London's burning

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
yolland said:
This squabbling about gun crimes statistics and whose grammar is worse is becoming really distracting and preventing any kind of discussion about the actual riots. Let it go.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.
 
I don't know if its possible to have a decent discussion about the causes of these riots without tensions flaring, name calling and an eventual locking of this thread. There are some sensitive issues here, such as race, class and politics to discuss. But as we've seen all too often in FYM, some people can't control themselves or don't have the issues well thought out, so a good talk on figuring this problem out may not happen.

Just my two cents.
 
JamietheEdgefan said:
So, not only is it horrible to see neighbourhoods, and local businesses and homes be destroyed, people robbed and injured, and left homeless, but any valid points against how the police act has been completely drowned out by these fucking moronic rioters.
Click to expand...
Some of the commentaries I've seen asserting that "community leaders" need to take the lead in condemning the violence and working with the police leave me pretty incredulous. Not because there aren't plenty of good upstanding adults in the affected areas who are genuinely concerned about the problems facing their young people and sincerely want to help. But when this many young people in a community are this ready to randomly trash and loot an immigrant neighbor's convenience store, gutting the above apartment of a working-class family in the process, and blithely call this "showing the police/the rich we can do whatever we want" (a textbook pathetic teenager's excuse if there ever was one) then you can't actually be said to have functional community leadership, can you? It's true, riots pretty much always involve self-destructive excesses, since showing the authorities your contempt for their mandate is part of the m.o. and smashing nearby shit up is one quick route to achieving that, but when this much of the destruction appears wholly opportunistic and random in nature, that does somehow seem worse than having an identifiable, rational grievance which might reasonably be addressed through policing reform for example. If you don't feel fundamentally respected by nor have fundamental respect for your own neighbors, then you're pretty poorly placed to aim for the same vis-a-vis 'society at large.'
 
angelordevil said:
Well said. :up:

My friend from the very peaceful Faroe Islands posted this on his Facebook page earlier today: "Lack of empathy is the root of all violence. To understand violent actions, we may need to have empathy with those that ("appear to") lack empathy."

It's a hard task to accomplish sometimes -- especially in the face of such destruction. But the true roots of the riots (beyond the initial event itself), need to be explored by those in charge. If not, those 'cunts' your friend described will literally ruin everything -- including the ideological points -- for both sides.

...Another great one, from a London bookstore employee: "We'll stay open, if they steal some books they might learn something."
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a great way of putting it - no matter how angry we might be, no matter how pointless or awful the riots were, it's important to understand the roots of this rather than just merely condemn it. Otherwise, well... it's not going to fix itself!

Great line by the way! I saw a group on facebook called "I didn't take part in the London riots because i don't have the I.Q. of a ham sandwich" :D
 
Tbh, if I was a young black unemployed teenager in London or, fuck it, pretty much anywhere in the UK, or actually, pretty much anywhere in Europe, I'd probably riot too. I'd probably take my chance.

The weasel words of white middle class condemnation in the media, as usual, explain nothing, and understand nothing.
 
UK riots 2011: Liberal dogma has spawned a generation of brutalised youths | Mail Online

I recently received a letter from a teacher who worked in a county’s pupil referral unit, describing appalling difficulties in enforcing discipline. Her only weapon, she said, was the right to mark a disciplinary cross against a child’s name for misbehaviour.
Having repeatedly and vainly asked a 15-year-old to stop using obscene language, she said: ‘Fred, if you use language like that again, I’ll give you a cross.’
He replied: ‘Give me an effing cross, then!’ Eventually, she said: ‘Fred, you have three crosses now. You must miss your next break.’
He answered: ‘I’m not missing my break, I’m going for an effing fag!’ When she appealed to her manager, he said: ‘Well, the boy’s got a lot going on at home at the moment. Don’t be too hard on him.’
Click to expand...

They have no sense of responsibility for themselves, far less towards others, and look to no future beyond the next meal, sexual encounter or TV football game.
Click to expand...

They are products of a culture which gives them so much unconditionally that they are let off learning how to become human beings. My dogs are better behaved and subscribe to a higher code of values than the young rioters of Tottenham, Hackney, Clapham and Birmingham.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...where have I seen this before? :hmm:

Clockwork Orange Trailer - YouTube
 
And what of the schools? I do not think they can be blamed for the creation of a grotesquely self-indulgent, non-judgmental culture.

