Tottenham Riots

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
he didn't, through luck.

Looters undoubtedly see it as a way to 'get something for themselves',
is that right? It is for them.

Well anyone loots my house, I might see it right to stab them.
Is that right? It is for me.
(In the eyes of the law too, if they are armed, and I feel my life is threatened, cornered by these invaders on my own property.)

But if I was to go out and stab someone on the street, or being the looter/assaulter, I'd be in the wrong.

And thats what they should know, but noooooo they go out with machetes, bats and firebombs. They are wrong no matter which way you slice it for them.

Originally posted by inimalist
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

The have nots taking from the haves, forced redistribution of wealth due to perceived inequality in opportunity and economic access to the ability to purchase said items within the accepted society's framework etc. As I said though a multitude of different norms have to be applied because no one group rioting is the same exactly, except in the sense they may well all hate the Police.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Well anyone loots my house, I might see it right to stab them.
Is that right? It is for me.
(In the eyes of the law too, if they are armed, and I feel my life is threatened, cornered by these invaders on my own property.)

But if I was to go out and stab someone on the street, or being the looter/assaulter, I'd be in the wrong.

And thats what they should know, but noooooo they go out with machetes, bats and firebombs. They are wrong no matter which way you slice it for them.

The law says you're O.K. to stab people in your own home now.
They see themselves as fighting back against a society that has broken it's contract with them.

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
The have nots taking from the haves, forced redistribution of wealth due to perceived inequality in opportunity and economic access to the ability to purchase said items within the accepted society's framework etc. As I said though a multitude of different norms have to be applied because no one group rioting is the same exactly, except in the sense they may well all hate the Police.

in my mind then, you are saying these people are politically aware enough to understand class struggle, but stupid enough to think attacking local businesses is a statement against the "haves"

whereas, I don't think poor people are that stupid, and riots are explained much better by simple social psychology, rather than marxist or other types of philosophy

Originally posted by inimalist
in my mind then, you are saying these people are politically aware enough to understand class struggle, but stupid enough to think attacking local businesses is a statement against the "haves"

whereas, I don't think poor people are that stupid, and riots are explained much better by simple social psychology, rather than marxist or other types of philosophy

No, I'm not saying that, I'm saying they just want what everyone else has.

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
No i'm not saying that, i'm saying they just want what everyone else has.

so then you agree they are not justified in attacking the work places of other people who are not upper class? As this, explicitly, would be detrimental to what other people, of their own class, want?

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
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.

not quite sure what i think of that. i dont believe that, no matter how much of a bum deal society has given you, it gives you any right to do as you please. if everybody did that the world would be in chaos!

these riots have affected more working class people than middle class people, on both sides, and all the rioters are doing is making things worse for everyone. i know that its not just working class people who are activly taking part in the riots, but many people assume that it is and that tars us all with the same brush.

its hardworking tax payers like myself who are going to pay and who are going to have to clean up this mess!

also i dont care how 'disenfranchised' these people are, that does not justify attacking people whos job it is to save lives!

sorry that came out sounding a bit more bitchy than i intended, but i just frustrates me!

Originally posted by midnightshadow
its hardworking tax payers like myself who are going to pay and who are going to have to clean up this mess!

Originally posted by inimalist
so then you agree they are not justified in attacking the work places of other people who are not upper class? As this, explicitly, would be detrimental to what other people, of their own class, want?

You see, this is the problem trying to attribute an individual blanket justification. Some of the people involved are third generation 'non working' class meaning they have not had work in there families in three generations. They are in societal terms in an underclass, below all people working economically and in terms of things like status and esteem.

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
You see, this is the problem trying to attribute an individual blanket justification. Some of the people involved are third generation 'non working' class meaning they have not had work in there families in three generations. They are in societal terms in an underclass, below all people working economically and in terms of things like status and esteem.

not being funny but whats to stop them from getting a job and contributing to society instead of coasting through it and then blaming society for thier situation?

Originally posted by midnightshadow
not being funny but whats to stop them from getting a job and contributing to society instead of coasting through it and then blaming society for thier situation?

Um, demography growing up, precluding an education leading to skewed socialisation, labelling, stimagtisation, illiteracy etc. etc.

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
You see, this is the problem trying to attribute an individual blanket justification. Some of the people involved are third generation 'non working' class meaning they have not had work in there families in three generations. They are in societal terms in an underclass, below all people working economically and in terms of things like status and esteem.

i don't want to get into it, but you are speaking like I don't understand class warfare or identity... like, we can measure penises if you want, but trust me, I know Foucault. I defended, successfully I feel, scientific psychology in a sociology seminar against these ideas, you aren't the first person who has presented moral relativism to me.

I want to know, if morals are really relevant to the bias that we see the world in, or in terms of narrative, please explain the narrative that includes the "have nots" as you describe. My main concern is with regard to people they know are of their own status. If you are arguing that people engage in looting as a form of political expression, you are arguing that working class people deliberately target their own class to achieve greedy personal goals.

In my view, informed from social psychology, I assume people are caught up in the context of the time and engage in bahaviour they would otherwise think is morally reprehensible. not tied to any political sentiment

I've already expressed the things you need to justify morally then, and I don't feel you have, other than "they think it is justified, so it is ok"

And what of the 5th generation working class business of 150 years that was burned down as result of the indiscriminate lunacy?

You just argued maybe what a tax drain these people are, and also for better birth control, if extreme, death causing violence and idiocy is their best offered contribution.

Also: Contracts are a two ways street.

Originally posted by inimalist

why did you quote me then not write anything? 😕

Originally posted by midnightshadow
why did you quote me then not write anything? 😕

because i feel you are right. it doesn't matter if the government is right wing or left wing, the trend seems to be co-opt more power for the state, and myself as a tax payer, I will forever be taken advantage of because I rationally want what is best for society.

not to rant, but it is like the hypocrisy of the voter. They know the people in power wont do what the constituents want, but they feel the only way to change things is to vote, dig?

Originally posted by inimalist
i don't want to get into it, but you are speaking like I don't understand class warfare or identity... like, we can measure penises if you want, but trust me, I know Foucault. I defended, successfully I feel, scientific psychology in a sociology seminar against these ideas, you aren't the first person who has presented moral relativism to me.

I want to know, if morals are really relevant to the bias that we see the world in, or in terms of narrative, please explain the narrative that includes the "have nots" as you describe. My main concern is with regard to people they know are of their own status. If you are arguing that people engage in looting as a form of political expression, you are arguing that working class people deliberately target their own class to achieve greedy personal goals.

In my view, informed from social psychology, I assume people are caught up in the context of the time and engage in bahaviour they would otherwise think is morally reprehensible. not tied to any political sentiment

I've already expressed the things you need to justify morally then, and I don't feel you have, other than "they think it is justified, so it is ok"

No one is speaking like you don't understand class warfare, that's not what this is though completely. As I say the one issue justification idea is flawed in my opinion. Looting is often just a result of jealousy again no single justification fits what's going on here. I disagree with you analysis of my justification and feel you are looking at everything as a one situation fits all for what's gone on. That's not the case. It's just not that simple.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
And what of the 5th generation working class business of 150 years that was burned down as result of the indiscriminate lunacy?

You just argued maybe what a tax drain these people are, and also for better birth control, if extreme, death causing violence and idiocy is their best offered contribution.

Also: Contracts are a two ways street.

Contracts are a two way thing but for some in the most deprived areas, they have never been taught to read one.

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
No one is speaking like you don't understand class warfare, that's not what this is though completely. As I say the one issue justification idea is flawed in my opinion. Looting is often just a result of jealousy again no single justification fits what's going on here. I disagree with you analysis of my justification and feel you are looking at everything as a one situation fits all for what's gone on. That's not the case. It's just not that simple.

well, cool, I'm happy to have things morally ambiguous, but do you admit this is a change in your opinion from the action of the rioters being justified before

I'm happy to agree to some vague grey region.

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
Um, demography growing up, precluding an education leading to skewed socialisation, labelling, stimagtisation, illiteracy etc. etc.

i understand that some people have real issues that stop them from getting a job, but some of them can be dealt with. with some effort some of these problems can become a non issue.

if people really want to do something they will find a way, if not they will find an excuse.

some people just find it easier to do nothing

Originally posted by Anarchy UK
Contracts are a two way thing but for some in the most deprived areas, they have never been taught to read one.

They probably should put down the machetes and learn.
A lot of em are pretty capable.

The only thing that stops a lot are laziness and the illusion they have of the notion that the rest of the world should wipe their arses for them constantly with little effort for themselves, let alone society. I say this as someone with friends who have fitted that bill.