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


Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 07:25 AM

New Britain
Today at 12:05 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

What's happened to the fo...
April 11, 2024, 01:00 AM

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

Pakistan: The Nation.....
January 28, 2024, 02:12 PM

Gaza assault
January 27, 2024, 01:08 PM

Nawal El Saadawi: Egypt's...
January 27, 2024, 12:24 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Riots in London

 (Read 49913 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 12 13 1415 16 17 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #390 - August 12, 2011, 04:56 PM

    I can't believe we're arguing whether communism is a good idea or not.  wacko

    Formerly known as Iblis
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #391 - August 12, 2011, 04:59 PM

    The fact the regime under the Tsar was as bad/worse is irrelevant.


    Not irrelevant at all. You said communism causes more problems than it solves and said for proof all I had to do was look at any former "communist" country. Now how would it be fair or even rational to assess if it causes more problems than it solves without looking at what it replaced?

    I can't believe we're arguing whether communism is a good idea or not.  wacko


    We're not. We're arguing over Hassan's specific statement that communism* causes more problems than it solves. I simply don't see a convincing amount of evidence this is the case in every situation or generally (though I will admit it is true in some situations).

    *Communism here being defined as the Leninist regimes which have claimed "communism", not the classical Marxian definition of communism.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #392 - August 12, 2011, 05:04 PM

    Not irrelevant at all. You said communism causes more problems than it solves and said for proof all I had to do was look at any former "communist" country. Now how would it be fair or even rational to assess if it causes more problems than it solves without looking at what it replaced?


    Then thats my fault for not making what I meant clear. I mean Communism to be compared to what we have in the UK - a modern liberal democracy.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #393 - August 12, 2011, 05:11 PM

    In that case you're comparing apples to oranges-- comparing the outcomes of semi-feudal monarchies that were just developing capitalism when they transitioned to "communism" (really Leninism is the appropriate descriptor I think) to advanced capitalist imperial powers. I don't think that's a fair comparison. As IA once noted in a similar debate I had with him, East Germany and maybe Czechoslovakia were two formerly advanced capitalist nations that turned to Leninism, but you can't really say that for the rest of them.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #394 - August 12, 2011, 05:19 PM

    Cumujizm iz mingin doe.

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

    -- Kenneth Rexroth
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #395 - August 12, 2011, 08:03 PM

    Interesting live debate, on TV right now.

    BBC3-  Riots: Young Voter's Question Time.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #396 - August 12, 2011, 08:04 PM

    Cumujizm iz mingin doe.


    arX! where have you been?

    At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
    Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
    Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #397 - August 13, 2011, 03:59 AM

    Is anyone really tiring of the overuse of the word 'chav'? It seems... de-humanising...
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #398 - August 13, 2011, 04:45 AM

    No. It fascinates Americans like me. dance

    "Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well."
    - Robert Louis Stevenson
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #399 - August 13, 2011, 04:46 AM

    Is anyone really tiring of the overuse of the word 'chav'? It seems... de-humanising...


    and as soon as they become humans, we'll start calling them people  Wink Cheesy
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #400 - August 13, 2011, 05:06 AM

    this whole episode is merely a brief glimpse of Britain's future. It has nothing left to sell the rest of the world and everyone knows it.

    At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
    Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
    Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #401 - August 13, 2011, 05:45 AM

    No. It fascinates Americans like me. dance

    When people insist on trouncing all your wishes and opinions or ignoring your problems and living conditions because you're just a chav... it will annoy you too, trust me. Tongue

    I grew up on a council estate, went to one of the absolute worst schools in the country, my family's income was... not even worth remembering... never got any pocket money nor had many places to go, so had very little to do and very few ways of expressing myself... school was too dire to interest me... my friends were in the same boat... so yeah, I got into trouble with the cops and spent too much time getting into fights and shit... half my street had children who had criminal records and the other half had children who had children. (Aphrodite will testify to the shit-hole I live in XD.)

    I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess I'm just really sick of people telling me they were my own decisions and opportunities are always available...  yes they were and perhaps they are, but it's a real struggle not fucking your life up before it's properly began, when everything around you is doing it's best to drag you down. I got off lightly I think, there were a lot of times I could have done something very stupid, but if these riots reached Bradford and I was still 18, I think I would have been somewhere with my friends in the thick of them. I wouldn't have had any long-winded political arguments or some idealistic higher cause... it would just have been hard to resist rebelling against... society... whatever the hell that meant to me, when society didn't seem to give a shit about me. But then I'm just a chav. Que sais je?

