The causes that The Washington Post traces for the London riots should sound disturbingly familar.
In an editorial published Wednesday, The Washington Post seeks to sketch out the underlying causes behind the riots which have now burned London for days.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments176 - Jordan Richardson
Re-read this thread, including troll's comments, and if and when you'll come to your senses, I'll start taking you seriously.
I don't need you to take me seriously, Roger.
You clearly didn't grasp what I was saying, so you decided to dismiss it and told me to "lay off." Tell me why I should do you the courtesy of "re-reading the thread" when you didn't even bother to understand what I was saying.
Right now, all you display is an emotional reaction.
Another mischaracterization based on an incorrect assumption. I'd say we should make a drinking game out of this, but I don't think there's enough booze in the world for it.
177 - roger nowosielski
I don't need to look up dictionaries, Dreadful, before I think or speak. The term was used to reflect "continuous present," if you get my meaning. You're an editor, Dreadful, so don't ignore context.
Get with it, will you?
178 - cindy
Then there is : Rioting & Looting: As a Modern-Day Form of Potlatch with it's very interesting thought-provoking insights.
A spectre haunts the modern world. It is the spectre of the gift. Everywhere the ?ght goes on, to get people to respect property, and to accept the miseries that come with such respect, such as work, destitution, and injustice. It is an endless ?ght by necessity. The minute it ceases, or weakens (e.g., gets caught on videotape), people break out into activities of an altogether di?erent nature.
They riot, and they loot. They relieve things of their ?xed commodity values. The redistribution of these relieved things does not take the form of a sale, nor even a trade. Without a ?xed price, they can only be considered as gifts.
More perspective from The Decline and Fall of the Spectacle-Commodity Economy by Guy Debord
The Los Angeles rebellion was a rebellion against the commodity, against the world of the commodity in which worker-consumers are hierarchically subordinated to commodity standards. Like the young delinquents of all the advanced countries, but more radically because they are part of a class without a future, a sector of the proletariat unable to believe in any significant chance of integration or promotion...
179 - roger nowosielski
Yes, Jordan, it is an emotional reaction. For some reason, you can't think straight when talking to me.
Seriously, bro, I don't mean to put you down, but I will not take you seriously until you take me seriously.
180 - Jordan Richardson
Is "silliness" an emotional reaction? If so, guilty as charged.
For some reason, you can't think straight when talking to me.
Point out ONE thing I've got wrong, Roger. Just one. Where am I mixed up?
I will not take you seriously until you take me seriously.
See comment #177:
"I don't need you to take me seriously."
What part of that don't you understand, bro?
181 - cindy
What of the looting of the pockets of people to keep this awful inhuman system afloat to the benefit of the few.
In the land of the free, if I, and others, don't contribute a lot of money to the youth indoctrination system, my house will be automatically taken away. No mind that I don't believe in that system and think it is an assault on children. No one cares what I think about it. There is no forum for me to vote on whether I want such a system or think it is detrimental.
It's pay up or we'll take your house.
Sounds like looting to me, sound like what terrorists would do to people.
182 - handyguy
Not everyone who thinks calling mindless looting "economic redistribution" is laughable and ridiculous would disagree that bankers should be held more responsible for the damage they did. One idea does not lead to the other.
[Of course the unfortunate fact is that much of what the bankers did was legal, whether it should have been or not, and thus outside the provenance of the courts.]
[And: only people who agreed to plead guilty have been summarily sentenced, many with the identical 6 months. It's deliberately aimed at potential copycats as a deterrent. Seems to be working so far. I'm not saying I agree. But I do not sympathize with thieves and arsonists. Well, Jean Valjean maybe.]
183 - roger nowosielski
Jordan, it's not worth the effort. You've got to do your own groping and searching. And the first thing you should try, stop being obsessed about always being right.
Really wish you the best, but for the time being, excuse me for saying that this conversation is going nowhere.
Best of luck.
184 - handyguy
#182 is an example of the type of de trop stuff that could lead Jet or Glenn to mistake certain "anarchists" [rolling my eyes, sorry] for Tea Partiers, or at least Tea Partiers' weirder cousins.
