Sorry rhad, but reading your posts on this thread is simply mind-boggling. Without understanding the facts, you come out with all the stereotypical leftist bullcrap that this is all society's fault, and not the fault of these individual scumbags who steal and loot because they can. This is not a problem of income inequality. It is a problem of some people not having a moral compass. The leftist reflex to blame "society" for everything instead of blaming the individual that commits crimes is odd. Exactly. I would have repped you several times on this thread if I could. You are there, and you understand the situation. Some people here are just talking from their leftist high horse, without a clue. This is not about frustration. It is about greed, and no morals. Exactly. Many of those people aren't even poor at all.
Interesting article from someone who doesn't get it: http://news.yahoo.com/ap-enterprise-uk-gangs-thrive-august-riots-103756755.html
[rquoter]As Britain comes to grips with the causes of the past week's descent into anarchy, Prime Minister David Cameron has identified the growth of gangs as a key factor and is recruiting high-profile American anti-gang experts to help bring them to heel.[/rquoter] Finally, America actually benefits from outsourcing.
I read them. Quite clearly, you don't get it. At all. Of course, that doesn't stop you from talking from a high horse in this thread. Obviously, you don't even read the articles people post either. In later posts, you try to relativize your position a bit. Your problem in this thread is that you came into it not understanding the situation, lecturing people about how this is society's fault. Rather than saying "okay, I didn't understand the situation properly" when people who know better educate you, you retreat to snippy posts.
No one is without a moral compass. When it comes to GROUP morality, you can't judge it the same way you do with individual morality. Group morality is a different animal. It's a series of reactions. This action is a reaction to something, it's not just chaos. Now, the reaction IMO is extremely overblown, but that doesn't mean it's not a reaction to SOMETHING. You guys are arguing about nothing honestly. One side is saying the criminals should be put away. The other side is saying there must be an underlying cause. You're both right. Both of those things should be addressed IMO. I think it's HIGHLY unlikely that there is NO underlying clause at all, or that there are no criminals in this conflict at all. Luckily, the UK will employ mercenaries as quietly as possible and it won't infuriate the rioters that their government is paying experts from another country to clamp down on them. A common occurrence with "civil" unrest, except that in the Middle East the mercenaries are on the front line rather than in the back room. Another unfortunate product of this whole mess is that it gives the government green light to police the state more than it did before. They're talking about blackberries already, increasing the size of the police force, more special units, etc. I hate it when governments use a temporary situation as an excuse to permanently implement surveillance powers.
Nonsense. Every single individual still has to make a decision about right and wrong. Just because others loot and steal does not make it any more right that you do it.
That's ridiculous. As I said, they are both true, but you insist on drawing a line in the sand. Everyone is liable for the mistakes they've made. There is a group dynamic which must be accounted for wrt those who did not break the law. Looting and stealing are wrong. Group dynamic exists. I'm actually shocked that, as a German, you are REJECTING the existance of a group dynamic which encourages unusual behavior. The rise of Hitler leading into the holocaust is perhaps the greatest example of this group dynamic that has ever existed. Think about it. If your side of the argument was valid in isolation, you would be busy trying to support it, rather than be busy trashing the other side of the argument. Everyone is accountable for their actions. There are underlying issues. Groups are different than the sum of individuals.
I am not rejecting the existence of group dynamics. I am rejecting this dumb statement of yours: If someone steals, I judge his individual action the same way, regardless of whether he stole alone or others did the same. He chose wrong instead of right in both instances. That group dynamics may have contributed to him having felt that he had the opportunity to do so is a separate issue; in any case, it does not relieve him from his individual legal and moral responsibility.
Ok, then you suck at reading, because this blather: that both you and DD are happily shouting about is not in any of my posts. I just re-read them, and it's simply not there. At best, I have only argued that folks (like DD) not categorically blame an entire class of people for the actions of a few (I know that this may be hard for you ATW). I have also argued that the societal structure has played a role, and should play a role in future efforts to prevent more rioting. I have never categorically blamed society. I have never argued the perpetrators of violence are innocent. The irony of me taking this arguably moderate position is that the other "side" has refused to budge at all. DD still thinks this is nothing but criminals and thugs in a (basically) unalterable society that simply need to work harder (great post on how plausible this is in reality, (at least, in America)). Stobbart wants to exterminate them all. And you've just called me precisely what I joked about a few posts ago. Whatever. I'm done. Sorry for this massive derail.
Except for you when you said: You also said: Anyone who loots breaks the law. Everyone who participates in rioting, as opposed to a peaceful demonstration, also breaks the law. So - what are you talking about?
You do not think that people who riot and loot are criminals and thugs? What would you describe them as? Victims? If you actually think that this was a serious statement...
That's the best you can do? Ok, let's go: No "out of context", just your first four posts on the thread: If that is not "blaming society" instead of blaming those who steal and loot, then what is? There you go - again. "The evil government started it and the poor people are just reacting. It is inevitable." And add "lecturing" from a high horse on top of that. So those who call it what it is - criminals at work - are bigoted. Nice.
You yourself acknowledged that my argument was not even really made apparent until I got into it with DD. These four posts are short, inflammatory posts in response to short, inflammatory posts. No argument, and no apologies. It's not. Period. The unemployment remark is exactly what it is. Pmac made a tangential point in the vein of my objective, i.e., that there was more to it than just mere thuggery - ergo the data point to get the ball rolling. As the debate continued, I repeatedly called for the criminals to be punished while explaining the idea that said simplification of roles and causes and motivations was unrealistic. You're just cherry picking again and it's boring. That is why the rioting started... whether or not the story is confirmed accurate. And I'd argue it not terribly surprising if the man was indeed, murdered. I did backtrack on the direct accusation though. That was in response to people blaming blacks. And yeah, that is bigoted. In conclusion, you're just ignoring everything I've said that runs counter to your preconceived evaluations of my argument. That's...lame.
And y'all wonder how he gets 77,000+ posts... He's never going to shut up. This is D&D *Debate and Discussion, not DaDa, already. Move it.
