Disclaimer: Wall of text and some controversial stuff, I'd appreciate if those who did respond actually took the time to read and understand, thank you.
First things first, I don't entirely disagree with the subject of this Critical Miss, but I do disagree. I've seen a lot of posts on either side in this thread and I would like to respond to them all, but I'll just stick to the main subject.
So anyway, we're supposed to be blaming the rioters themselves right? Especially those who committed murder/manslaughter during the conflict or those who simply took advantage of the chaos and looted for personal greed. This I can and also cannot agree with. I absolutely think those who killed or looted were completely at fault and there is no justification for these actions, but its very dangerous to take the actions of the more general rioters out of context and simply call them "animals" (the comic did not reference this, but several subsequent posts did).
Calling people animals or dehumanizing them in any way is an extremely slippery slope that can lead to very dangerous places, especially if the society is willing to let dehumanizing comments become an acceptable way of referring to certain groups of people such as the rioters.
This argument can lead back to such basic concepts as natural prejudice and even eugenics. What I mean by this is that an argument of a Eugenicist (when there was still such a thing) may be something like "the natural state of a black man is to be a slave, whereas the natural state of a white man is to be a master, this is not only current practice, but biological fact." This argument suggests that Africans were slaves not because they were the victims of conquest and colonialism, but because it was natural for them to be so. They were less human than humans. So leading back to my argument about dehumanization, it is not only simplistic, but also dangerous to dehumanize the rioters as a whole by doing so we assume that those who riot are naturally uncivilized, prone to violence, and need to be ruled with an iron fist (ie., a master-slave relationship). Sound familiar?
Naturally those who did the worst crimes should (and hopefully will) be punished, but as for those who were explosively expressing their rage and fury in response to years of exploitation, prejudice, and hopelessness? They need to be understood on a different level. Logic did not cause these riots and they cannot be viewed through a lens of rational thought, to understand the why we need to be willing to see things on their level or else it can not be truly said that what caused the build up of so many suppressed emotions has been addressed or solved at all.
Concluding my main point, there is no justification for a riot, but there are reasons. These reasons need to be addressed or this will happen again. Not today, not tomorrow, but the cycle will repeat.
Don't believe me?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots
Replace L.A. with London, Rodney King's beating and trail with Mark Duggan's shooting, and the entire thing seems eerily similar.
Also:
George H.W. Bush
Conversely, President Bush argued that the unrest was "purely criminal". Though he acknowledged that the King verdicts were plainly unjust, he maintained that "we simply cannot condone violence as a way of changing the system ... Mob brutality, the total loss of respect for human life was sickeningly sad ... What we saw last night and the night before in Los Angeles is not about civil rights. It's not about the great cause of equality that all Americans must uphold. It's not a message of protest. It's been the brutality of a mob, pure and simple."[59]
vs.
David Cameron
http://in.reuters.com/video/2011/08/11/cameron-recalls-uk-parliament-over-riots?videoId=218214443&videoChannel=117762
19 years and the responses to the riots are virtually identical, I mean you could practically play political Mad Libs with either of these speeches and you'd get the speech that'd be given for NEXT time this happens. The cycle needs to end, and it starts with understanding, not demonizing.
First things first, I don't entirely disagree with the subject of this Critical Miss, but I do disagree. I've seen a lot of posts on either side in this thread and I would like to respond to them all, but I'll just stick to the main subject.
So anyway, we're supposed to be blaming the rioters themselves right? Especially those who committed murder/manslaughter during the conflict or those who simply took advantage of the chaos and looted for personal greed. This I can and also cannot agree with. I absolutely think those who killed or looted were completely at fault and there is no justification for these actions, but its very dangerous to take the actions of the more general rioters out of context and simply call them "animals" (the comic did not reference this, but several subsequent posts did).
Calling people animals or dehumanizing them in any way is an extremely slippery slope that can lead to very dangerous places, especially if the society is willing to let dehumanizing comments become an acceptable way of referring to certain groups of people such as the rioters.
This argument can lead back to such basic concepts as natural prejudice and even eugenics. What I mean by this is that an argument of a Eugenicist (when there was still such a thing) may be something like "the natural state of a black man is to be a slave, whereas the natural state of a white man is to be a master, this is not only current practice, but biological fact." This argument suggests that Africans were slaves not because they were the victims of conquest and colonialism, but because it was natural for them to be so. They were less human than humans. So leading back to my argument about dehumanization, it is not only simplistic, but also dangerous to dehumanize the rioters as a whole by doing so we assume that those who riot are naturally uncivilized, prone to violence, and need to be ruled with an iron fist (ie., a master-slave relationship). Sound familiar?
Naturally those who did the worst crimes should (and hopefully will) be punished, but as for those who were explosively expressing their rage and fury in response to years of exploitation, prejudice, and hopelessness? They need to be understood on a different level. Logic did not cause these riots and they cannot be viewed through a lens of rational thought, to understand the why we need to be willing to see things on their level or else it can not be truly said that what caused the build up of so many suppressed emotions has been addressed or solved at all.
Concluding my main point, there is no justification for a riot, but there are reasons. These reasons need to be addressed or this will happen again. Not today, not tomorrow, but the cycle will repeat.
Don't believe me?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots
Replace L.A. with London, Rodney King's beating and trail with Mark Duggan's shooting, and the entire thing seems eerily similar.
Also:
George H.W. Bush
Conversely, President Bush argued that the unrest was "purely criminal". Though he acknowledged that the King verdicts were plainly unjust, he maintained that "we simply cannot condone violence as a way of changing the system ... Mob brutality, the total loss of respect for human life was sickeningly sad ... What we saw last night and the night before in Los Angeles is not about civil rights. It's not about the great cause of equality that all Americans must uphold. It's not a message of protest. It's been the brutality of a mob, pure and simple."[59]
vs.
David Cameron
http://in.reuters.com/video/2011/08/11/cameron-recalls-uk-parliament-over-riots?videoId=218214443&videoChannel=117762
19 years and the responses to the riots are virtually identical, I mean you could practically play political Mad Libs with either of these speeches and you'd get the speech that'd be given for NEXT time this happens. The cycle needs to end, and it starts with understanding, not demonizing.