185 - cindy
More food for thought: LA '92: The Context of a Proletarian Uprising
Distorted by the bourgeois press, reduced to a mere 'race riot' by many on the left, the L.A. rebellion was the most serious urban uprising this century. This article seeks to grasp the full significance of these events by relating them to their context of class re-composition and capitalist restructuring.
I see similarities with what is happening in England.
186 - cindy
#185 That comment exemplifies why I say you (and other liberals) who believe that going along with the status quo is the only reality acceptable are the problem.
187 - Jordan Richardson
Roger, what I said in this thread was so simple and so straightforward that only you could get it completely wrong. I actually think it takes effort to be so wrong about others, so I hope you get plenty of rest between posts.
I'm glad you wish me the best, but I have no idea what any of that means. I'm not obsessed with "being right," Roger, but I am "obsessed" with getting you to stop tainting every single conversation with your incessant need to (mis)categorize. Call it my White Whale, but I think it would make things a lot easier if you'd stop doing that.
188 - cindy
You insist that anyone who challenges the status quo is worthy of ridicule. And you, thereby, seal your fate as the anchor that weights down the ship of change.
189 - cindy
That is how liberals fuck up the world, handy, et al. Not because they don't do 'as much as' or they do things in a slightly different way, but because they prevent any radical change, they are arms holding the door shut againts a better society.
They fucking take out a permit, whereby the city grants them the right to march around the pentagon patting each other on the back for all their contribution to a better world--whilst the fucking place is entirely empty and they have done worse than nothing. Worse because they believe that what they are doing IS something.
The sentiments of #185 disgust and dismay me.
190 - Jordan Richardson
You read an awful lot into #185, Cindy. All I got out of it is that handyguy can see how others might mischaracterize you based on your remarks in another comment. You've gone and assigned a wholesale political philosophy on that basis, but I'd really like to see where you got that from.
I know you're angry, rightly so, but where's this really coming from?
Also, we all fuck up the world. You included. We have the arrogance to think that our virus of a species can produce a "better world," but all we can really do is make changes so that we fuck up the world a little less. We should be striving for that, each one of us.
191 - cindy
an example of the type of de trop stuff
I think that is pretty clear. He chose his words carefully.
192 - cindy
Also, we all fuck up the world. You included.
Yes, that is true.
193 - Jordan Richardson
I'm still not seeing the same handyguy you see, Cindy. But then again, perspective is everything. That, I think, is what we're all stumbling to understand in our own incoherent, clumsy ways.
194 - roger nowosielski
@188
It's not just what you said, Jordan, it's your reacting that turns me off. Try to change that and some day we may talk. Not until.
I'm really done with this for a while Please try not to tax my patience just because out of politeness I'm bound to reply. Can you respect that?
195 - Jordan Richardson
Okay, Roger.
196 - roger nowosielski
I don't approve of Cindy'a #182, except in spirit, and neither does she. Still, it's a kind of payback in a manner of speaking.
Why do we all approve of "killing me gently with kindness," while we abhor outright brutality?
As to revolutions, just or unjust, sorry, there are no hostages. We raise up a great stink about innocent lives lost in London riots, and yes, it's very regrettable, while we sit in the comfort of our living rooms watching news broadcast about US drone attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan with God knows what cost to the innocent civilians.
Taking about liberal brand of hypocrisy? Give me a fucking break! If half of you were as adamant and vocal about crimes and atrocities committed by this and other Western governments against populations the world over, I'd give you half the credence. Until then, your words are empty and hollow.
197 - roger nowosielski
I appreciate that, Jordan. I mean it. And please try to understand I'm not your enemy.
198 - roger nowosielski
I;m sorry if I haven't made it clear, Jordan. STM made "the argument," and I found his phrasing, or shall we say, juxtaposition of terms? rather intriguing and calling for elucidation, that's all.
