SHOP FRONT, EALING BROADWAY. 9/8/11 |
The choice of premises attacked was interesting;_ they were all retailers of fashion accessories, such as mobile phones, trainers, or clothes, such as the store in the photo. All of which sets the present riots apart from those of previous years. Previous riots in Britain have been political in intent (Lewisham, 1977), or over a recognisable grievance (public sector cuts) or a combination of both (The Poll Tax Riots of the 90s).
These riots, I think, are exactly what so many commentators have said already: a massive outburst of criminal activity. I have no intention of reproducing what has been written already - there is an abundance of that, but I would like to express a personal view. My opinion is that these horrendous events are the bursting of an ulcer that has ben building up in our inner cities for some time. A number of national newspapers have been chronicling the rise of gang culture and general anti-social behaviour in Britain for years. The media has highlighted numerous "spasms" of that ulcer, such as senseless murders, violence, drug taking and binge drinking. There has been much condemnation of "Broken Britain" (David Cameron's phrase), but precious little serious analysis of the problem, still less a national strategy to deal with it. And no-one predicted what has happened - the fact that these gangs might resolve their "turf" differences and act together, with devastating consequences.
Already, the blame game has begun ("liberal society"), as well as sensationalist, simplistic (or should it be "simple-minded"?) solutions ("put them in the Army"), coming from the Right, in their posturing, unimaginative way.. The Left, in their posturing, unimaginative way, are starting to regard the riots as some kind of latter-day "Peasants' Revolt", and linking it to cuts in public spending. Both need to wake up to the fact that we now have a national emergency on our hands that needs immediate pragmatic attention.
Instead of employing carrots OR sticks to deal with the problem, I would advocate the use of BOTH. If, as so many right-wing thinkers say, these rioters are a bunch of twisted, psychotic criminals, then we need to find what has made them that way and - very important - how to cure this psychosis and prevent it spreading to younger, potential rioters. The Left needs to recognise that criminal behaviour is just that, and needs to dealt with severely. There is no political motive at work here. As noted, the looting has been of luxury consumables, not necessities. Ordinary people have been attacked, robbed and made homeless by these rioters - hardly an expression of class consciousness. Wherever these rioters have met determined opposition, such as that shown (I think magnificently) by the Turkish/Kurdish community in the East End of London, they have been dispersed and defeated. That wouldn't happen if the rioters were the vanguard of the revolution, as my friends, the Anarchists, seem to think.
In conclusion, I would say that if we think we are having problems now - wait until these rioters have their own children, and see what problems we have then.
People have been murdered, and it's sheer luck that others haven't been killed when buildings were set alight: for example, a Tesco was set on fire in Liverpool, even though it was immediately below student accommodation.
ReplyDeleteSeeking causes of crime shouldn't be seen as being soft; it's a sensible way to try to prevent similar crime in future. The causes of the riots are many, but it's a simple fact that as unemployment goes up, and chances of having a reasonable standard of living disappear, social disorder becomes more likely. Anyone who regards the consequences of the current government's austerity policies as a price worth paying is ignoring the long-term damage that they are causing.
While I do believe that those who have committed crimes in the riots need to be punished, we also need to decide why we punish people. The main reasons are:
1. Retribution.
2. Protecting society.
3. Deterrence.
4. Rehabilitation.
1 on its own isn't enough, but we're not very good at 2, 3 and 4. Politicians, who just talk of stern punishment with no regard as to why we are punishing people, or what form that punishment should take, will simply repeat the failures of the past, and our high rate of recidivism will continue.