This has ultimately been sanctioned by Parliament, which refuses to accept, for instance, that children are more likely to prosper with two parents than with one, and that the dependency culture is a tragedy for those who receive something for nothing. This is why conservatives argue against welfare dependency, it's not just the staggering amount of money but the wasted lives as well.
Click to expand...

They are an absolute deadweight upon society, because they contribute nothing yet cost the taxpayer billions. Liberal opinion holds they are victims, because society has failed to provide them with opportunities to develop their potential.

Most of us would say this is nonsense. Rather, they are victims of a perverted social ethos, which elevates personal freedom to an absolute, and denies the underclass the discipline — tough love — which alone might enable some of its members to escape from the swamp of dependency in which they live.
Click to expand...

This is exactly why conservatives decry the entitlement state and the opiate of government dependency. It's not just the enormous waste of money but the tragic waste of lives as well.

Sometimes tough love is the truly compassionate social program.
 
Let's just bring back poorhouses. That's where Britain stuck the underclass for 400 years before the welfare state was introduced, and it worked great (see: Dickens, Trollope).
 
financeguy said:
Tbh, if I was a young black unemployed teenager in London or, fuck it, pretty much anywhere in the UK, or actually, pretty much anywhere in Europe, I'd probably riot too. I'd probably take my chance.

The weasel words of white middle class condemnation in the media, as usual, explain nothing, and understand nothing.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with this.
 
I think you need to start with looking at why the British 'underclass' is so uniquely isolated and fucked up to begin with. I don't think either side of the left/right analysis, or left/right blaming, or left/right band-aid 'solutions' are coming close to actually getting to the heart of it.
 
yolland said:
Let's just bring back poorhouses. That's where Britain stuck the underclass for 400 years before the welfare state was introduced, and it worked great (see: Dickens, Trollope).
Click to expand...

If people don't have to work why will they?

Surely limiting the time the benefits are available would be better than Dickens or the current situation.

It would also be nice if there was a welfare system that actually rewarded looking and finding a job.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJWZ27OT16M

In the full episode he talks about a welfare system where you don't get punished for finding a job that pays too little so you still get some welfare to top off what you get with a job so the incentive for getting any job is better than staying on welfare. Of course I'm open to other ideas like limited time spans for employment insurance and welfare or other ideas that don't make welfare permanent.

To me the most salient point in the video is how the habits of personal choice atrophy and the self-righteousness of the politicians who dole out the welfare. Habits are SO IMPORTANT. Once they atrophy it's very hard for people to change. When you look at cognitive behavioural therapy you can see that in order to change habits you have to tolerate discomfort in order to change. Many people don't want to tolerate ANY discomfort to change themselves. Then when you decide to use your willpower consistently to tolerate discomfort you have the next problem in that emotions change only when the new habit is developed after many months of tolerating negative emotional habits trying to come back. Then after that the new good habit is created for long enough the emotions finally change.

I'm going through a similar process right now to try and increase my responsibility and in turn gain more pay or other job opportunities. I have to tolerate any negative mental habits, and delay gratification in order to do this and it's not easy but it's also not impossible.
 
bWqY3.png
 
Canadiens1131 said:
Also, protip for our conservative buddies INDY500 and purpleoscar: The Daily Mail is widely considered to be too trashy even to use as toilet paper (or support your opinions) :D
Click to expand...

I would guess I'm not the only person who read the headline in the link, then saw 'Mail Online', and so then didn't bother clicking on the article, or even reading the quoted parts. So I gather it's a welfare rant, but did they squeeze immigration, Islam and the EU in there too? And would none of this have happened if Princess Diana were still alive? It's not a truly good Daily Mail rant if it doesn't tick all the boxes.
 
poverty

lack of ambition and a culture that discourages ambition within the household

rubbish state system with overcrowded classes, pointless non-academic subjects and a sense of entitlement without the need to work for it

Overcrowded homes and estates

High cost of living for crap local services and poor housing (I think only the highest earners should pay tax)

Pressure from the international community such as the EU

Lack of discipline within the home and schools.