    Make of that what you will.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #402 - August 13, 2011, 06:29 AM

    I grew up on a council estate, went to one of the absolute worst schools in the country, my family's income was... not even worth remembering... never got any pocket money nor had many places to go, so had very little to do and very few ways of expressing myself... school was too dire to interest me... my friends were in the same boat... so yeah, I got into trouble with the cops and spent too much time getting into fights and shit... half my street had children who had criminal records and the other half had children who had children. (Aphrodite will testify to the shit-hole I live in XD.)

    I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess I'm just really sick of people telling me they were my own decisions and opportunities are always available...  yes they were and perhaps they are, but it's a real struggle not fucking your life up before it's properly began, when everything around you is doing it's best to drag you down. I got off lightly I think, there were a lot of times I could have done something very stupid, but if these riots reached Bradford and I was still 18, I think I would have been somewhere with my friends in the thick of them. I wouldn't have had any long-winded political arguments or some idealistic higher cause... it would just have been hard to resist rebelling against... society... whatever the hell that meant to me, when society didn't seem to give a shit about me. But then I'm just a chav. Que sais je?

    Make of that what you will.


    You see, its somewhat difficult to respond to that.
    Everything ive highlighted in bold is in a direct application to myself and my inner-circle of counterparts (but add high levels of racism, bullying, an unstable single-parent family and the death of a father figure at age 13),
    Yet at present, myself (somehow speaking with a vague 'queens english' high class accent and wearing a suit) and the people I deal with are (or in the beginning stages of) becoming high-flyers, professionals, intellectuals and rich.
    I have never smoked, drank or taken drugs, no problems with the police etc etc

    I suppose reality effects people differently, because most people who were around me were clearly the type who would have been at the riots, including some people I used to be friend with at one point, but broke away from after they began mixing with (what I call) Scum; where as I would never consider it any at point.

    Interestingly no one ever caused any issues when around me at that time, but always began to the moment they left my vicinity. Perhaps I was just born into being a good influence, as with my circle friends.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #403 - August 13, 2011, 06:45 AM

    The reality is that even if 90% of poor people were hard-working and smart, the majority would still be poor. The economic superstructure demands it-- not everyone can be rich or even middle income in our system. A large pool of people must exist at the bottom of society due to the systemic demands of the economic engine of society, either as powerless, cheap labor, exploited to various degrees, or as a surplus army of labor (the unemployed) or as the parasitic underclass criminals feeding on the poor and working-class from the bottom, just as the parasitic ruling class and middle management feeds on them from on high.

    True in the advanced capitalist countries, particularly the seats of imperial power and their clients in Europe, there exists some degree of social mobility for poor and working-class people who are intelligent and motivated, but there's some luck involved, and, as indicated above, an upper limit on how many can advance-- the opportunities for advancement are finite. So while some will succeed in moving up, some equally-equipped and motivated will not.

    Short version-- you ain't all that.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #404 - August 13, 2011, 11:48 AM

    The reality is that even if 90% of poor people were hard-working and smart, the majority would still be poor. The economic superstructure demands it-- not everyone can be rich or even middle income in our system. A large pool of people must exist at the bottom of society due to the systemic demands of the economic engine of society, either as powerless, cheap labor, exploited to various degrees, or as a surplus army of labor (the unemployed) or as the parasitic underclass criminals feeding on the poor and working-class from the bottom, just as the parasitic ruling class and middle management feeds on them from on high.

    True in the advanced capitalist countries, particularly the seats of imperial power and their clients in Europe, there exists some degree of social mobility for poor and working-class people who are intelligent and motivated, but there's some luck involved, and, as indicated above, an upper limit on how many can advance-- the opportunities for advancement are finite. So while some will succeed in moving up, some equally-equipped and motivated will not.

    Short version-- you ain't all that.


    Well Im clearly more than the 90% and alot of people who whine and bitch about being at the bottom of the barrel.
    To an extent what you say is true, but to another extent, its bollocks.
    Alot of people stay on the ground, not because 'opportunities are finite' but because they have no desire to achieve or too goddamn stupid to even provide the illusion of self-worth.