In light of that, I thought it most proper to direct my puzzlement at STM rather than at anybody else. Since he was responsible for the utterance and what I regard as peculiar phrasing, I naturally assume he was the person most qualified to field my query. Again, I apologize for not having been crystal clear about my intent, in light of which, sideline comments, in spite of the best possible intention, I viewed as subversive.
I'm still looking for STM's response, and I sure hope it's forthcoming sooner or later. Perhaps then the meaning of my query will become more evident. But you can understand, I hope, why I don't want to reveal all of my cards at this point, before, that is, STM decides to respond.
199 - cindy
Roger,
Are you sure you disapprove of my complaint about paying real estate taxes to indoctrinate children? Do you really think I disapprove of that comment? Surely you were meaning some other comment than #182?
(Really though, I meant every other thing I said, in the context I said it in. I challenge what liberals are fond of claiming--'there is nothing we can do to change that', 'you must accept 'reality'', etc whilst working their little guts out to insure that the social order is a bitch to change...and making fun of and dismissing anyone who dares challenge it. If handy was not doing that, then I acquiesce. But that will be for him to admit.)
200 - cindy
UK: Feral Capitalism Hits The Streets By David Harvey
Prof. Harvey has a very interesting take and quite different:
Thatcherism Unchained
What I say may sound shocking. Most of us don’t see it because we don’t want to. Certainly no politician dare say it and the press would only print it to heap scorn upon the sayer. But my guess is that every street rioter knows exactly what I mean. They are only doing what everyone else is doing, though in a different way - more blatantly and visibly in the streets. Thatcherism unchained the feral instincts of capitalism (the “animal spirits” of the entrepreneur they coyly named it) and nothing has transpired to curb them since. Slash and burn is now openly the motto of the ruling classes pretty much everywhere.
This is the new normal in which we live. This is what the next grand commission of enquiry should address. Everyone, not just the rioters, should be held to account. Feral capitalism should be put on trial for crimes against humanity as well as for crimes against nature.
Sadly, this is what these mindless rioters cannot see or demand. Everything conspires to prevent us from seeing and demanding it also. This is why political power so hastily dons the robes of superior morality and unctuous reason so that no one might see it as so nakedly corrupt and stupidly irrational.
But there are various glimmers of hope and light around the world. The indignados movements in Spain and Greece, the revolutionary impulses in Latin America, the peasant movements in Asia, are all beginning to see through the vast scam that a predatory and feral global capitalism has unleashed upon the world. What will it take for the rest of us to see and act upon it? How can we begin all over again? What direction should we take? The answers are not easy. But one thing we do know for certain: we can only get to the right answers by asking the right questions.
201 - STM
What a load of bollocks.
202 - STM
Why is the viewpoint of the small-L liberals and intellectuals and handwringers of the chardonnay left more important than the view of the working left, or those occupying the political centre (which is really what British conservative politics are when compared to the political stands of the major parties of the US, in particular).
Democracy demands more than one participant. In a progressive, liberal democracy like Britain that has gone out of its way to provide equal opportunity - perhaps more than equal - to its so-called "underclass" makes this even more pathetic than it really is.
That some people prefer to be part of the "underclass" means they are the problem ... all the answers to their problems can be found in the mirror.
Like I say, there are plenty of jobs going begging in England that pay decent wages. But when it's more luvrative to stay on welfare, what's the point besides a desire to escape the welfare trap.
It's making me sick listening to the apoligists for vandals, arsonists, looters, rioters, bashers, robbers and killers who are the ONLY ones responsible for what happened.
The only statement most of the rioters were making was: "I need a new flatscreen TV, let's take that one then we'll burn the building down for fun."
F.ck me, what is it with you f.cking people. And not knowing sh.t from clay is no excuse for such ridiculous, blinkered views.
203 - STM
Cindy: "Stan, how did 1.4 million kids get to be below the poverty line in the land of plenty where the are members of the 'dominant' culture?"
Because, Cindy, no matter how much opportunity and money you throw at people, you just can't guard against parents who don't give a rat's. Alcohol abuse is rife in the UK and always has been, and now drugs run a close second.
