Depraved or deprived: What lies behind these riots, and why aren't they happening in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?

[Solopower]

I've been reading the threads on the riots and I wondered if we needed one on the causes.

People's ideas seem to range from thinking the rioters are just opportunistic criminals to socially and culturally disadvantaged youngsters.

But why isn't there any rioting in Scotland, for example, where there are pockets of extreme social deprivation?

Zoe Williams' article on the psychology of looting is worth reading, imo:
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/09/uk-riots-psychology-of-looting?CMP=twt_gu

There's a thread in Chat about the life skills you feel you need to give your children. Lots of people said things like teach them to manage their money and value their possessions, be independent, stand up for themselves etc, but I was really surprised that no-one said empathy. I can't think of anything more important! If you can't put yourself into someone else's shoes, if you can't imagine what it's like to be them, what sort of society do you get? Everyone out for themselves. And bricks through windows.

'no public buildings were target like in Athens or Paris riots. Why poor people's houses'

because it wasn't political, it wasn't about government cuts or anger at the authorities, it was about opportunistic crime and looting.

edam, riots across Europe are usually political, like in Greece, where communists, anarchists and lots of other people are out on the streets. Those riots are about cuts.

But our riots are not political, much of our youth is apolitical and don't turn out to vote or watch the news. Our riots reflect our society. It was about looting and violence, where a young Malaysian boy 's jaw is broken and his bike looted as well as shops being looted. It was about mindless violence and burning small shopkeepers' businesses and people's cars for no reason.

The left wing New Statesman's article says it wasn't about government cuts, because many have not even started yet.

'If the left is to create the intellectual space for such a debate, it must be far clearer about what those causes were. The riots were not, as some have claimed, an uprising or insurrection against the coalition's spending cuts. Many of the cuts deemed responsible for the violence have not even taken effect. This is not to say that the cuts will not make matters worse. Rather, it is to say that placing an undue and politically convenient emphasis on their role risks masking the social and economic deformities that lie beneath the violence.'

The New Statesman says what politicians and think-tanks of all parties and persuasions having been saying for years, that family breakdown is a factor.

'Labour and the wider left must pay greater attention to those cultural factors - most notably family breakdown - that they have too often downplayed. All of our politicians need to think deeply about how the urban poor have been disenfranchised by globalisation; how our culture has been coarsened and debased by life­style libertarianism.'

The New Statesman calls it for what it is, unlike some politicians who are trying to make political capital out of these events by blaming it on government cuts.

www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2011/08/riots-violence-social-speed

Claig, I think some of the young people involved in the riots just feel powerless and angry against society. They see conspicuous consumption by rich people and want what they have.

Everyone knew these problems were occurring for years and that poverty and lower living standards were being masked by free flowing credit, on which they inevitably eventually pulled the plug.

Globalisation has disenfranchised many people and will disenfranchise even more in the future. But no one cared, no one tried to stop it. The unions didn't and nor did New Labour, because they are all globalisers. No one is prepared to protect people's jobs. Let's see if they change now. I don't think they will.

'They see conspicuous consumption by rich people and want what they have.'

yes, but that is a moral breakdown. Many want to be millionaires, wags, pop stars and footballers, they want fame and fortune, they don't want to pick fruit in the fields or work in McDonalds, like their parents and grandparents used to do. They want it all and they want it now. That's why the gangsta lifestyle and criminal life is appealing to them. It's a get rich world.

When they saw that the police were nowhere to be seen, they jumped in their cars and thought they would pick up goods for free. They knew it wouldn't last, they knew the authorities would eventually stamp it out, but like stealing magpies they all flocked and swooped down on the local electronics stores and filled their boots.

They didn't see anything morally wrong in doing it. The public pays for them already and they thought they deserved even more. They think the world owes them a living and they could grab it with both hands while they could. The Polish woman who jumped from the burning building said she thought that Britain was a civilised place. Now she thinks it is "sick". She says Polish people would never behave like that.

It is 'Broken Britain' as some right thinking politicians have always said. But who broke it? Who caused it all? It was the politicians whose policies caused it, who did nothing to stop it and denied that anything was wrong.

Some of those politicians, whose policies were the cause, now stick their heads in the sand, like ostriches, and say there's still nothing wrong, it's all about government cuts, about EMA and libraries. No wonder we're in a jam.

People are not intrinsically bad, except for some crooks at the top. These kids grow up on crime-ridden estates, where drugs and gangs are rife, where their friends are stabbed in the neck at bus stops for £60 mobile phones. Now the politicians say there will be "a war on gangs". But why hasn't there been one before. Why wasn't it a priority to make these residents lives safer by eliminating the corrosive criminal gangs. I think, because just like globalisation, someone didn't really care enough about these communities and their prospects. They turned a blind eye while they themselves were getting rich quick.

Depraved or deprived?
People aren't generally depraved. Some have now become depraved due to the deprivation that they endured. Money is not teh answer as so many politicians wrongly think. At heart it is a moral deprivation and is also the moral deprivation of the top of society who never cared enough for these communities to rid them of the crime, drugs and gangs and never cared enough to give them real jobs and real wages and real prospects, because they were too busy obeying their masters - the Gods of globalisation.

They bailed out bankers with untold billions, but for the morally bankrupt and the poor, who have turned to crime, they will evict them from their homes.

And instead of stopping it and taking real action, the progressive politicians indulge these kids, dressed in their latest fashion trainers, with their blackberries in their back pockets. They listen attentively to them as they lecture the politicians on how the system is "taking food out of the babies' mouths'. The kids know the politicians will listen noddingly and praise them all the while for their input. Hell, they'll probably give them more grants.

It's a circus and the criminal gangs know it. That's why 11 year old kids were laughingly saying "the police can't do anything about it" and young girls were saying "we're showing them". It's an abdication of responsibility by the ruling class, who play along with the circus. They don't care enough to change things for real. That would mean jobs and prospects and preventing the ravages of globalisation. It's a lot easier just to hand out a grant.

The politicians will do anything to win votes, they'll "hug a hoodie" just to look like a goody.

Exactly, they know the system has a soft underbelly. But in Northern Ireland, the same system does use water cannon and has for years.

It's got nothing to with poverty, except for moral poverty.

Some of these people who rob and kick a dying man, just as some attacked the old man who tried to put the bin fire out. They will pilfer and cheat a young Malaysian boy sitting on the floor in pool of blood, dazed, confused and injured. He said there were primary school children among them. He was threatened with knives.

These people in their designer jeans and trainers are poor alright, but it's a moral poverty, and that is even worse than monetary poverty, because they lack decency, pride and compassion, things which far pooree people all over the globe possess in abundance.

And then we have some politicians on our screens telling us that it is about cuts to EMA. These gangs are laughing. The 11 year olds laughed and said "the police can't do anything about it". They also laugh and know that those politicians with their EMA line, won't do anything about it.

I think the link between actions and consequences seems to have been severed for people from many backgrounds. The Met police commissioner, various politicians, parts of the media, the City...

Midnight Express: Good point, but when I lived in Deptford/ Bermondsey there was much coming and going for work or social reasons, you didn't know your neighbours and they would change quite alot, alot of rented property in those areas, people hustling, working odd hours

None of this explains why the riots didn't happen in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, though. Isn't that key to understanding why they did happen in England? And why Birmingham but not Southampton? etc.

Someone near the beginning of the thread said it was about population size, and on the radio prog mentioned by Edam (More or Less, Radio 4) someone said that a population bulge (eg more young people) might have something to do with it. Lots of young people in those areas? Fewer young people in other parts of the UK?

The presenter also pointed out something about causality: just that two things occur at the same time, eg poverty and riots, it doesn't follow that one causes the other.

I do agree with claig about 'moral poverty'. And there isn't a quick fix for that.

They didn't happen in Scotland and Wales and NI because they are different countries

Claig, many summer projects have closed down and 44 % of children in Hackney live in poverty. In Haringey youth project funding has been slashed by 75%, eight of the borough 13 youth clubs have shuit.

For the kids it's a message from the government. We don't care about you. For aspirational kids, their EMA has been cut and they face the most competitive clearing for university ever before fees are hiked to the maximum.

I think there is a moral bankruptcy but it pervasive through all sections of society.

I agree that there is a moral bankruptcy from top to bottom.

But cancellation of summer projects doesn't cause looting. The whole nation is feeling the impact of what the bankers did. Many have lost their jobs, and taxes like VAT, have increased.

But Labour MP, Diane Abbott and Chuka Umunna, have got it right.

'Miss Abbott said: 'Cuts don't turn you into a thief. What we saw was people thieving for hours. Mr Umunna said the violence in London was 'totally opportunistic and utterly unacceptable'.

and as the New Statesman editorial said

'Many of the cuts deemed responsible for the violence have not even taken effect.'

Many people have lost their homes and businesses, not just EMA, due to what the bankers did. But they aren't rioting.

Small shopkeepers and residents have lost all their possessions, burnt out by the rioting youths. They've lost far more than EMA and cancelled summer projects and cut back youth funding, but they won't be rioting.

I agree about 'moral poverty'. Many people are struggling financially and not able to have the lifestyle and opportunities they'd ideally like, but that doesn't make someone behave like this. What to do about it, however, is a difficult question...

I think the regional problem with rioting could be down to regional over population, N.I for example has a tiny population of 1.7 million, Scotland has only 6 million leaving the rest of the population of around 60 million living in England alone mainly in the South of the country, that is far too many people in a small area compared to the U.K as a whole.
Another possible reason is the different legal systems in the 3 main regions of the U.K, England seems to have a very soft legal system when compared with N.I so the threat of a heavy fine or imprisonment could well be a deciding factor when it comes to rioting, Living in N.I I was amazed how soft the Police were treating the rioters, all police officers in N.I attend riots with baton rounds, gas , live ammunition and sometimes water cannon but due to legal restraints these weapons cannot be used in England, that gives the rioters a free hand as the police have nothing in the way of defence against petrol bombs, rocks and bottles which is frankly just crazy and something the police and goverment need to sort out sooner rather than later.
There was minor rioting in N.I on Saturday 13th but for a different reason, petrol bombs were thrown along with a blast bomb, a few cars/vans were set on fire but thankfully no one was injured and the culprits have been arrested and charged.

I agree, too, that moral poverty affects all classes: top to bottom. It seems very hard to bring up children with any kind of hard sense of what is right and what is wrong. Fortunately their teachers at school are good. But we've just found out that one of their out-of-school sports instructors has been fired for stealing to buy drugs. And this was a sport we chose (riding) SPECIFICALLY because we wanted something wholesome, out of doors, involving responsibility, etc.

Obviously the right and wrong business starts and ends at home, and parents are the best role models, but you'd hope that society would back up what you were telling your children. Fortunately we still have the lovely adults at our local athletics club, who volunteer to coach and are honest and straightforward and brilliant role models.

Conculainey, you are right about over-population. Sometimes I feel that those not in the SE don't understand the effects of too many people in a small area. When I'm in the north of Scotland people are more relaxed. They don't feel jammed in and stressed in the same way people down here do.