• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Causes and Effects of the London/England Riots

LucyDuke

staring at the clock
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
13,583
Location
where mise
Spoiler :
Q&A: What sparked the London riots?

London (CNN) -- Controversy continues to surround the death of 29-year-old Mark Duggan in north London on Thursday evening.

His shooting at the hands of police while he was travelling in a taxi cab sparked rioting and looting in Tottenham on Saturday. The unrest subsequently spread across London and other parts of the UK in what police have described as copycat attacks.

How did Duggan die?

Officers from Operation Trident -- the Metropolitan Police unit that deals with gun crime in London's black communities -- stopped the cab Duggan was travelling in during a pre-planned operation.

Duggan, a father of four, died of a single gunshot wound to the chest, an inquest at north London Coroner's Court heard on Tuesday. The inquiry was told that the incident occurred at 6.15pm local time and that Duggan was pronounced dead at 6.45pm.

There are varying accounts of the sequence of events -- initial reports from the IPCC said that during an apparent exchange of gun fire police officers fired two shots and Duggan died at the scene.

There was a suggestion that officers could have come under fire from the car carrying Duggan.

This assumption came from the fact that a bullet had lodged in a police radio worn by an officer at the scene, raising speculation he might have been fired at from the vehicle.

A non-police issue handgun was also recovered at the scene where Duggan was shot dead, the IPCC said.

However, a report in the Guardian on Monday said that initial tests by the National Ballistics Intelligence Service on the bullet found lodged in the police radio suggested that the bullet fragments were from police-issue ammunition, meaning they could not have been from a weapon fired by Duggan, casting doubt on claims that he was killed in an exchange of gunfire.

The IPCC said it would not comment on the Guardian report until all ballistics and forensic tests were complete.

Why did the police want to arrest him?

Trident officers, backed up by a CO19 detachment -- the Metropolitan Police's specialist gun unit -- were conducting a "pre-planned" operation to arrest Duggan. According to numerous media reports, Duggan was a suspected north London gang member who went by the street name "Starrish Mark."

What happened next?

On Saturday evening at around 5.30pm local time about 120 people, including members of Duggan's family and community workers, marched to Tottenham police station in north London, only a short distance from the scene of the shooting.

The march was peaceful according to reports, with protesters calling for "justice" and an investigation. Local roads were closed and traffic diverted.

About two hours later violence erupted, with gangs of youths attacking police cars, buses, shops, banks and other buildings. There was widespread looting in and around Tottenham.

What sparked the rioting is still unclear but police said: "We believe that certain elements, who were not involved with the vigil, took the opportunity to commit disorder and physically attack police officers, verbally abuse fire brigade personnel and destroy vehicles and buildings."

Why did the riots spread to other parts of London and the UK?

Police say the subsequent riots in other parts of London and the UK are copycat events that have little or nothing to do with the death of Duggan.

On Monday evening rioting had taken place in several London locations, including Battersea in south London, Ealing in the west and Hackney in east London. Disturbances were also reported in Birmingham in central England, Bristol in the southwest and Liverpool in northwest England.

On Sunday evening and in the early hours of Monday, rioting and looting was reported from several other parts of London, including Brixton in south London, Enfield in north London and Oxford Street in central London, the capital's main shopping district.

Are there enough police officers?

A video report from Battersea in south London on Monday evening showed gangs of youths roaming the streets, smashing and looting shops with apparent impunity. The Sky News reporter who shot the scenes on his mobile phone said he could not see a single policeman. There were similar reports from other parts of London leading to claims that there were not enough police to keep the peace.

According to the Metropolitan Police, 16,000 police officers will be on duty in London during the next 24-hour period. They also announced that all police leave had been cancelled.

The head of London's Metropolitan Police has called for all Special Constables -- volunteer police officers -- to report for duty.

What options do the police have to quell the unrest?

The police introduced special powers in four areas of London on Sunday -- Lambeth, Haringey, Enfield and Waltham Forest -- allowing stop and search without reasonable suspicion in a bid to keep rioters off the streets.

In theory, parliament could invoke powers to implement curfews, use water canons or even call in the armed forces.

However, senior politicians and police officers have said that these options are unlikely to be used unless the situation got significantly worse.

In 1981 police used CS gas for the first time to control civil unrest in mainland Britain during the Toxteth riots in Liverpool, northwest England.

Was social media a factor?

London's Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Kavanagh said that smart phones and social networks like Twitter had been used by criminals to liaise. "It's a group of individuals using modern technology to cause chaos," he said.

Other reports say BlackBerry's messaging service was a popular means of communication to spread news about the violence.

Are there any parallels with the 1985 Tottenham riots?

Only superficially, but some might argue that today, as in 1985, there is a racial element to the troubles.

In 1985 Floyd Jarrett, who was of Afro-Caribbean origin, was stopped by police near the Broadwater Farm estate in Tottenham on suspicion of driving with a forged tax disc.

A few hours later officers raided the nearby home of his mother, who collapsed and died during the raid. Her family said she was pushed by the police, a claim they deny. Rioting erupted shortly afterwards. Like the recent troubles, it was a protest outside Tottenham Police Station which sparked the 1985 conflict.

Police officer Keith Blakelock was stabbed to death by a gang during the riots as he tried to protect fire crews.

What about the riots in London and the UK last year?

They were student riots against tuition fee rises, although they were also marred by violence.

What next?

The IPCC is conducting an investigation. Colin Sparrow, deputy senior investigator for the IPCC, told an inquest into the death at north London Coroner's Court heard on Tuesday that their "complex investigation" could take four to six months.

The IPCC commissioner said in a written statement: "[We are] investigating not only the actions of the officer firing the shots but also the planning, decision making and implementation of the police operation. Our lines of enquiry include the bullets fired and any firearms used and recovered."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/08/08/uk.london.riots.tottenham/index.html
How did a peaceful protest trigger mass arson and looting? Was this just waiting for a trigger - and what is "this", populist anger about police, about poverty? Is there a message from the rioters that we should listen to, that is, can we trust the ones that explain their actions, or are the explanations just shallow rationalizations? If they're only rationalizing, what does explain their actions?

How much of an impact did the twitter have? Did the live media coverage shape the events significantly? Did police behave appropriately to contain the damage? What could they have done differently?

What kind of political repercussions will this have? What kind should it have?

Will there be more tonight? What will be done if there is?


PLEASE DO NOT spam with uninsightful crap about "rioters=animals" or "there is no reason this happened" or naked political fingerpointing. (Political fingerpointing should be accompanied by interesting reasoning.) If your post isn't going to contribute to us understanding what's happening, make it in the other thread.
 
I wonder why this CNN story doesn't mention the 16-year-old girl who was allegedly beaten with batons by cops at the peaceful protest mentioned in the above article.

'Attack' on teenage girl blamed for start of Tottenham riot

A rumoured attack on a teenage girl by police has been widely blamed for triggering Saturday night’s riot.
The video of the girl apparently being beaten in this article was originally posted by Traitorfish in the Tottenham thread on page 8, and there is another Youtube video from a BBC interview that I posted on the same page which claims the girl did not throw any objects at the cops. That she merely walked up to them and demanded answers.

There have also been numerous reports in the press of apologies from the London police for not keeping Mark Duggan's family properly informed as to what was occurring.

Police apologise to Mark Duggan's family for failing to keep them informed

A row has broken out between police and the body charged with investigating them over who let down the family of Mark Duggan by failing to keep them informed of what had happened to him.

The family of Duggan, shot dead by police on Thursday, said they were angered by the lack of information they received, and that their upset stoked tensions immediately before Saturday's riot in Tottenham.
There was also remarks apparently made to the press that the police had been shot at by Mark Duggan, but those comments have now been repudiated by one of the officers at the scene.

It seems like one of the major problems fueling these incidents is that the police have been very slow to respond to what is actually going on.
 
How much of an impact did the twitter have? Did the live media coverage shape the events significantly?

Don't know enough about the UK, I'll only venture an answer to this: no new impact, because riots have occurred many times before. News have a way of getting around, doesn't matter the medium.
Media coverage can influence the evolution and political outcome, not really the starting.
 
I just want to address the media aspect of these riots until we know more about how Mark Duggan was killed.

One interesting thing I have seen people are using is Blackberry Messenger to "start" riots/gather people up. Instant ways of communication that's pretty hard to track for police, I believe.

On the other side, there's a lot of interesting ways to follow the developing events. YouTube has almost instant videos of various conflicts while Twitter has been used to tell the world where they are happening. The question to me is this helpful or hurtful to communities? On one hand, it could increase participation in looting and rioting but it also raises awareness and helps law enforcement in defusing riot situations. All in all, social media sites will probably be overstated in the role of these riots when all is said and done - it was a tool of communication for citizens AND rioters, but it was not the only tool and it has less affect than a Molotov cocktail on Tottenham High Road has.


Also, in regards to the beginning, I think all riots are the result of a building-up of various political and usually social factors. Mark Duggan was just the trigger to unleash some people's angry. Others see that violence and see that it is "acceptable" and join in in other areas of London and towns. I'd be surprised if these riots could be sustained though, seeing that the general population of London is not behind these rioters and there is a lack of understanding for their causes (- it seems as if the "Rioters=Animals" viewpoint is held A LOT by those in England from what I've seen). Thus, these riots will burn themselves out after releasing their frustration in the coming days, or at least I think so.
 
I wonder why this CNN story doesn't mention the 16-year-old girl who was allegedly beaten with batons by cops at the peaceful protest mentioned in the above article.

That would certainly contribute. But did it? Was that part of the rumoring that sparked the later violence in cities other than London?

Don't know enough about the UK, I'll only venture an answer to this: no new impact, because riots have occurred many times before. News have a way of getting around, doesn't matter the medium.
Media coverage can influence the evolution and political outcome, not really the starting.

Sure, but there were several different "starts" here. Would the tweets from London alone have had the same impact on [insert other city with riots] without all the live arson being broadcast? Or is that irrelevant now that everyone and their dog carries an internet-connected video camera around everywhere?
 
Something was definitely waiting to boil over.

I'd say it was down to poverty and social exclusion. The shooting of Mark Duggan escalated things, but he himself was a victim of the situation those people are living in. People don't just go bad for no reason.

Anger and hopelessness have been festering in those communities for a while now. Some token assistance has been offered which soothed things for a time, but people knew deep down that they were being left to rot. Mark Duggan's death was the ultimate reminder of "their place" in this country.

These people have grown up learning that human lives are disposable, that people have to compete against each other, and that if you can grab it first, it's yours. Now people are suddenly "shocked" that they have no respect for property or other people. Oh my god, it came out of nowhere (not really).

The irony is, what these kids are doing with fire and sticks is little different to what other people have done to them using economic and social policies. One just looks scarier and makes more noise.
 
Also, in regards to the beginning, I think all riots are the result of a building-up of various political and usually social factors. Mark Duggan was just the trigger to unleash some people's angry.

That seems likely to me too, but what are the political and social factors? I've only heard specifically about tension with the police and tuition subsidies being cut.
 
That would certainly contribute. But did it? Was that part of the rumoring that sparked the later violence in cities other than London?
Since the rioting in Tottenham occurred immediately after this incident was supposed to have occurred, it certainly seems like it contributed. That would be true even if it is a rumor, the blurry Youtube video of a woman screaming that the apparent victim is only a girl was concocted, and the eyewitness report of what occurred was also fabricated. But I think it is quite credible, especially given the police haven't even tried to deny it yet. Some have merely insinuated that she threw a rock at them before being apparently beaten and supposedly detained.

But not clarifying what actually happened seems like the worst thing the police could do under the circumstances. That is, unless what the eyewitness claims is true...
 
That seems likely to me too, but what are the political and social factors? I've only heard specifically about tension with the police and tuition subsidies being cut.

Tottenham is a poor area with severe problems of unemployment and some "brutality" (make of that what you want, that's just what I've heard) of the police against blue-collar workers. A lot of racial issues are underlying this whole thing. But I really think the police has a lot to do with this, from what I can tell. Honestly, a similar incident could easily occur in the United States with the build up of time and another trigger incident, like the BART cops shooting that dude in Oakland.
 
People don't just go bad for no reason.

Anger and hopelessness have been festering in those communities for a while now. Some token assistance has been offered which soothed things for a time, but people knew deep down that they were being left to rot. Mark Duggan's death was the ultimate reminder of "their place" in this country.

These people have grown up learning that human lives are disposable, that people have to compete against each other, and that if you can grab it first, it's yours. Now people are suddenly "shocked" that they have no respect for property or other people. Oh my god, it came out of nowhere (not really).

Very reasonable.

So how is that helped? Can it be helped in this generation, or is it impossible to reform someone that already thinks that way? Is there any political will to?

The irony is, what these kids are doing with fire and sticks is little different to what other people have done to them using economic and social policies. One just looks scarier and makes more noise.

Which makes it pretty much a given that there's a moral imperative to do something about the deepest roots of what's happening.
 
Well, aside from the Duggan incident, the causes of this are deeper. Mostly:
- Large majority of young people don't respect the police, or the job they do. A lot of this lack of respect is for good reasons, ones which I agree with. From this viewpoint, I get it.
- Disatisfaction with the government. No one in this country voted for this government, and the policies it has been implementing have been terrible, especially to the working class.

I'd like to think these are the reasons. Hopefully for some they are.

However, in all of this, there is an underlying sense that perhaps it's more "We just want to riot cause we can" - A sense that this soceity is rotten at its core.
 
Don't really care about Mark Duggan but this sort of public reaction to the police is good in general. There seems to have been a lot of anti-police sentiment waiting to explode at the right opportunity.

The rioting itself is unproductive and unfortunate.
 
I think that people are focusing too much on the shooting and videos. What Newbunkle mentioned seems closer to the point of this thread: it was festering, and just needed a trigger - any trigger. It also means that it'll not be some isolated incident.

The government reaction so far demonstrates why the police is one of the main targets of the riots: all the government can think of to deal with social problems is to throw police at them. Obviously, the police will continue to be constructed as en enemy to attack.

The other main target have been stores, and (it looks to me, on what news I've seen) chain stores selling brand products. And for an explanation of that, we have only to look at the price of those products, at wages (or unemployment benefits and social assistance) and at the daily barrage of advertisement associating said products with status and happiness. The rioters are mostly people priced out of conspicuous consumption, yet nevertheless daily encouraged to engage in it.

We can't have a society which both glorifies consumption, glamorizes brand names, etc, and has a large portion of the population unable to do it legally, without setting the stage for explosions of violence like this one. The peaceful solutions are either to take away the emphasis from consumption (but retail commerce and advertisement have grown so important that it'll be very hard to change that culture), or to enforce a much greater income equality so that every one can afford to be a dull middle class consumer. The other solutions is what the british government is attempting: thrown police at any inconvenient breakdown of the system and hope that repression alone can keep it going as it is.
 
Something was definitely waiting to boil over.

I'd say it was down to poverty and social exclusion. The shooting of Mark Duggan escalated things, but he himself was a victim of the situation those people are living in. People don't just go bad for no reason.

Anger and hopelessness have been festering in those communities for a while now. Some token assistance has been offered which soothed things for a time, but people knew deep down that they were being left to rot. Mark Duggan's death was the ultimate reminder of "their place" in this country.

This kind of reminds me of Mohamed Bouazizi, who was the spark (but not the underlying cause) that started the protests/riots/civil wars in the arab world.

It is my belief that whenever you have inequalities in a society, cracks will appear. You just can't get around that.. Then all you need is a spark like Bouazizi and things can spiral out of control pretty quick
 
While I absolutely agree that cops don't help with deep-rooted social and economic dysfunction, I don't see what else can be done to combat mass looting and arson. Then again, it's unclear how effective the police were in keeping any order at all last night.

Interesting how people that feel that the police are worthless (at best) managed to make their more-satisfied neighbors feel the same way for a time.
 
I think as useless also pointed out early in the other thread on the subject.
The closing of youth centres does have an impact.
The cutbacks on things like these, that activate the youth only leads to bad things.
But ofcourse it is just one among many other things that has caused this!

Sex Pistols has been on my mind lately! :)
 
Yeah, this event or series of them, is only a catalyst of all these conflicts between the angry young people and their local authorities. It is similar to what happen in France in 09 and other subsequent events all over the world.

To think of it: underemployment and unemployment is really the key problem for young adults.
 
It's not as if these protests come out of the blue: Student Protests (London), Plaza del Sol (Madrid), Stuttgart 21 (Germany), Pension Reform Protests (France 2010), Italian Protests 2010, Israel (Housing) Protests, Anti-Nuclear Energy Protests/Marches. (And of course the Arab Spring per se!)

It does seem that the number of such protests have grown over the last years. As for the English protests, they are clearly linked with social group on the lower strata that had to suffer from the Financial Cuts following the Financial Crisis. As are most of the others btw. (the other side is the call for more direct participation).

As such, I do fail to see the big news here. It's clear that you cannot bail out the big banks while simultaneously cutting down for those that need it the most.
 
I'm not usually a Torygraph reader, but Mary Riddell (their token social democrat) has written a good analysis piece.

Summary of good points [and my comments]:
- The police failed.[ They had a lot of key people on holiday and trouble blew up quickly, but this is their core business.]
- This isn't a classic black-vs-white ethnic riot [though I'm sure that several hundred years of racism and ethnic tension are a background factor].
- Cuts are not a direct cause [IMHO, the front-line effects have hardly started yet].
- The gross inequalities in society undermine people's respect for property owners and the police. The welfare state that reduced inequality has been partially dismantled.
- The economic downturn has taken away what little hope unemployed young men might have.

I would also add:
(1) The breakdown in family life means that many parents have lost control over their children - and don't even see it as a problem
(2) Building on innonimatu's point, we have a society saturated by advertising and gross materialism (whether the 'bling' culture of mainly-black council estates or the 'property porn' of mainly-white surburban estates), but still a class system that stops people moving out of poverty. If law and order breaks down, why not take what you can?

As warpus writes, Mr Duggan's death was just the spark; the fuel has built up over years.
 
Top Bottom