Girls as young as 13 are having children and they don't know how to bring them up. This is the generation of their children who are now rampaging across the streets

A few greedy bankers have gone unpunnished what they've done. They knew exactly what they were doing, don't give me all that "they didn't want to stop their reckless practices because they were fearful of what it would do to jobs within the company" claptrap. Even I know that if you lend ridiculous amounts of money to those who can't really afford the repayment then you are going to come unstuck sometime in the future, and I was rubbish at maths.

Lazy morons who need a good kick up the backside
 
It’s one of the most disturbing images from a tragedy that has given us so many. A boy, lying in his own blood on a London street, is helped up by a group of men. However, once he’s gotten to his feet, the men pretending to help rob him and walk away, leaving the boy to stumble, dazed and still bleeding, down the road.

The video of Asyraf Haziq, a 20-year-old Malaysian, who had come to the United Kingdom for school. It’s had such an impact that Prime Minister David Cameron even referenced it in one of his addresses, saying that the video makes it “clear that there are things badly wrong with our society.” Haziq has spoken to The Sun about the incident from his hospital bed as he waited to be treated for a broken jaw.

Haziq explained that he was going to a store to buy food to break his Ramadan fast when 20 or so looters tried to steal his bicycle. He doesn’t remember if he fell or was knocked off.


“Then everything is a blur – I fell down. I was bleeding from my mouth and thought some people were coming to help me. But they were from the same group. They took my PSP and a container you can see a man in the video throwing away. The video has been seen by lots of people. I want to thank them for their support. I want everyone to know, these people may steal my things, they won’t break me.”
 
purpleoscar said:
In the full episode he talks about a welfare system where you don't get punished for finding a job that pays too little so you still get some welfare to top off what you get with a job so the incentive for getting any job is better than staying on welfare. Of course I'm open to other ideas like limited time spans for employment insurance and welfare or other ideas that don't make welfare permanent.

To me the most salient point in the video is how the habits of personal choice atrophy and the self-righteousness of the politicians who dole out the welfare.
Click to expand...
Okay, but at this point we're talking welfare reform, which is a whole different topic. My comment was in response to this crazily ahistorical idea that the persistent existence of an underclass is some uniquely post-WWII phenomenon brought about by the welfare state. Even after the poorhouse (workhouse) system was reformed early in the 19th century in response to 'new' thinking about the responsibility of the poorest for their own situation and the incentives and disincentives this called for, still around a fifth of its participants became permanent or semipermanent residents--ins-and-outs they called them--no matter what strategies the Victorians tried. The model of human psychology you're advancing as a basis for welfare reform is no more or less head-in-the-clouds/-sand idealistic with regard to this reality than the notion that if only provided adequate education, state-furnished job and family mentoring, and money for basic survival needs, everyone will naturally right themselves and bloom into their full potential eventually.
Earnie Shavers said:
Australia turned out okay!
Click to expand...
Absolutely! Shipping the worst of the riffraff off to undefended land elsewhere is one tried-and-true alternative, as is creating sheltered markets abroad for the worthless crap your lower orders produce once competition sinks your own markets! Why hobble ourselves trying to rehabilitate lost causes? Even Marx admitted some sectors of the population are terminally unfit for productive work!
Canadiens1131 said:
The Daily Mail is widely considered to be too trashy even to use as toilet paper (or support your opinions)
Click to expand...
Rush featured Max Hastings' analysis of the riots yesterday.
Earnie Shavers said:
I think you need to start with looking at why the British 'underclass' is so uniquely isolated and fucked up to begin with. I don't think either side of the left/right analysis, or left/right blaming, or left/right band-aid 'solutions' are coming close to actually getting to the heart of it.
Click to expand...
:up:
 
"Go get a job" is all well and good if there are jobs to go get. There's really not.

So if no job, then... ???

Welfare reform is all good, and obviously a worthy and relevant part of the debate. However - totally nonacademic, just my own feeling - there are big differences between the US and the UK. This group or class or 'underclass' or whatever, aren't as bad off as their equivalent in the US. That social welfare safety net is there - it's far, far stronger. The estates etc can be very rough, very ugly, but they're not anywhere near as poor, desolate (or dangerous) as the equivalent in the US. Somehow, that American "one day I'll be that guy" Dream seems to keep that all in check. The belief in that, the aspiration, seems to somehow manage that situation. The good 'underclass' of the US haven't figured out that it's bullshit. You'll never be that guy, you don't stand a fucking chance, the system is absolutely built against you. The 'underclass' in the UK have no such illusions. They know they're fucked. But the safety net is there.

You could say that the division between 'them' and 'us' is pretty much insurmountable in both cases. The one in the US is far wider, they are actually far more disadvantaged. But it's a pretty shallow division, there's not that much belief in it. The division in the UK is far more narrow. Far better support, healthcare, safety and security, and yes, government cash. But the division is super, super, super deep. A question getting asked a lot: How could they trash their own communities? Pretty simple answer: Because they don't see themselves as a part of that community. They know they stand no chance of stepping into it, and they know it doesn't really give a fuck about them.

So in relation to welfare, and pretty all the other analysis and 'solutions' coming from both left and right over the past couple of days, it is really just about how that situation is 'managed', and not about actually changing it. I suppose, just be glad that the equivalent portion of the population in the US are drinking the kool-aid... for now?
 
Earnie Shavers said:
I'm taking this as a 'deep' type post, just lobbing a grenade in for the fun of it, or... have you been reading Nick Griffin's tweets again?
Click to expand...

Very much the former, plus a hint of reaction to a post written in reaction to the latter. The only reason I posted a Nick Griffin tweet was that someone posted it on another forum in the specific context of providing informational update re the Liverpool riot. In no way was I advocating support for this beliefs.
 
Didn't think so - you have on previous occasions proven that you can spell, so you're waaaaaay above the BNP intelligence grade.

I did actually check his Twitter feed a few times myself. I'm actually (happily) surprised the EDL types weren't whipped up earlier. That would have been terrifying.
 
yolland said:
Let's just bring back poorhouses. That's where Britain stuck the underclass for 400 years before the welfare state was introduced, and it worked great (see: Dickens, Trollope).
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: How do get there from here?
Sometimes tough love is the truly compassionate social program.
Click to expand...

Sometimes yolland, sometimes. Sometimes it would be nice to raise the possibility that a government program, though begun with the best of intentions, may have become inefficient or may actually be doing more harm than good. Sometimes it would be nice to propose reforming an inefficient program or eliminating a harmful program without apoplectic liberals fear-mongering with predictions of homeless seniors wandering the streets begging for food, children being sold into slavery or the return of poorhouses. Sometimes that would be most beneficial.
 
yolland said:
The model of human psychology you're advancing as a basis for welfare reform is no more or less head-in-the-clouds/-sand idealistic with regard to this reality than the notion that if only provided adequate education, state-furnished job and family mentoring, and money for basic survival needs, everyone will naturally right themselves and bloom into their full potential eventually.
Click to expand...

Remember that the U.S. successfully got millions off welfare rolls when they limited the time you could get on it. The same conservative argument reflects their attitudes on employment insurance time limits. People do tend to find jobs when they know it won't last forever. Sure not all jobs are fantastic but it at least is a job and some experience. What people don't want to hear is that it's "up to them" when it comes to earning more.

Regarding the economy I'm in favor of stopping this bloated debt and inflation economy that punishes savers and rewards borrowers and threatens large tax increases on those who would hire. That would make it easier for people to find jobs. Good luck with the deranged Keynesian's in government who think the solution to every downturn is more inflation and more debt. It's like a broken record. :huh:

For some people (like Amy Winehouse) who have all the opportunities in the world and I don't think anyone knows how to deal with all cases of addicts or ne'er do wells. It's a democracy so we can't hijack them and send them to some dictatorial rehab to forcefully cure them. No tough love or eternal rehab will save them. There's so much we still have to learn about the human brain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
U2 books for sale
Replies
1
Views
387
KBRY
K
Z
Rare Official U2 Stuff and Bootlegs for sale
Replies
0
Views
999
zoomania
Z
M
Hello!
Replies
0
Views
2K
MissCandyGirl
M
A
london
Replies
1
Views
615
alve72
A
M
SWAP - 2x London 23rd Oct for 2x London 24th Oct
Replies
0
Views
456
misterboo
M

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom