Salon: Why London exploded last night

[LongTomH]

Why London exploded last night, originally in Global Post.



Michael Goldfarb, labels this an "explosion among the underclass," and attributes the violence to a combination of "new media, old media, and rampant unemployment."

First, the chronology: The tension began to boil over last Thursday when police shot and killed a young black man named Mark Duggan in Tottenham, a predominantly Afro-Caribbean and African immigrant neighborhood in north London. In the mid-1980s, Tottenham was the scene of terrible race riots which culminated in a policeman being hacked to death by a group of men armed with machetes. Saturday night, following a disappointing visit to the police by Duggan's family and community leaders, a protest about the incident turned violent.

When the smoke cleared on Sunday morning it was obvious that the violence was not about the police and racism -- as it had been in the 1980s. The Duggan family were appalled by what had happened, much of it directed against shops owned by black and immigrant businessmen. Back in the 1980s, community leaders were harshly critical of the police and the government. Local black politicians used the riots to point out the institutional racism in the police force. Now the local member of parliament, David Lammy, son of Afro-Caribbean immigrants, led the criticism of the rioters.

'Underclass' kids were able to watch the situation on TV (old media) and use texting (new media) to tell each other where the London cops were massing. Police were able to make relatively few arrests; they soon concentrated on 'holding ground.'

The underlying cause of the riots is an historically high level of youth unemployment, mostly among 'underclass' young people.

The rioters were overwhelmingly teenagers and kids in their 20s. About 20 percent of 16-24 year olds in Britain are unemployed. That figure is much, much higher on council estates -- the British term for housing projects. (You can leave school at the age of 16 in this country). Unemployment statistics in Britain are sadly vague, but a reasonable estimate of youth unemployment just in Hackney is 33 percent. (Those attending college or performing any form of unpaid apprentice work are considered to be employed.) There don't seem to be any statistics for youth unemployment on council estates -- as I live in the neighborhood I would say well above 60 or 70 percent is a good guess.

<snip>

What happens after the rioting subsides is difficult to predict -- entry level jobs are in short supply these days -- and as the government's austerity measures begin to bite here, it's not likely to get better any time soon.

Someone on DU suggested that our high level of imprisonment is the only thing holding back similar violence in the US; but, there are enough unemployed kids out of jail to start some pretty impressive riots here.

How long before our cities burn?

Edited to add: There is a photo gallery of the London riots at the Global Post site.

[fascisthunter]

1. Unfortunately, their reasons will be contorted to demonize them

instead of realizing or acknowledging that poverty itself is creating this. The rich won't get it until it is too late. I've seen enough to come to that conclusion... their arrogance supercedes their own agendas to keep their "good thing" going. As long as they have theirs, they could care less. Very sad..

[brooklynite]

2. Looters don't need to be "demonized"

These people aren't stealing food, or diapers, or breaking into empty homes; they're going after TV sets and electronics, and damaging the goods not of megastores but of small shopkeepers. You'll have to show me more evidence that all these people need is a steady paycheck.

[Peace Patriot]

3. I think that's myopic. Same thing was said about the Watts Uprising--they're stealing TVs!

Yup, they're stealing the very propaganda machine that shows them, every day, in every way, what they can't have because they're poor, and because the poverty is endemic and embedded, in the midst of a wealthy society in which the wealthy steal on a much, much bigger scale and with much more sophisticated methods.

Ironical, huh?

I think the Watts rioters were more selective about business targets, but there was a lot of damage to local business. And "small shopkeepers" are not always "good neighbors." Don't know about these particular shopkeepers, but some "small shopkeepers" in poor neighborhoods are gougers, even crooks, some are just franchises of chains that are gougers and crooks, some are the local front for banks that are gougers and crooks, and so on. I would need to know a lot more about these rioters and their neighborhoods before I could make a judgement. Large-scale rioting like this simply doesn't happen for no reason. I suspect that there legit grievances, even if the rioters can't articulate them.

I would absolutely prefer to see focused, non-destructive protest. I'm not defending destructiveness, but I consider property damage to be far less an offense than the rich throwing the poor into the trash bin. That's what these riots are probably all about. These kids have no hope. They might as well be landfill. That's how they feel. The top of society--piling up the wealth and hoarding it, engaged in every kind of ponzi scheme to stuff themselves with yet more money and now gorging itself on social programs--is far, far more blameworthy than these youngsters. That they don't have any sense--have rioted randomly, trashing the neighborhoods they are forced to live in, because "social mobility" is a thing of the past--isn't really the problem. The problem is that there is nothing to aspire to but greed, and that is not enough for the human soul.