Tony Blair's comments re riots

[MilaMae]

I agree with a lot of what he said.

I think the gov need to be robust in dealing with the criminals involved(there has been far too much weakness in the past) but bankers,thieving MPs,tax dodgers aside the vast majority of the population have good moral values, are working every hour to make ends meet,pay taxes and are certainly not out for all they can get.

Given that Cameron has very little to do with the population at large and lives in his millionaire bubble I don't get how he can come to the assumptions he has.

Would be interested in other opinions.

Blair sounds confused and his soundbites sound confused too

'He insisted the disturbances were ''an absolutely specific problem that requires a deeply specific solution?.

He probably deeply, deeply believes what he says.

He says it is not to do with moral decline and talk of broken Britain risks harming our international reputation. He does have some experience of both.

He says it is about disaffected youth and not moral decline, and says that both left and right "just miss the point".

'The ''big cause'', he said, (it's always 'big' for the progressives, just like the 'Big Conversation') lay with alienated youths from dysfunctional families living outside ''any canons of proper behaviour''

Well isn't 'living outside of any canons of proper behaviour', a break down in morality and upbringing, rather than just disaffection? Isn't it a breakdown in moral spirit rather than just being disaffected and cheesed off?

Gosh, I think I agree with him.

Doesn't he look old.

Sounds like he is recommending the same things as the Police Inspector from Glasgow who had improved gang violence there. He recommended targetting the ringleaders and removing them, then providing for support for the other individuals and their families.

This article is an interesting take on the possible cause of the riots.

'Data from Scotland Yard also emerged that appeared to show as many as 30,000 people were involved in looting, arson and criminal damage during rioting in London.'

It sounds like there could be a lot of ringleaders. Lots of them were under 18 as well, so does the taxpayer really need to support their parents?

Blair says
'The "big" cause of the riots in England was "alienated, disaffected youth,"

That is obvious, but the question people are asking is why?
What has caused this moral rot? Why has it occurred? The riots had no political cause, they were not a call for a change, they were just opportunistic looting, arson and violence. They were evidence of a moral vacuum, a failure to instill moral behaviour, a throwing to the wind of norms and morals.

Hedley's article is v interesting - my only complaint woud be that he blames the politicians.

I'm not sure that the politicians would get away with (or the media would let them get away with) spending more money on helping the underprivileged.

The disenfranchised underclass is probably everyone's fault, but with a bit more due to our media and their screaming headlines which reduces the opportunity to debate things sensibly.

The latest Private Eye points out that there was a riot on Tottenham some weeks before the big one kicked off. But it barely got a mention as Japan was on the brink of nuclear meltdown at the time. It also didn't spark a wave of copycat riots.

Coincidence? The meeja all have different views on what caused the riots, depending on their political leanings, but you won't get many journos suggesting that actually what really did it was all the fucking coverage the disturbances were getting .

inTottenham

As claig already pointed out:

'The ''big cause'', he said, (it's always 'big' for the progressives, just like the 'Big Conversation') lay with alienated youths from dysfunctional families living outside ''any canons of proper behaviour''

errr - this actually means "breakdown of moral values". Ffs.

Shame his 10 years of power didn't lend itself to helping the section of society his party claims to work for.

mila Do you think Blair is poor? Do you think he's "one of us"? Seriously? Do you know he was in power for a decade? Do you think he could've done "something" to assist the poor during that time?

Milamae - Blair has very little to do with the population at large and he lives in multi-millionaire bubble.
I don't see why he should have better insights than Cameron - or anyone else.

"tax dodgers aside the vast majority of the population have good moral values, are working every hour to make ends meet,pay taxes and are certainly not out for all they can get."

As I've said before there is a problem with the vast majority of the population. Yes they work hard but there's increasing thoughtlessness, selfishness and a general lack of respect.

How many people pay tradespeople in cash to avoid the VAT on work?

How many people park in disabled or parent and child bays at supermarkets when they shouldn't?

How many people still drive while talking on a phone?

How many people leave it at the last moment to try and push into the queue off traffic turning off of a road and block the people trying to drive straight on?

How many people moan about speed cameras having the audacity to actually enforce the law?

How many people drive on the hard shoulder on motorways (there was a recent video about this)?

How many people buy those dodgy copied DVDs from the people in supermarket car parks?

How many people download stolen games off of the internet? And what's worse how many give them to their children to play?

How many other examples of just pure selfishness, impatience and lack of thought can you see as you go through your normal daily routine?

Now compared to some crimes those things are pretty tiny, but they still set an awful example, they lower the boundary of what is "good behaviour" and set an appalling example to the younger generation. And the excuses people will often give if challenged is "well everybody else was doing it" or "what someone else has done is worse so leave me alone", which sounds really rather similar to the sort of excuses trotted out by the rioters.

Don't blame the bankers, don't blame the politicians and don't blame the so called "underclass". They're the minority, their are real problems with respect for others running right through the majority of society and that is what is really having an influence on what is deemed right and wrong these days.

