisons between what happened in the 1980s and what is happening today.  Despite their many failings, of which I shall come to later, the Met have come leaps and bounds over the past decades and are not the same racist force that our parents and grandparents had to put up with.  SUS laws have ended and the institutionalised racism that was described in the Macpherson report has been all but stamped out.

    However, that is not to say that the police are angels.  Young residents in this area continue to hold reservations against the police and trust levels between the youth and the police continue to be at an all-time low, even before the events of last week.  This, however, has little to do with institutionalised racism and more to do with the fact that the police continue to patronise and misunderstand the youth of today.  Put simply, if you dress in a certain manner and talk in a certain way (regardless of your race) you are treated differently by the police and many people on Saturday and Sunday, wrongly I might add, saw this as their chance to ‘get back at the feds’.

    Furthermore, with continued levels of gun and knife crime in the area many youth do not feel adequately protected by the police.  One of the most common statements that I have heard over the weekend from terrified residents is that the police allowed the riots to happen.  Scenes of young people rioting and looting for hours on end in Wood Green without any police intervention lends more weight to their concerns.  I remember being robbed and attacked a number of years ago with CS spray and a hammer by two hooded youths my age and the last thought on my mind was to report the crime for fear that I would then be viewed in suspect terms by the police.  Although I now see this as a mistake, I can understand why many people younger than me hold similar reservations.  The only result of this, however, are more young people ‘tooling up’ for protection and further violent crimes.

    Thirdly, this has nothing to do with multiculturalism or government cuts and any attempt to link the two with events this weekend are nothing but political opportunism, from both the right and the left.

    In regards to multiculturalism, it is clear from the images in Tottenham that this was not just a “black issue”, despite the media predictably rolling out so-called “community leaders” many of whom are apparently leading our community yet we have never even heard of them.  Members of all races were rioting and if anyone knows this area well then they will know that Tottenham is a strong mix of black, white, Polish, Turkish and Jewish communities, many of whom took to the streets on Saturday.

    The scenes in the predominately white area of Enfield should also lay to rest those who are quick to blame multiculturalism for this mess.  Despite this Sky News have continued to roll out a very well spoken and thoughtful black guy (I will not mention his name because I think he actually makes some very good points and it is not his fault) to explain the situation in Tottenham even though he lives in South London!  Multiculturalism, for all it’s failures, does not encourage people to loot and riot and those (mainly right wing commentators) attempting to use this weekend to lament multiculturalism should be ashamed of themselves.

    As should those on the left, such as Ken Livingstone, who have tried to link the riots to the coalition cuts, arguing that they have caused ‘social division’.  This is nonsense.  Many of the kids looting and rioting would probably be unable to name our Deputy Prime Minister, let alone be aware of the effects of spending cuts in the area.  It should also be noted that many of the people rioting are not ‘under-privileged’ and economically poor.  Many tales of the riots in what is relatively the middle class area of Enfield describes seeing well dressed youths escaping with loot in their VW GTI’s.  Today we are hearing rumours of riots in Southgate and Palmers Green – hardly Compton and the Bronx.  To try and simply paint this as ‘poor people’ uprising is lazy and quite typical of some of us on the left who try to blame the coalition for everything and see economic causes when there are none.

    That is not to say that the cuts in this area have not had an effect, as can be seen in this video.  Youth clubs are being closed down, unemployment in the area is rising and local community groups are losing funding.  What we need to ensure, as a community, is that these cuts do not have a detrimental effect in the future and prevent the area from progressing socially.

    Lastly, I cannot overstate the effect that social media has had in encouraging the riots.  Many people have called this the ‘twitter revolution’, but I am afraid that the kids are once again one step ahead of our adult counterparts.  This was not merely a twitter revolution, it was a BBM revolution.  The amount of Blackberry broadcasts, such as this, that were being sent out clearly had an impact, particularly on the riots in Enfield. It seems that the riots on Sunday were clearly planned and organised, but not on the well known platforms like twitter and Facebook which rioters were aware were being monitored by the police.  They were being planned via the Blackberry, which seems like the phone of choice for today’s urban rioter.  This article here explains why.

    So where do we go from here.  Whilst it is too early to tell of the effects that the riots will have on the community here in the future, what is clear in the meantime is that until the police get a quick hold on the situation this will continue and continue.  Shops have already shut early in Southgate and Palmers Green today and the fact that looting spread as far as Brixton last night is further proof that this is unlikely to end anytime soon.  Serious questions also need to be asked of the police inaction in what has been a terrible month for Scotland Yard.  I guess all we can do here is clean up the mess and brace ourselves for further problems in the coming week.  Whilst we do that, however, it would help if outsiders stopped spreading misinformation, for all our sake's.  


    The saddest thing is that whilst our parents fought for noble causes such as equal rights and the end of apartheid our generation fought for Nike trainers and iPads.  This, i am afraid, will define my generation.


    http://iamtheurbanite.blogspot.com/2011/08/riots-that-will-define-my-generation.html





    Thank you for sharing this.

    Against the ruin of the world, there
    is only one defense: the creative act.

    -- Kenneth Rexroth
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #387 - August 12, 2011, 04:27 PM

    Evidence that Communism creates more problems than it solves, please.


    Just look at <insert almost any Communist country past and present>
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #388 - August 12, 2011, 04:42 PM

    Okay, let's pick out two examples--

    1) Yugoslavia
    2) Soviet Union

    Neither of which were actually even remotely communist, if we are to take Marx's original definition of communism, but for sake of argument we'll say they were.

    I see no evidence that Yugoslavia was, on the whole, worse off under communism than under capitalism. Tito clamped down on inter-ethnic strife, standards of living were high, citizens had free movement in and out of the country and through the various regions of the country, and workers had some level of self-management in industry. Compare that with the inter-ethnic warring fascist-sympathizing elements running the country (and its constituent parts) before and after Tito and communism ain't lookin so bad there by comparison you ask me.

    Nor do I see that the Soviet Union (apart from Stalin's reign) was worse off under communism than under the Tsar, and I would argue that capitalist restoration in Russia has made things worse-- still an authoritarian government but higher crime rates, high rates of poverty, joblessness and homelessness (which was practically non-existent under communism), a number of far-right groups engaging in racist attacks against minorities, and much higher incarceration rates than under communism.

    How am I wrong?

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #389 - August 12, 2011, 04:52 PM

    Yugoslavia is probably the most benign example of Communism in action, so I won't argue that one. But Communism in Russia - and I'm afraid you can't exclude Stalin - has certainly caused massive injustices and restrictions on freedoms and liberty. The fact that the regime under the Tsar was as bad/worse is irrelevant. Another example is China.
  • Previous page 1 ... 11 12 1314 15 ... 17 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »