You do not have to subscribe to the liberal-left agenda to understand the role of "respect" in society. In fact, this is as much a right-wing concept and one with which the military is entirely familiar. So fundamental is this concept that one could argue that, without it, there can be no society. And thus, we argue that the loss of respect is a significant causal factor in these riots.
Furthermore, we are not alone. Esther Addley talks a great deal of sense, writing about: "A generation who don't respect their parents or police". If there is a fault in what she writes, it is that her article is cast too narrowly. The broader point is that the loss of respect is not just confined to her subjects. One only has to read the forum attached to this blog to appreciate how far respect has been eroded across the board.
Looking at this from an entirely personal stance, I would readily concede that I have almost no respect for politicians, precious little for the institutions of state, and none at all for the police. Nor, I would suspect, am I alone in such a stance.
Now, the point is that if we are so lacking is that vital quality, why is it that we should be so adamant in expecting that those who many would prefer to think of as the "lower orders" should have any respect for the very institutions that we shun? Putting it personally again, how can I expect them to have any respect for the police when I have none?
In order then to take this thought further, we then have to remind ourselves that respect is not given but earned. If the "lower orders" do not respect our institutions, that is not their fault. We lack institutions which are worthy of respect, and capable of earning it. Of this, really, we must not lose sight. And when we fully take that on board, we might then start to make some progress.
COMMENT THREAD
This is the good news - that people are banding together to protect their own property and environs. Note, though, that one shop owner reports police telling defenders that they should not bring their weapons onto the street. They were "entitled" to defend themselves [only] inside their premises.
We also note the report about the Bengali community in Whitechapel, further into East London, which fended off a mob of looters. Rioters who had targeted shops on Commercial Road arrived in the area as prayers were finishing at the East London Mosque on Monday evening. It was feared they were trying to break into the mosque and the nearby Islamic Bank of Britain, but they were driven away by a large crowd of Muslim worshippers.
"Within about 10 minutes there were 1,500 people on the street, not just Asians but also Somalis", says Muhammad Ali, 27 – cited in the report. "We were at a chicken shop, finishing our fast when we saw the looters. Some had bandanas over their faces". According to Sam Miah, 26, the riot police were unsure what to do. "They saw our brothers from the mosque and we said we could handle the situation".
And all this lends another dimension to an already complex situation – although one has to approve in principle the idea that people should take charge of their own communities and their own safety. One then sees the police uncertainty when confronted with the idea.
There is an interesting contrast here, between this self-help response, and outsiders calling for the Army to be called in, and/or for draconian measures to be taken by the police. Arguably, one alternative response might be to revert to the style of policing we see in the fictional Westerns, where the Sheriff swears-in a posse of deputies to deal with a threat.
The merit of such an option is that it formalises (and legitimises) community action – allowing people to take part in the protection of their property without fear of intervention by the police. In effect, it reinforces the idea that a community problem might best be dealt-with by the community. The best police response might be to invite and organise a community response – and then back it up.
Furthermore, this should be a first, rather than last resort. Not least, this then recognises that a breakdown of law and order is not a police problem, per se, but a community problem, of which the police are part. This re-establishes links and communal responsibility, positioning the police as part of the community response and not as an occupying power.
Here, I fall out with Charles Moore and his injunction that "a Tory PM must always deliver peace and order". I would sooner have it that the responsibility goes where it belongs - not to a plump old Etonian, but to individuals and the communities in which they live.
It is they who should be empowered and encouraged to take responsibility for their own safety and security, with the assistance of the police. Such security is not within the capability of a prime minister to deliver, and nor should a national politician be entrusted with that task.
On the other hand, there is a problem with some of the more draconian responses suggested. Initial action might be successful in suppressing violence, but at the risk of alienating still further sections of the community that already feel oppressed or excluded.
It must always be remembered that a communities must then be policed after riots, when fewer resources are routinely available. Thus, solutions should, perhaps, be looked at in the round. What might work in the short term might be less attractive if it stores up trouble for the future and makes longer-term solutions more difficult.