I agree with Blair. Talk of a general rot is just hysteria. The vast majority of people rich and poor are trying to do the best for their family. However, there is a small group who are totally dysfunctional and have just no idea.

This underclass has pretty much always been with us - see Eliza's father in George Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion for a perfect example. It may be exacerabted by welfare policies which encourage single-parent families and the decline in unskilled jobs, but it is not new. Early intervention e.g. Sure Start etc with such families seems better than ranting about criminality.

As for BadgerPaw's trivial examples of moral decline - I honestly cannot believe that things were ever any different. It reminds me of my favourite Bible quote:
"Do not ask 'why were things so much better in the olden days?' It is not an intelligent question." Ecclesiastes 7:10. Written about 970 BC and still so apt.

"As for BadgerPaw's trivial examples of moral decline - I honestly cannot believe that things were ever any different"

Trivial? I think that such things set the general moral tone of people's lives and that they in turn then inform them about what is generally right and wrong.

And yes I believe things, some things, were different.

I can't believe that years ago parents would have happily gone to a community group and discussed ways to steal games and toys for their children, yet you see that here quite often with people asking how to fill cards for their children's Nintendo's.

Even relatively recently (well by my standards anyway) I don't recall paying cash to avoid VAT being that common, now it seems that every tradesman I deal with offers to accept cash and my friends look at me a little boggle eyed when I tell them that I refused.

And I could go on...

This isn't about saying things were "better" in the "olden days", many things were worse, there are many aspects of society and many of them are better now than they ever have been.

But the issues of selfishness, lack of patience and lack of respect are things that seem to be on a decline at the moment.

But instead let's just all point fingers are one minority element of society and blame the mythical "them" for our ills rather than actually consider our part in the problem, that's certain to fix things.

BadgersPaws, I am totally behind you, like your friends are aghast when I insist we will not pay cash for work done. I check my change and give back if given too much. What really annoys me are people who rant on about benefit cheats and then go on to boast how they managed to evade tax and ofcourse VAT.

Blair is only interested in saying: "It wasn't the fault of New Labour, and anyone who says it was is wrong." Nothing more to add.

The riots happened for the same reason that riots have always happened, around the world and across history.

The people cannot afford to eat.

Why would they care about a society that doesnt care for them? Kids with high hopes, talent and ambition cant get jobs.
The government has TRIPPLED the cost of education (the best route to a good job), and put the entire debt on CHILDREN!
The government has taken everything away from them.

On Jobseekers allowance for the forseeable future, the price of food and bills has gone up hugely, while their jobseekers allowance has not. Decisions have to be made between food or heating, food or shoes.

"The people cannot afford to eat."

The rioting and looting has absolutely nothing to do with needing to eat. To the best of my knowledge flat screen TVs, trainers and mobile phones are not well known for their nutritional benefits.

"The government has TRIPPLED the cost of education (the best route to a good job)"

And how many of those rioting have been affected by the new fee system?

None.

Not one.

"Decisions have to be made between food or heating, food or shoes."

Decisions had to be made between following the law and getting their hands on a nice new TV.

Nonsense, utter nonsense.

Badger - you obviously know nothing about this or these people.

It is a fact of life that riots break out when people cannot afford to eat.

Who can't afford to eat? That's utter bullshit.

Education is free for the poor. I'm sick of liberal middle-class types pushing the line that it's being made too expensive. It's them that it's being made more expensive for, not poor people. They're pissed off at being made to pay the full cost of their own education, they couldn't give a shit about poor people, they're just a tool to be exploited.

At the end of the day, people that work hard, work smart, and take advantage of opportunities given them will prosper. Those that do not do any of these things will suffer. That is how it has to be. A world where people are rewarded the same even if they act in a degenerate manner is not a nice place to live.

It's th gap between rich and poor. It grew wider under Labour. Blair obviously doesn't want to face this fact.

"Badger - you obviously know nothing about this or these people."

A bit more than you do, apparently.

The riots had precisely nothing to do with food or hunger. I would understand if looting had targeted the essential supplies for life, I wouldn't support it, but I would understand it, it would make a kind of sense. The looting that did happen was mainly about luxury items.

I'm not denying that when people are genuinely hungry rioting and lawlessness can break out, but that wasn't the cause in this case.

If you do have genuine sympathy for the rioters then cease peddling this nonsense.

The looting had nothing to do with putting food on tables no, I agree. The "authorities" will crack down as hard as they possibly can, especially now we are in times of hardship. The hoi-polloi must be kept in our place. My son sent me mixing Jello with Coldcut from a couple of years ago, and it's scarily accurate what he has to say. If we allow the status quo we, as a people, are fucked.
By people I mean anyone who isn't rich. If things carry on as they are only the rich will have any quality of life.

People are disaffected because they're allowed to be, I believe. The welfare state was meant to help people but unforunately many use it as an excuse to stay idle. Surely there needs to be some kind of scheme where people on benefits have to work on a community service type scheme, painting fences etc. If they refuse then I'm sorry but they lose housing and benefits. If they had work to do they would be incentivised to work harder and get off benefits IMO