There ya go again, jumping in, making a personal comment, nothing about the topic. Weaksauce muchacho, weaksauce. DD
You're totally and utterly missing the point in a massive way I'm afraid. This is NOT the poor people of Britain rebelling. This is NOT the working class hitting back. As I have said, I am working class, I am relatively poor. These people are in no way representative of my views, and nobody I know in my social class is out rioting. I am also not far out of the age group you were suggesting we should all feel sorry for. I am 24, I have 2 brothers aged 21 and 19. They are directly in this demographic. Believe it or not, incredibly, my 21 and 19 year old working class brothers were NOT out rioting either. In fact, nobody I know was out rioting. Pretty much everyone I know is working classl, or "poor" as it would be considered in this case. What these people ARE however, are criminals. As described in the recent article pasted, these were mainly gang members out rioting. Excuse my French, but don't you ****ing dare suggest that these people are representative of my demographic and social class. It's basically like all the criminals of our country were given free reign to roam the streets and do what the hell they pleased. How on earth you think this points to some wider social problem in order to fulfill your leftist agenda I have no idea. These people are the dregs of society. A group of criminals and gang members who are in no way representative of the working class of this country. Unfortunately, they're not as much of a minority as they should be but there is still no excuse for them. I agree with DD, there is plenty of opportunity in the Western world for people to make something of themselves. Not everyone will be a self made millionaire or even businessman, but I can guarantee you in this country if someone is determined enough there is jobs and apprenticeships out there, enough that they can at least make themselves a respectable member of society. Some people choose not to. Take your left wing nonsense elsewhere
To be honest, I think you are missing the point. Sadly, most of our media is reporting this as the common working man rioting over economic issues. Most of the posters here have the sheep mentality and follow whatever their favorite news source has to say w/out thinking for themselves. Ignore the ignorance.
You're probably right. Wasting time trying to get sheep to think for themselves. It is rather annoying to be grouped in with this lot though, when people start referring to "the working class" rioting and fighting back, it infuriates me.
I haven't seen a single news report that portrayed this as 'the common working man' rioting over economic issues.
Can anyone here read? In my post you quoted: The people making casual broad accusations in this thread are, well, people like you.
No, you. I quoted your first four posts on this thread. Not taken out of context, not shortened. Your "defense" was...that they were short. stobbartjohn is there. What he describes is exactly correct. I believe DaDakota has spent extended time in the UK. So have I. What about you?
I lived there, and spoke to tons of friends about it while it was going on, they all echoed the same thing, it was a bunch of thugs and criminals getting their riot on, and some other folks got caught up in it. There was no "rage against the man" agenda. It is argument 101, someone doesn't agree, call them an idiot, and say they don't get it. Sometimes, there is no deep seeded reason for things, sometimes it is just a group of people being assholes and taking advantage. DD
Add to that all my family, friends, colleagues and every single person I have spoken to regarding this as well AroundtheWorld and presumably anyone he knows still in the UK, the British Police and the British government. Of course, I'm open to any theory and it's certainly possible that rhad is just on another plane of thinking altogether and just far more intelligent than all the above combined and we just all "don't get it".
But, to be fair, I believe it was rhad who made one important point: The "white collar" criminals (greedy bankers who act in violation of laws; politicians who illegally take monies that should not be theirs, one way or another) are not one iota better than these looters; and, in fact, the economic damage they cause is probably far greater.
Sure, agree with that. Just think the context in which he brought it up was incorrect, ie it had no influence on the motives of the rioters. It was not the reason they were doing it.
Why are they gang members? Surely they weren't born gang members and would have preferred to live an easier life than that.
Good grief, point out where I said this please. I'm ****ing sick of arguing with you guys if all you're willing to do is make up things I did not say but that fit your own twisted idealization of some wannabe pseudo-leftist model that I'm specifically excluding... Let me requote myself again, and maybe if I'm really lucky one of you will read it. It would be nice if ATW might read these especially, as he really likes to play the game of ignoring any paragraphs that pose a challenge. And it's not about a "stated agenda" of the rioters - I've never presumed them anymore than a riot and I would never argue the folks involved as disenchanted political activists - they're no doubt far too ignorant to have a context of the possible why's and the how's. What I questioned was what motivated such anger and perverse ethics, and I suggested that it was more complex than "barbarians in our midst". Please point out my broad accusation. Stobbart, yourself, and DD have all clearly stated these are mere criminals with no motive. I'm happy to assent to punishing criminals. What I argue is that motives exist beyond simple greed, even if the folks involved are too apathetic to notice it.
I never said it was. I was arguing with DD's hypothetical that the solution to being an "underclass criminal" was to work hard and become the affluent. Inasmuch as the affluent wreck similar havoc on society, DD's argument amounts to "do as I say, not as I do" - hypocritical elitism. DD admitted as much but nevertheless refused to alter his stance. Ce la vie. EDIT: I think this quote of mine: May imply that the rioters had a political agenda. This is the one quote that I think gives that impression, and I did not intend it to sound absolute - it was a generic statement meant to indicate that discontent is deserved (I think), not that the rioters in question knowingly acted out of such sentiments. Mea culpa.
the always eloquent noel gallagher on the london riots... and i must post this liam gallagher quote b/c it is awesome...
