London Riots.

I haven’t been able to follow the riots in London as much as I wish I could, so I can’t say that I’m really well enough informed to say much about them. 

But when has that ever stopped me?

I grew up in Los Angeles, and I was in my freshman year at Occidental College when the verdict acquitting the four LAPD officers in the beating of Rodney King came down.  I watched my city burn.  I watched helicopter coverage from South Central.  I saw a 7-11 next door to the pizza place from which we would get pizza on Saturday shifts for Saferides trashed.  I heard radio chatter about the national guard needing support while I drove the campus escort van.  I watched flames from what turned out to be the home of an elderly lady from my church.

It was sickening, and I have no doubt that the vast majority of Londoners feel the same way. 

Eventually, hopefully soon, order will be restored and the cleanup can begin.  So will the talking. 

Some will say that the rioting was just caused by thugs, by ill behaved gangs of disaffected youth and criticize the police for not just going in and busting heads.

Others will analyze the social conditions and the underlying causes of the riots. They will criticize the police for busting heads, too often and too rapidly.

The thing is, the answer is somewhere in the middle.  Violence should never be condoned, and once started, it needs to be stopped.  But, to simply take a hard line against the rioters and label them as some kind of dangerous “other” is to dismiss the fact that rioters don’t riot for nothing.  You need a spark to light a fire, but you also need kindling. There is always an underlying cause, maybe understandable, maybe not.  There is always a reason, and that reason needs to be explored and identified.


About Andrew

I'm a Christian, American, liberal, geeky, thoughtful, Northwest-transplanted Angeleno husband, father, and pundit who writes about anything he can think of.
This entry was posted in News and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to London Riots.

  1. Oscar Rivera says:

    I agree with your assertion that violence if very rarely the answer. However, in this case, I’m not really convinced that the riots had much to do with any social ills. Many of the actions carried out in these riots were displays of pure moralistic nihilism and that, I think, is why there was so much media attention.

  2. Andrew says:

    I think that’s possible, but I think even that comes from somewhere or some thing, and it needs to be looked at. Using the fire analogy, once the fire starts, you have to stop it. Working backwards, it’s possible to identify the spark, which may or may not be somebody doing something “wrong”. But what is the difference between the spark that is inconsequential and the one that starts a devastaing conflagration? It’s the kindling. Now, is the kindling social injustice or draconian austerity programs or racist policing? Or, is it “moral decay” or weak family structures or something like that? The truth is, it’s probably a very complex mix of some or all of those things.

What are your "Great" Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s