Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Even LESS reason to feel like mass rioting (Knowing what uncontrolled mob mentality does) is justifiable then.Still criminal acts they willingly volunteered into.
All of any high ground they may have felt they had is flushed immediately into the shitter.
Of course it's justifiable in the moment to the mob. It's like saying when the cops assaulted people at the G20 it's unjustifiable, under normal circumstances it breaks the norms under the mob mind it follows the norms.
Originally posted by Anarchy UK
No, however mobs do escalate that's not stupidity.
ok, so then you would agree that the riots have more to do with the psychology of groups than with any sort of political struggle
ie: the people rioting are not justified and merely taking advantage of the destabilized situation?
Originally posted by inimalist
ok, so then you would agree that the riots have more to do with the psychology of groups than with any sort of political struggleie: the people rioting are not justified and merely taking advantage of the destabilized situation?
No, I would say they have a multitude of reasons stemming from the dissatisfaction of various groups in the societal norms they are forced to live under. They are looking for a reason to break the chains and explode and for the moment have done so. lot's of other individual reasons and justifications can be attributed to specific circumstances, certainly a hatred of the Police for many is one.
Originally posted by Anarchy UK
Of course it's justifiable in the moment to the mob. It's like saying when the cops assaulted people at the G20 it's unjustifiable, under normal circumstances it breaks the norms under the mob mind it follows the norms.
People werent trying to kill anyone at G20.
Also G20 at least had some political validity.
Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
People werent trying to kill anyone at G20.Also G20 at least had some political validity.
True and true, much of this has political validity, no matter what your world view. For you it reaffirms a number of societal norms.
However that lad did chuck that fire extinguisher over the side at the Police in the student protests. Was he trying to kill someone?
Originally posted by Anarchy UK
No, I would say they have a multitude of reasons stemming from the dissatisfaction of various groups in the societal norms they are forced to live under. They are looking for a reason to break the chains and explode and for the moment have done so. lot's of other individual reasons and justifications can be attributed to specific circumstances, certainly a hatred of the Police for many is one.
but what I am asking is why this feeling of disenfranchisement actually justifies violating other people's right
like, think of it this way. I am a (small a) "anarchist". I don't see the value of the power of the state or of the power of corporations. However, I understand that most businesses are run by middle class people who want the exact thing from the social contract that I do.
The argument you seem to be making is that, regardless of what these people believe, I am justified in assaulting their rights because I don't make a salary above poverty status and I feel the police are biased toward people who represent the same demographic as me. My position is that I am never allowed to violate other people's rights.
I don't see how your position is different than the "its ok when I do it" position, I don't see how it preserves individual rights, and I don't see how it could represent anything other than ignorant "i'm going to get mine" thinking.
The best argument you have made is "they think it is ok", but so did Ted Bundy, so I'm not sure what to make of that...
so, let me throw it out like this. As a member of society, I don't see how these actions are beneficial, as the only people being targeted for violence are those who are members of the local economy and those involved in local social infrastructure. As a political anarchist, I don't see how this furthers the position of less state involvement in people's lives.
please explain it to me
Originally posted by Anarchy UK
True and true, much of this has political validity, no matter what your world view. For you it reaffirms a number of societal norms.However that lad did chuck that fire extinguisher over the side at the Police in the student protests. Was he trying to kill someone?
Maybe only in that sense, AFTER the fact... but these goons dont really care about it, the looters are just going fer gold.
I meant political motive in the disorder/unrest.
Murder, probably not. Assault? For sure.
But he didn't kill anyone anyways...
But lets say for a sec that he did intend murder: I think he would have been a murdering arsehole, had he succeeded.. would you disagree, perhaps attempting to justify it?
Originally posted by midnightshadow
I believe that people have the right to defend them selves and their comunity, but im not sure vigilantism (sorry cant spell), activly seeking out the rioters and 'giving them what for' will actually help. it might just exacerbate the situation.
It will stir things right up. The EDL want exactly that, that's their justification.
Originally posted by inimalist
but what I am asking is why this feeling of disenfranchisement actually justifies violating other people's rightlike, think of it this way. I am a (small a) "anarchist". I don't see the value of the power of the state or of the power of corporations. However, I understand that most businesses are run by middle class people who want the exact thing from the social contract that I do.
The argument you seem to be making is that, regardless of what these people believe, I am justified in assaulting their rights because I don't make a salary above poverty status and I feel the police are biased toward people who represent the same demographic as me. My position is that I am never allowed to violate other people's rights.
I don't see how your position is different than the "its ok when I do it" position, I don't see how it preserves individual rights, and I don't see how it could represent anything other than ignorant "i'm going to get mine" thinking.
The best argument you have made is "they think it is ok", but so did Ted Bundy, so I'm not sure what to make of that...
so, let me throw it out like this. As a member of society, I don't see how these actions are beneficial, as the only people being targeted for violence are those who are members of the local economy and those involved in local social infrastructure. As a political anarchist, I don't see how this furthers the position of less state involvement in people's lives.
please explain it to me
I've answered all this at least twice. It all comes down to disenfranchisement for those committing the acts. They do not share your norms.
Originally posted by midnightshadow
[QUOTE=13491664]Originally posted by Anarchy UK
[B]True and true, much of this has political validity, no matter what your world view. For you it reaffirms a number of societal norms.what do you mean by that?
It reaffirms how you see the world, that the rule of law is good and people should not be allowed to riot. No matter how disenfranchised they are.
Originally posted by Anarchy UK
I've answered all this at least twice. It all comes down to disenfranchisement for those committing the acts. They do not share your norms.
what norms do they share then?
please explain the norms and political discourse that informs people attacking local businesses such that they steal high priced electronic equipment