Originally posted by Anarchy UK
I think one of the many things you're missing is these riots are not the same in each demographic. When you talk about normal voters, just one of the flaws in that statement is many involved in the later rioting are kids who don't even vote. They have a different set of reasons for rioting. This is why I say no one explanation fits any of the situations, let alone intrinsic justifications. Extrinsic justifications are even more difficult to use in any blanket fashion. I use the word demographic to apply to geography, age and class.
but you are changing the issue again
nobody is arguing about the motivation of these rioters, social stress comes from any number of places.
We are talking about the fact that you have argued these riots are justified as some type of political expression...
however, as political expression, the majority of the riots have targeted the infrastructure that supports those who are rioting.
Now, if we accept that, as human beings, people make decisions based on local context, and may riot or not based simply on opportunity, this makes complete sense. A breakdown in social responsibly and personal feelings of culpability results in mass anti-social behaviour.
However, for it to be direct political speech, you have to acount for the fact that the rioters are taking actions that directly harm the very things they are, in theory, rioting to protect.
now, in my mind, it seems much more clearly to be the former, whereas you seem to be arguing that it is the latter, and further, there is some moral justification for poor people to abuse the rights of other poor people because they are dissatisfied with the rich.