When people prefer to spend their money of grog and drugs instead of their kids, that's not the fault of the government or society. Like I say, welfare/benefits paid in the UK is extremely generous.
That some people can't feed their kids is down to them, not to what they'bve been given, because the level of government help to anyone in the UK means that no one in the UK needs to do without anything.
Even parents who for whatever reason can't afford school uniforms for their kids are provided with school uniforms so their children won't feel out of place. They are also fed for free if parents can't afford the nominal fee charged.
Those are the facts, despite what you might want to believe.
Perhaps you'd get a better idea of how it is if you actually went there and had a look yourself.
204 - STM
Roger, my meaning is crystal clear.
Some societies need to be more compassionate, withouit fostering so much dependence.
The US is at one end of the spectrum (no compassion), the UK at ther other (having fostered a no-work ethic through welfare and a bureacracy that throws money, grants and opportunities at people at a frightening rate).
Somewhere between the two might be what we're all looking for. The utopia that seems to avoid us all.
I don't understand how you couldn't work that out in the first place Rog, unless you didn't read the original comment properly. Which is, ah, not like you at all ...
205 - STM
Here's a great UK government website detailing the levels of help given to people who can't afford certain things that others in their peer groups might take for granted.
The idea in all that, and it is admirable, is to create a level playing field for all Britons. That is also why fury and disgust should be the only response we should use to address the non-causes of this opportunistic mass criminal action.
And this, BTW, as detailed, is only a very small part of what's available, as you might pick up from a decent study of this site.
Actually, unless you are mentally challenged, even a quick look will give you acc accurate picture.
A detailed look, however, should be somewhat illuminating for Americans who don't understand how it all works in Britain and are basing their views on the American cultural experience, which simply doesn't apply.
And BTW, Rog, I'm glad to have an advocate in Jordan, except I don't think that's what he was doing. He was just pointing out the bleeding obvious.
206 - Jordan Richardson
Thanks, Stan, that's what I thought.
207 - Christopher Rose
Stan, although there are some useful social benefits available to certain people, mostly parents - although why this life choice deserves special treatment I don't quite understand - your other points that there are plenty of well paying jobs available in the UK or that the benefits system pays out generously are total garbage. Where do you get these ideas from?
208 - troll
...let's start again
gee Stan -- when you use the word 'dependency' realize that it's a repub/teaparty/neo-liberal buzz word frequently used to denigrate what is essentially a positive (in that it beats starving) relationship between the individual and his community
without some clarification your continuum supports this narrative
and Jordan can't the process of child development be legitimately viewed as one of transferring the locus of dependency more than an act of shedding it (psychologically speaking that is)?
I find this a productive way to view it anyway
...continue your mission Paladin -- just realize that some of us take our silliness very seriously..we live it unlike so many who attack us...
and remember: silliness if felt deeply enough transcends both politics and art
(Cindy - aren't there any reasonable client advocates in the system to shield you guys from this nonsense?)
209 - handyguy
"De trop" referred to the rhetoric:
youth indoctrination system
assault on children
sounds like what terrorists would do to people
If you think this is a reasonable way to express yourself, we speak different languages.
Public schools certainly have their problems, but tens of millions of kids depend on them. Not all public schools are alike, so using propaganda terms to slander them all is pure foolishness.
And if those schools were defunded, would you actually be pleased with the results? Do you really, really think parents who just want their kids to go to college and get a decent job are, in effect, part of a 'terrorist' system?
Words have consequences, and your outlandish words are absurd, beyond the pale, nearly useless.
210 - cindy
112 - Dr Dreadful
Aug 14, 2011 at 9:55 pm
"This may be achieved through legal or political suppression of other sets of values and patterns of behaviour"
What sets of values?
Whatever sets of values are held by the subordinate culture--whatever they may be. Here is one example:
Pacifism belongs to a value set that is not in line with the values of the dominant culture--which indoctrinates, rewards, and prizes competition and aggression and sees violence as normal, natural, necessary, and inevitable and trains its children to reproduce it.
211 - roger nowosielski
@205
" ... He was just pointing out the bleeding obvious."
Far from detouring the discussion, Stan, baby, let me dispel your illusion. Consider these remarks as a prelude to any meaningful conversation.
Any text, no matter how "bloody obvious," lends itself to a variety of readings, and it's got nothing to do with the best intentions of the author. It's the reader which makes it so.
Why? We all bring different experiences to a text, different upbringings, different political convictions and understandings. Shoot, Stan, you and I even live in different continents. Hasn't this fact alone made you wonder how communication is possible at all? Hell, you yourself, as you grow up, don't view the same text in the same light ten years after you've first read it. We've all had that experience.
Personally, I think you should welcome the fact that all these different readings and yes, creative misreadings are possible. I certainly do, because no matter how I myself try to be "crystal clear" in saying what's "bloody obvious," I always find, it's been my experience, I fall short off the mark. We all do. It's for that reason I always welcome people challenging my intended reading, for it's only then I am exposed to my deficiencies as a writer and thinker. It's only then that a real conversation and the meeting of minds can begin. I hope you feel the same way too.
212 - roger nowosielski
Cindy, my qualms about your #182 had less to do with the principle of it, more with the language you use. Looting and theft do carry negative connotations. Granted, these connotations are predicated on a system of private property which, both you and I may agree, is not the most happy social arrangement. But for as long as that system is in effect, property ownership is going to be regarded by most folk as something to be protected, whereas things like looting or theft, which takes away from them their property, as immoral. (Never mind for now the question of how the property was obtained in the first place or by what means. Most people don't even consider it or are not prepared to consider it; that's a topic for another time). Which is why your language generates an adverse kind reaction, as for example, from Handy; it always will. Well, we don't need that. Besides, looting and theft only validates the private property system. It says that those who commit it are no different than those from whom it is taken away, that all people are about the same thing, the only difference being their different circumstances.
That's why I like the sixties slogan, "Burn baby, burn!" It makes for a stronger revolutionary statement than mere looting or theft.
I hope we're on the same page
213 - roger nowosielski
@204
OK, let's go at it again, Stan baby (Breakfast at Tiffanies in case you're wondering).
... more compassion, less dependence ...
I'm going to reiterate the question I originally put to you way way back:
Does compassion promote dependence or discourage it? What does the former has to translate to in order to produce the first [as opposed to] the second result?
Personally, I think you should thank me, Stan baby, for trying to milk your meaning and giving you an opportunity to shine.
And the answer is ...
214 - troll
...I view the rioting as akin to cutting
a desperate diagnostic release indicating the need for revolutionary changes in the way one lives
no 'good vrs bad' needed here
'Burn baby, burn' -- how 'bout 'General Strike'?
215 - roger nowosielski
Now, to complicate matters a bit, here comes Jordan (#108, I believe):
The question as to how a society fosters a similar relationship [compassion/dependence]with its citizens is an interesting one, but I don't think it's quite the puzzle you make it out to be."
Well, isn't a puzzle, Stan baby? What exactly is meant by "society" here. Three ideas have been floating around: the government (see Chris's remarks on authority, and how it's possible to love authority); the society; and the community. Now, Chris's model comes the closest to lending itself to a parent-child analogy, doesn't it? Not the middle t4rm, certainly, for our societies are surely fragmented, aren't they? Which presents us with an interesting dilemma: Who should listen to whom? Lastly, the community. And yes, in the context of a community, the very notion of dependence and interdependence assumes different dimensions, doesn't it, Stan baby? because our societies aren't quite communities.
Anyway, these are some of the complications. I know you hate complications, Stan, because you're a straight-shooting kind of guy, but forgive me for asking, again, which of the three you've meant?
216 - roger nowosielski
True, but "burn baby, burn" was in the nature of an important catalyst which paved the way to subsequent formulation and refining the terms of the struggle. No different, in a way, than the storming of the Bastille. So yes, these are some of the "desperate diagnostic releases" which foretell the future of things. I agree.
217 - Dr Dreadful
Cindy @ #210:
I was rather hoping you could explain what sets of values Joe Rioter espouses that the dominant culture is supposed to be suppressing.
I don't think you buy into Roger's wet dream of the UK riots as a manifestation of some sort of benevolent global revolution, but your take still seems quite a bit removed from the actual mood on the ground.
Perhaps you spotted or heard something I didn't, but as far as I could tell, the only "values" on obvious display last week were the sociopathic ones of Me Me Mine.
218 - troll
...well -- inversely --he certainly isn't keeping a stiff upper lip
219 - roger nowosielski
@218 - referring to Joe Rioter? That's the only way I read it, along with the implication.
And BTW, Dreadful, it ain't no wet dream of mine. Still have fantasies that go beyond politics.
As a matter of fact, I believe I happen to be more detached from the situation than you apparently are. But even accepting your formulation for the time being, if I'm having a wet dream, then you certainly exhibit all the signs of having a nightmare.
220 - Dr Dreadful
The British stiff upper lip died with John Major, who not matter how much he shaved still looked like he had a walrus moustache.
221 - Igor
IMO, the rioters have simply decided that theirs is the best strategy, that it is better to throw the whole system into chaos and hope that the next system works better. They have good reason to discard The Adults commands to ¨work hard, study well, apply yourself, and, most of all, be obedient¨
Because they see the adults in their families stripped of their 401K savings, homes foreclosed by crooked bankers bribing politicians. They see that abuse, violence and criminality PAY!
Bankers freely cheat people of their savings, hedge fund operators arrogantly defy the tax authorities, media moguls bribe politicians and pervert childrens privacy.
No one goes to jail.
You can´t blame them for concluding that anarchy reigns.
All your pretty talk about how the wonders of the capital system will raise everyone up are wasted. No matter that they are false.
All your pretty talk about communism liberating them: wasted. They saw the results in East Germany and Russia.
Crime pays!
Don´t miss your chance to cash in on the crime spree!
222 - Fred Brock
"
A recent analysis by the Center for American Progress (CAP) finds that the recent deal to deeply cut federal spending attacks those federal programs which could help low-income Americans climb out of poverty"
This is utterly false. These programs don't people out of poverty!..They ensure that people stay in poverty. Self confidence, commitment, personal responsibility, will power and an environment of opportunity will get you out of poverty. Look at the numbers the more programs we introduce to help those in "poverty" the more "poverty" increases.
223 - STM
Troll: "without some clarification your continuum supports this narrative".
No mate, it doesn't, because the narrative here is not about America. When your talking dependence of the kind on offer in Britan, it bears no resemblance whatsoever to what the right is banging on about in the US.
If they think America is a socialist country or heading that way, they know diddly squat.
If they had half a clue, they'd look overseas and see what's happened there.
That's why I say, the ideal might be somewhere between lack of compassion (the US) and dependence on big government (the UK).
The rea part/repuclicans/right in the US certainly faill into my idea of no compassion.
So the narrative doesn't apply.
224 - STM
Rosey: "plenty of well paying jobs available in the UK or that the benefits system pays out generously are total garbage. Where do you get these ideas from?"
What rot Chris. I don't agree with your agenda or your worldview in your eyes, so your first resort is to put sh.t on me. I never thought I'd see you do it.
The figures are there for all to see, Chris. It's not up to me to present them, but if you don't agree, why not post what two unemployed parents of, say, five children earn through benefits, factoring in the nominal rent of a council house and some of the other benefits I've posted above on the Citziens' Advice Bureau website, like free school lunches and grants for musical instruments and school uniforms (including sports gear). Make it the maximum amount available ... in US dollars - so that our American friends will understand.
It's all publicly available. The job ads are still there too.
Please, do it.
225 - STM
And there's still no excuse for a criminal rampage on the scale we've seen.
It says more about the youth of modern Britain - modern anywhere in the west, probably - than it does about the system or democratic governments.
It's OK to dislike the system and to feel it's shafted you, but the system also provides many other means of redress that don't involve arson of homes, businesses and cars, looting, wanton, mindless vandalism, bashing people, or killing people.
Stop apologising for these idiots, all those you who are apologists.