    I spent plenty of months in job centres and work development programs and I'll tell you this:
    I was the one sending out 100's of C.Vs per week, I was the one who showed up every day, I was the one who took every available course, I was the one who spent the whole day in classes, I was the one who spent any additional money on education, not them, ME.
    Whilst the other groups of 10's, 20's, 30's were doing eff all, reading the newspapers, smoking and looking out the window, I was the one who actually got off his ass and did something and I am the one who started to make something of myself, so you can cut the bullshit on how its societies fault for peoples standards and how it comes down to luck. Yes the chances are finite, but they're not 1 in a million or like a lottery.
    Its not 'luck' that most self-made millionaires got to where they were, you cant claim its about financial help and you cant claim its about education, because in so many of the cases these people were just as much in the same position as said people. Its about work and responsibility and worth and ambition.
    I presume you live in England, how many people on 'the secret millionaire' go back to the slums from where they lived? Did everything just miraculously deteriorate in the area the moment the cameras started rolling?

    Theres a reason why I was always the top of my class, why the staff at every appointment liked me the most, why I was always given the most flexibility, the most attention, the highest ratings, the highest applause, the most job opportunities, the highest work positions, the most pay increases, the most promotions, the most referrals, the best references in every single case and the reason why 10 of us went for interviews at a factory --9 of them getting work as sorters/packers and yet I (with no more experience or qualifications at the time) came out with trainee supervisor with an extra £3 an hour...It had eff all to do with luck, it had eff all to do with 'society' and it had eff all to do with my identical position to every other person in my class/ work group who were mediocre AT BEST..Gee, I wonder what the cause was for my consistent special treatment over the others..


    Like you said, some people have the ability but never get the opportunity and sometimes thats true; But these people are not even close to numbers that would make such an excuse valid.
    I cant even count the number of shop-owners and general successes in the area who don't even come from the country..people who come from nothing and with nothing more than a suitcase and can't even speak the language, yet manage to open businesses  and gain higher positions in companies in a short time period...funny how that works for a society that forces people down..
    The enigmas are piling up aren't they...
    Hard work + Ambitious = respect + promotions + opportunity? Naaa, its a conspiracy from the corporate elites in their ivory towers..

    So yes I am 'all that', I always will be, not something that can be said for most others, whether it be on this forum or in the local estate.
    People are responsible for their own futures. Yes its hard some times, but its
    1) Not unattainable
    2) Not societies fault that some people just so happen to not make any effort or take any interest in being any more than a cog in a machine
    3) Surprisingly to you and society, isn't always everyone elses fault but their own.
    and forever making excuses for the 'victims' (as I tend to see certain people do on this forum, no matter what the scenario) helps no one, especially not the people who are having 'psychological' and 'social' excuses shoved down their throats for explanations as to why they're spray-painting the wall or downing a bottle of vodka in the street or launching a brick at a car windscreen.

    Society needs some people to be poor? Well the market is pretty over-saturated and I seldom come across people who have the mentality of finding it enough of an issue to even make an attempt to get out of it.
    Its one big nanny-state playing the violin where everyone has a sense of entitlement but no care of understanding of why life isn't providing.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #405 - August 13, 2011, 12:22 PM

    Whoa!
    'The whites have become black' says historian David Starke

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14513517

    Also:

    Self-destruction is more dystopian even than nihilism. Not only does it imply hopelessness, it suggests this week’s rioters are cut off not just from society, but also from themselves. In A Clockwork Orange, Burgess illustrates this by naming one of Alex’s victims “Alexander”. The idea is taken further in the film Taxi Driver, when the protagonist Travis Bickle utters the immortal “Are you talkin’ to me?” monologue while pointing his gun at his own reflection in the mirror.
    As in fiction, so in reality: just because the violence across Britain’s streets seemed to have no meaningful target, it doesn’t follow that it wasn’t directed at anything.


    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c42acba-c40f-11e0-b302-00144feabdc0.html
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #406 - August 13, 2011, 12:35 PM

    Whoa!
    'The whites have become black' says historian David Starke


    Article:
    Quote
    He also hit out at what he called the ''destructive, nihilistic gangster culture'' which he said ''has become the fashion.''


    +9000 for that quote alone!
    This 'gangsta' culture is certainly a key issue for a large percentage of the populous in question.
    I doubt its a coincidence that near-identical situations exist from across the sea where the concept originated.

    I honestly don't want to be the type of person who says 'hiphop and rap played a part in this' (the typical scapegoats for everything in the 90's in America), But I do have to wonder how gullible some people are in thinking that many of the stars in question actually live/lived the personas they play on screen (or atleast to the extent they portray it).
    Hopefully there are other explanations for this.

    Now that someone has said it publicly and officially, there should be a few informal interviews from said people so we can hear it from their mouths.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #407 - August 13, 2011, 12:52 PM

    Who is behind the riots,

    http://westminsterjournal.com/?p=217

    Arthur.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #408 - August 13, 2011, 12:58 PM

    I honestly don't want to be the type of person who says 'hiphop and rap played a part in this'  ...


    How terrible of you to even think of such a thing!  Tongue

    Just kidding, I do agree with the point made also but as can be observed on has to be very, very careful in WHAT they say in order to not come across as a complete prejudice.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #409 - August 13, 2011, 03:09 PM

    Pretty good article, although a bit alarmist to suggest one should leave the country ...

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904006104576502301564142090.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

    By DOUGLAS MURRAY

    London

    In April 1993, black teenager Stephen Lawrence was stabbed to death at a bus stop in south London. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) bungled the investigation, and by 1997 Britain's new Labour government announced a judicial inquiry into the matter. The report was published in 1999 and found that "institutional racism affects the MPS, and police services elsewhere." It also made recommendations aimed at "the elimination of racist prejudice and disadvantage and the demonstration of fairness in all aspects of policing."

    Since then the country's police services have been suffering a public nervous breakdown, quaking at every public-relations setback and buckling under mounting restrictions on their ability to do their jobs. The Metropolitan Police is also leaderless, its commissioner having resigned last month in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal.

    What has happened to the British police in the last decade is a textbook example of how to wreck an institution. In November 2010, when students and anarchists took to the streets in protest of rising tuition fees, they vandalized property and smashed the Conservative Party's headquarters. The police seemed unable to stop them.

    A couple of nights ago a member of the public in an affluent London neighborhood accosted a group of rioters. They beat him into traction while a policeman looked on. He had apparently called for backup and could not do anything until it arrived.

    Dysfunction does not only permeate Britain's police force. It applies to most of Britain's institutions, from schools to social services to local governments.

    This week's chaos might signal an even more important moment for Britain than many people realize: Either the radical left's lies about the country—namely its economic and welfare system—will finally be exposed, or they will be reinforced by politicians eager to rewrite history. The leaders who helped bring us to this pass seem intent not merely to repeat their mistakes, but to deepen them.

    Within hours of the riots starting on Saturday, the left-wing former mayor of London Ken Livingstone claimed the unrest was "the fault of the government," citing a 9% cut in central government grants to Tottenham, where these crime sprees began. Labour's Shadow Health Minister Diane Abbott made sure to garnish her condemnation of the violence with the reminder that in her constituency, "Haringey Council has lost £41 million from its budget and has cut youth services by 75%." Whether her constituents ever raised this issue as they looted luxury-goods shops, Ms. Abbott did not say.

    Deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman behaved worst of all. Claiming on Tuesday that Labour leader Ed Miliband had been "well-received in Peckham," she compared this reception to the hostility that has greeted Britain's Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron and London's Conservative Mayor Boris Johnson this week. She claimed that the difference was due to the Labour Party's opposition to tuition-fee rises. Stuck in an even less functional radical-left tape-loop, Labour Parliamentarian John McDonnell blames bankers.

    So the Labour Party has decided to draw political conclusions from the hooliganism. They have decided that these supposed breadline-rioters—who seem utterly uninterested in bread—are the product of political decisions the Tories have made in the last 15 months. Fine.

    But these aren't the only political conclusions we can draw from this week. One is also tempted to point out that during Labour's 13 years in power it raised public spending to record levels to fund a massive increase in the welfare state. By the time the current government came to power last year, it had no fiscally sane choice but to reduce these unsustainable spending levels. Hence, the "cuts" (which still entail nominal spending increases) that Labourites are now blaming for all that ails Britain.

    Did the country at least get anything for its money under Labour? Only a generation of young Britons who consider work not merely a "lifestyle choice," but a crummy one at that. Under Labour, a life on welfare appeared the best life to live.

    It is no surprise that the north London borough of Islington has been among the riot scenes this week. Prosperous and left wing, it is also scattered with the welfare beneficiaries whom Labourites have created. To that extent the borough was the postcard exemplar of leftist Britain. And now it's up in smoke.

    A few years ago former U.K. cabinet minister George Walden wrote a terrific short book about the country, called "Time to Emigrate?" If it gets reprinted this year perhaps the publishers will consider dropping the question mark.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #410 - August 13, 2011, 03:21 PM

    Well Im clearly more than the 90% and alot of people who whine and bitch about being at the bottom of the barrel.
    To an extent what you say is true, but to another extent, its bollocks.
    Alot of people stay on the ground, not because 'opportunities are finite' but because they have no desire to achieve or too goddamn stupid to even provide the illusion of self-worth.

    I spent plenty of months in job centres and work development programs and I'll tell you this:
    I was the one sending out 100's of C.Vs per week, I was the one who showed up every day, I was the one who took every available course, I was the one who spent the whole day in classes, I was the one who spent any additional money on education, not them, ME.
    Whilst the other groups of 10's, 20's, 30's were doing eff all, reading the newspapers, smoking and looking out the window, I was the one who actually got off his ass and did something and I am the one who started to make something of myself, so you can cut the bullshit on how its societies fault for peoples standards and how it comes down to luck. Yes the chances are finite, but they're not 1 in a million or like a lottery.
    Its not 'luck' that most self-made millionaires got to where they were, you cant claim its about financial help and you cant claim its about education, because in so many of the cases these people were just as much in the same position as said people. Its about work and responsibility and worth and ambition.
    I presume you live in England, how many people on 'the secret millionaire' go back to the slums from where they lived? Did everything just miraculously deteriorate in the area the moment the cameras started rolling?

    Theres a reason why I was always the top of my class, why the staff at every appointment liked me the most, why I was always given the most flexibility, the most attention, the highest ratings, the highest applause, the most job opportunities, the highest work positions, the most pay increases, the most promotions, the most referrals, the best references in every single case and the reason why 10 of us went for interviews at a factory --9 of them getting work as sorters/packers and yet I (with no more experience or qualifications at the time) came out with trainee supervisor with an extra £3 an hour...It had eff all to do with luck, it had eff all to do with 'society' and it had eff all to do with my identical position to every other person in my class/ work group who were mediocre AT BEST..Gee, I wonder what the cause was for my consistent special treatment over the others..


    Like you said, some people have the ability but never get the opportunity and sometimes thats true; But these people are not even close to numbers that would make such an excuse valid.
    I cant even count the number of shop-owners and general successes in the area who don't even come from the country..people who come from nothing and with nothing more than a suitcase and can't even speak the language, yet manage to open businesses  and gain higher positions in companies in a short time period...funny how that works for a society that forces people down..
    The enigmas are piling up aren't they...
    Hard work + Ambitious = respect + promotions + opportunity? Naaa, its a conspiracy from the corporate elites in their ivory towers..

    So yes I am 'all that', I always will be, not something that can be said for most others, whether it be on this forum or in the local estate.
    People are responsible for their own futures. Yes its hard some times, but its
    1) Not unattainable
    2) Not societies fault that some people just so happen to not make any effort or take any interest in being any more than a cog in a machine
    3) Surprisingly to you and society, isn't always everyone elses fault but their own.
    and forever making excuses for the 'victims' (as I tend to see certain people do on this forum, no matter what the scenario) helps no one, especially not the people who are having 'psychological' and 'social' excuses shoved down their throats for explanations as to why they're spray-painting the wall or downing a bottle of vodka in the street or launching a brick at a car windscreen.

    Society needs some people to be poor? Well the market is pretty over-saturated and I seldom come across people who have the mentality of finding it enough of an issue to even make an attempt to get out of it.
    Its one big nanny-state playing the violin where everyone has a sense of entitlement but no care of understanding of why life isn't providing.



    Coolstorybro

    Whoa!
    'The whites have become black' says historian David Starke

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14513517


    This is a new low, even for you HO.

    Who is behind the riots,

    http://westminsterjournal.com/?p=217

    Arthur.


    Communists-- of course.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #411 - August 13, 2011, 03:23 PM

    I think the call by a Labour(?) MP (Alan Milburn) during one of the previous election campaigns to allow "more people the opportunity to join the middle class" is pretty much the problem in a nutshell. It wasn't a call for a social equality, just for more individual escape. Yes people get out, but people are people. They are diverse. You would think there is an equal spread of intelligence and ability among the lower classes as among the middle/higher - if most of the chavs seem like lazy fuckers who have no drive to move up the social ladder, you have to wonder what is causing that. It's easy to claim they are poor because they are lazy and anti-social... but perhaps they are lazy and anti-social because they are poor...

  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #412 - August 13, 2011, 03:31 PM

    When people insist on trouncing all your wishes and opinions or ignoring your problems and living conditions because you're just a chav... it will annoy you too, trust me. Tongue

    I grew up on a council estate, went to one of the absolute worst schools in the country, my family's income was... not even worth remembering... never got any pocket money nor had many places to go, so had very little to do and very few ways of expressing myself... school was too dire to interest me... my friends were in the same boat... so yeah, I got into trouble with the cops and spent too much time getting into fights and shit... half my street had children who had criminal records and the other half had children who had children. (Aphrodite will testify to the shit-hole I live in XD.)

    I don't know where I'm going with this. I guess I'm just really sick of people telling me they were my own decisions and opportunities are always available...  yes they were and perhaps they are, but it's a real struggle not fucking your life up before it's properly began, when everything around you is doing it's best to drag you down. I got off lightly I think, there were a lot of times I could have done something very stupid, but if these riots reached Bradford and I was still 18, I think I would have been somewhere with my friends in the thick of them. I wouldn't have had any long-winded political arguments or some idealistic higher cause... it would just have been hard to resist rebelling against... society... whatever the hell that meant to me, when society didn't seem to give a shit about me. But then I'm just a chav. Que sais je?

    Make of that what you will.


    thanks for posting this

    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #413 - August 13, 2011, 03:32 PM

    I think the call by a Labour(?) MP (Alan Milburn) during one of the previous election campaigns to allow "more people the opportunity to join the middle class" is pretty much the problem in a nutshell. It wasn't a call for a social equality, just for more individual escape. Yes people get out, but people are people. They are diverse. You would think there is an equal spread of intelligence and ability among the lower classes as among the middle/higher - if most of the chavs seem like lazy fuckers who have no drive to move up the social ladder, you have to wonder what is causing that. It's easy to claim they are poor because they are lazy and anti-social... but perhaps they are lazy and anti-social because they are poor...


    Short of a complete reordering of the economy/society, full employment at good wages in respectful, safe and fair conditions should be the goal, and anyone who just chooses not to work can get fucked and not expect a single penny.

    "In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #414 - August 13, 2011, 03:57 PM

    I think the call by a Labour(?) MP (Alan Milburn) during one of the previous election campaigns to allow "more people the opportunity to join the middle class" is pretty much the problem in a nutshell. It wasn't a call for a social equality, just for more individual escape. Yes people get out, but people are people. They are diverse. You would think there is an equal spread of intelligence and ability among the lower classes as among the middle/higher - if most of the chavs seem like lazy fuckers who have no drive to move up the social ladder, you have to wonder what is causing that. It's easy to claim they are poor because they are lazy and anti-social... but perhaps they are lazy and anti-social because they are poor...




    That's a good point, it is important not to make generalisations about those involved in the rioting. I think the government needs to start to address the root cause of why the prisons are over-populated in the first place because there definitely is a problem with the way crime has continued to persist in working class areas within the inner city. Taking away all the benefits of these people will only make matters worse. 

    "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 #415 - August 13, 2011, 04:00 PM

    Whoa!
    'The whites have become black' says historian David Starke

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14513517



    OMG that was outrageous! He talks about an educated black man being on radio and you would think he was white! And that White people have become black - as if black culture means gangs, riots and looting! What disgraceful generalisations - and he wasn't even challenged. (Edit - yes he was!)

    And what shade of black are we talking about? All shades? Or just the blackest of the black? We need to know these things to keep our property safe.
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #416 - August 13, 2011, 04:07 PM

    OMG that was outrageous! He talks about an educated black man being on radio and you would think he was white! And that White people have become black - as if black culture means gangs, riots and looting! What disgraceful generalisations - and he wasn't even challenged.

    And what shade of black are we talking about? All shades? Or just the blackest of the black? We need to know these things to keep our property safe.



    Shocked .. Am I reading this right? He was not even challenged?! Over react
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #417 - August 13, 2011, 04:11 PM

    Watch the clip:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14513517
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #418 - August 13, 2011, 04:14 PM

    Yeah, just lost a lot of respect for BBC for allowing such lunatics talk.

    "That it is indeed the speech of an illustrious messenger" (The Koran 69:40)
  • Re: Riots in London
     Reply #419 - August 13, 2011, 04:17 PM

    He was challenged...
  • Previous page 1 ... 12 13 1415 16 17 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »