What can I say about the London riots that some other buffoon hasn't already said. Things seem to have returned to a sort of normal. I did not witness any looting first hand. I did see images of places very familiar places like Wood Green, Peckham, and Clapham being looted and burned. I heard sirens as police vehicles sped by my window, first in one direction, then 10 minutes later in the other, then in 10 minutes back the other way. I saw smoke in the distance one day. On another, a police dog unit set up in front my workplace. I saw shopkeepers boarding up shop windows. I saw others standing vigil in front of their shops at dusk: human shields. It felt like society was unraveling; and even though I never saw any first hand violence, there was an eerie spectre that it would materialise in front of me at any moment without warning. It seems to be over by virtue of its gradual absence rather than the feeling that anything is over. Wikipedia says the riots took place between 6 and 10 August 2011. I suppose it is easy enough to change the dates or add another riot to The List if something happens tomorrow.
The List I am referring to is Wikipedia's "List of Riots in London", which lists 38 riots between 1189 and 2011. They also have riot lists for Mumbai (6 between 1832 and 1993), Leeds (19 between 1735 and 2011), Singapore (6 between 1956 and 1969), the United States (321 between 1676 and 2010), and Hyberdad (13 between 1923 and 2010). Counting just the New York City riots from that US list: there were 28 between 1689 and 2000. If London had 38 over 822 years and New York City had 26 in just 311 years, clearly New York City warrants its own list.
As far as this latest London riot goes, everyone with an agenda has weighed in. It seems that the riot has firmly reinforced what people already believe. There was a YouGov poll that asked over 2,500 Brits what they thought the main cause of the riots was. 42% said criminal behaviour. The media coverage was touting that line from day one, so kudos to 1,600 people for regurgitating what is fed them. It's obviously criminal behaviour to steal and burn stuff, but is it a cause? How does 'criminal behavior' explain why a police shooting erupted into criminal behaviour across a city and then a nation? There HAS to be some kind of undercurrent or SOMETHING other than a bunch of criminals waiting around for some reason to go on crime spree. It's easy to respond emotionally to something without looking for real reasons. 26% in the same poll said gang culture was the main cause. When those 660 people said that, did they look at gang statistics in London? Will our media organisations look into gang culture connections and the actual people arrested to see if this fear is born out in fact? Or is our initial fear and bias enough to decide complex issues.
When something as unexpected as this happens, spouting the same tired old rhetoric will just lead us down the same path that lead us here in the first place. Any thoughtful review of the riots clearly shows that there is not ONE main cause. If we just respond emotionally, we may end up throwing resources at things like combatting gangs that may not even exist, or if they do, may not have been a significant contributing factor. Wouldn't it be more effective to analyse potential causes and compare them to the actual facts? Pointing fingers at some segment of society without actually analysing the situation is just refusal to consider the complexity of societal problems. The world would be just fine if it weren't for certain professions, certain political views, certain generations, certain parents, certain races, certain religions: Feel free to fill in anyone it is convenient to persecute. Don't worry about analysing facts in search of truth: Truth is at the end of a pointing finger. Trouble is that the only truth behind pointing fingers it is that the person wagging the finger is trying to wield political control over people that they cannot convince to follow them. The finger inevitably demands sacrifice or change of someone else while the pointer gets to blissfully go about life in exactly his or her preferred way. How convenient… and we fall for it every time. We are all too willing to choose immediate gratification of reacting emotionally rather than examining complex problems critically. It is not THEY who are unraveling society, it is us.
Photo Credits
Wood GreenPeckham
Clapham