COMMENT THREAD
A point of view, from the other side – as the IPCC confirms that Mark Duggan did not shoot at police. Much heat, not a lot of light, and about as close to the target as much of the rest of the "analysis".
COMMENT THREAD
Farage shows himself to be completely without understanding or judgement. Crass does not even begin to describe it.
BBC Radio 4 News had two 17 year-old-girls who had been involved in the looting. "It's all about showing the police that we can do what we want to do. It's all about showing the rich people we can do what we want to do", they said. Nice one Farage ... call in the Army to protect the "rich people" from 17-year-old girls.
COMMENT THREAD
"Angry business owners in south London confronted mayor Boris Johnson about a night of violence which saw shops smashed up and burned", says the BBC. Unable to answer them, Boris turned and walked away.
Exposed at last is the emptiness of a showman - a man who is all "style" and no substance who, when it comes to the crunch, is himself a vandal at heart. Politically, he's finished.
COMMENT THREAD
With The Boy doing his photo-opportunity tour, and recalling parliament to let a load of ignorant windbags prattle, we see the very worst of mindless journalism from the Evening Standard - exactly that sort of shallow, brain-dead EVM that got us into trouble in the first place.
"Plans for deep cuts in the [Met-Plod] force's funding - and in that of the criminal justice system - will have to be reconsidered", says the paper, adding the brain-rotting cliché, "The safety of the capital's citizens must be paramount". It then goes on to say that: "... whatever the devastation today, Londoners and their police force will beat this thuggery and come back stronger".
There is no doubt that the state can put enough of its own thugs on the streets to suppress violent disorder, but that is a long way from being able to "beat this thuggery". To do that, you have to understand what is going on, and the root causes of the disturbances. I see no evidence of this being done.
Earlier, I walked in on a TV news interview with the specialist in the study of riot psychology, from Liverpool. I missed his name but the fragment I caught made sense. Crucially, he said, you cannot divorce the behaviour during riots from what went before. Longer term, he added, prevention of disorder required "building police legitimacy within communities". And, of course, if the police are regarded with contempt throughout the wider community, that isn't going to happen.
The police, therefore, need not only to build bridges with the affected communities, but with the rest of the people they supposedly serve. And I do not see them doing that. In the first instance, they barely if at all realise they have a problem and, where they do, they do not have the first ideas of how to go about securing improvements.
But there is a bigger problem in that police are not only seen for what they are, but as the representative of The Man ... the parasite class. And as long as those are seen as contemptible (and deservedly so), the police are going to struggle to build their own legitimacy.
Thus, the problem is not just down to the police to solve. Their crisis of legitimacy is a crisis for the political (aka parasite) classes as a whole, who are also going to have to change their ways. And the parasites are not even off first base – they haven't started to understand that they too are a major part of the problem.
That then leaves us in the clutches of "mindless journalism". Tough talk, and even tougher action, will simply drive the problem underground for a while – out of sight. But it will not be solved, and will not go away. In time – and sooner that the prattling fools realise - it will be back. London, and the nation, will be weaker for it, not stronger.
COMMENT THREAD
We have often remarked that our politicians do what they do because they have lost their fear of us. Similarly, we seeing criminals doing what they do because they have also lost their fear... of the law.
When a recidivist may plough down Arbroath High Street smashing shop windows and ripping off wing mirrors and be told sternly that he must pay £5 a week from his benefits, while his legal aid solicitor tells the court how much progress he has made with his social worker... and then saunter out of court smirking, you just know the game is up.
The justice system has lost it. The plods can haul em in, but they will be out on Monday and up to the same old tricks. And since the Police lost control after bungling a riot, the criminal element have simply worked out that the police are on the back foot and they can't be everywhere at once. Is anyone surprised?
This is the culmination of welfarism, political correctness, minimum wage and an overly "liberal" justice system. And for all the whining we hear about damaged shops and businesses, well, this is what you get. You get the government, and thus the criminals and the police, you deserve. As we keep saying, if you take no interest in politics, it will take an interest in you.
Posts
