August 11, 2011

Columns I haven't read

From the Washington Post:

Behind Britain’s riots

Behind Britain’s riots
What do the looters want?

I dunno ... Loot?

51 comments:

Scott said...

LOL.

Anonymous said...

Yea, free stuff.

dearieme said...

And the thrill of running riot.

Anonymous said...

i usually don't post this but... LOL!

green mamba said...

Classic.

Hunsdon said...

Hunsdon said:

Alex, I'll take "Loot for $1000."

Dennis Dale said...

He finds them as vexing as women.

elvisd said...

Hey, could one of you post a 10 point program on that new Blackberry of yours?

Reg Cæsar said...

But not sex. (Yet.)

grauniad said...

Unfortunately for me I followed the link and read it. The entire thing is quotes from other newspapers (plus "a Somali-born cellphone store owner" he talked to for 3 minutes). He concludes with a threat to U.S. ("Tottenham youth workers cut by 75000%; you're next")

Lara said...

This is almost as funny as your Henry Louis Gates/Bob Dylan comparison.

Anonymous said...

Flatscreen tvs, the next constitutional right.

Anonymous said...

You are missing the point entirely. They want Social Justice! They want to spread the wealth around!
There is a price to be paid for this kind of fevered rhetoric, and Britain is now paying it.
Let's see if the British press can spin its way out of this one.

DCThrowback said...

Gary North had an interesting column today comparing the riots from Watts in '65, LA in '92 & London today.

http://www.garynorth.com/public/8351.cfm

His conclusion:

Understand what has happened in 2011 in Great Britain. This is not social revolution. There is no list of grievances. There are no spokesmen. This is well-organized banditry. This is the most dangerous of all mobs: one without a leader to negotiate with or arrest.

Why the riots? The Left's party line never changes: not enough jobs, not enough state welfare. You can read it here. The article says the riots may be coming to the United States. I thoroughly agree.

I have a different analysis regarding the causes. First, there is state-funded education, k-12 (or dropping out). Second, there are minimum wage laws, which hit black teenage males most of all. Third, there is a complete breakdown of families, subsidized by state welfare. Fourth, there is envy. Fifth, there is jealousy. Sixth, the cost of organizing violence is falling steadily. The fun and excitement of violence are tempting to young men with no roots and no fathers at home. When you have a falling price for a forbidden fruit, you get riots. Combine it with racial hatred and a life of envy, and you get riots.

The jealous steal. The envious burn. They're already in a city near you.

There will be an incident. There always is.

There may be a riot. If there is, governments will react. Freedoms will be removed. Voters will cheer.

Violence feeds on itself.

The victims of banditry will take it for a while. They have been guilt-manipulated for 45 years. But the day will come when they will dig in, the way the Indian shop owners did in London. But, in this country, the victims will be armed.

Better to be tried by 12 than carried by six.

Anonymous said...

Let me be the first to first to wag my finger at you - they're now officially "English" riots, since the Celtic fringe seems to think it can't happen there and wish to dissociate themselves.

Since the Fringe is not afflicted by similar levels of immigration, they might just be right.

Anon.

Anonymous said...

Usually, *they* want "hate crime laws" "affirmative action" more welfare and an end to "racism."

But in England, they already have that. In fact -in England - I could be put in jail for publicly speaking what I just wrote.

So, I guess they just want Free TV's.

Anonymous said...

Yeah that's funny and all Steve but what the looters really want is.......love

Dan in DC

Anonymous said...

Here is an interesting perspective on the riots from somebody concerned with White continuity...

"The bulk of the rioters and looters are Afro-carabeic, the bulk of the areas are Afro-carabeic.

This means that AVERAGE cognitive inequality (ie lower IQ) in these areas will be lower. The evidence for lower cognitive ability is very strong and very consistent. No amount of resources (no child left behind nearly doubled resources), teacher cajoling, teacher scapegoating and harassing; no amount of modified, culturally appropriate schooling has ever closed the gap in at least 60 years, although miracle educational experiments and environmental enrichment programs ,which inevitably disappear again, help sustain the delusions of the faithful.

Associated with the lower IQ is lower impulse control, lower ability to imagine consequences and higher prevalence of psychopathy.

The higher proportion of people of lower cognitive ability means the critical mass required for a breakdown in social order is much closer to the tipping point.

Many of blacks in these areas are certainly good people however many more than in a typical White community are not good people.

Now as to the “White” participants in the looting.

Many of the Whites in these areas are the “White underclass” who could not participate in “White flight” and are likely at the lower end of the cognitive spectrum. There are less low IQ Whites but they are concentrated in these areas alongside the Afro-carabeics.

And additional factor is the deculturation and deracination that has accompanied the succesfull ethno-marxist efforts counter cultural deconstruction. All the talk of institutional racism, white privileged, has worked, all the blame Whitey talk has worked. This breakdown is EXACTLY what countercultutralists talk of achieving.

Whites not longer feel they belong to anything whether it be Christianity or being English.

Afro-carabeics are now steeped in resentment, a ‘religion’ preached to them by ‘progressives’ as well as their own. It is really a result of the frustration at being unable to function intellectually in a modern economy as Whites, Indians, Sihks can. Stoddards ‘revolt against civilisation’ come true.

I as a White racist will never commit a crime: not against my White brethren, who I would die for as I would for my children. Nor will I ever commit a crime against another race out of the pride of not embarrassing my own race and simply out of conscience and respect for the other ethnie or individual. Neither Whites nor White racialists are haters despite the rhetoric of Searchlight/SPLC/HopeNotHate etc.

Globalisation ideology has similarly to ethno-marxism disconnected many Whites from any sense of community; in particular this applies not only to the White underclass but to also to elites with either left or right orientation. Blair didn’t care about the working class British when he piled more immigrants on top of them.

It is no longer worth investing oneself in anything. There is no sense of pride that makes it seem worth investing any further, no sense of stewardship. Mutual obligation is an abstraction not a sensibility anchored in spirit and or blood.

Supposedly people like you are investing in the ideology of multiculturalism as a substitute for religion. It is your ideal, your Kingdom of God, your 2nd coming.. It doesn’t work in reality as the Flash mobs, riots, looting, subway bombings show. It’s as ridiculous and unreal as a pink she elephant goddess.

It is no surprise that a community compartmentalised and divided by diversity, dragged down in sections by low cognitive ability should be the first to breakdown. It is no surprise that a society de-constructed by an endless war on Western values and religion should then show no values but the culture of resentment and disenfranchisement around which it was reconstructed."

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/08/london-feels-the-strength/?show=comments

Anonymous said...

This guy calls himself a journalist?

Anonymous said...

John Derbyshire estimates that blacks comprise about 2% of the British population but 60 - 70% of the rioters.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/274226/epitaph-britain-john-derbyshire#

Anonymous said...

I believe the rapper Notorious B.I.G. explained this in one of his songs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEPgA4ZQf0U

Anonymous said...

Here is some of the evidence that people here were asking for:


Pakistanis and Indians Jailed for Starting Birmingham riots

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top-stories/2011/08/11/saltley-man-first-to-be-jailed-for-birmingham-riots-full-court-report-from-first-day-of-prosecutions-97319-29216078/



...

Jack Aubrey said...

"What do the looters want? I dunno ... Loot?"

To follow their natural inclination, which is violence and brutality. A riot is a breakdown in civil order that lets them do so with at least the illusion of invincibility. They want to do on a large scale what they've been doing on a small scale so much of their lives - hurting, stealing, intimidating people, and in general getting everything they want.

Anonymous said...

Get your free electronic goods by organizing looting with electronic devices.

Digitalnacht.

Anonymous said...

If police go easy on such communities, people complain the cops are neglecting them and not doing enough.
If cops aggressively go after crime, people complain that cops are 'racially profiling' them.

Well, it seems like black looters racially profile their victims as well. Victims in this case tend to be whites or South Asian/Turkish businessmen.

Anonymous said...

I've a feeling much of the commercial crime is black and white trash on Muslim businessmen who run many of the small shops, especially in depressed areas.

Anonymous said...

Hasn't this guy ever read "Lord of the Flies"?

Anonymous said...

"Why the riots? The Left's party line never changes: not enough jobs, not enough state welfare."

God, I listened to Kirsten Powers, one of Fox's lib commentators, argue that this morning.

After she realized her friend Anthony Wiener had lied to her and she wrote a scathing piece calling for his resignation, I thought she had shown some intellectual honesty and had a true Come to Jesus moment.

Alas, her dribble this morning proved me wrong.

RKU said...

Seriously, doesn't this once again underscore the *astonishing* power of the electronic media to shape the reality of our world?

Consider a thought-experiment in which the MSM presented the London Riots with a very different "spin" and very different visuals. I'd think that the behavioral reactions of the politicians, police, and citzenry would be utterly different, even if their initial ideological perspectives were exactly as before. In fact, I'd suspect that if even just 10% of the media took this "contrary" approach, it could probably swing the majority of the population and the elites in that direction. As that famous psychological research experiment showed, most people are just such sheep-like idiots that if all their peers say Up is Down, they'll Baa! in agreement, but if there's a lack of unanimity, they might possibly consider observing reality for themselves.

The sheer Pavlovian response of the masses to these explicit MSM orders to Cheer!, Clap!, or Boo! is really quite grotesque to watch...

An exceptionally intelligent but completely apolitical scientific friend of my mine always used to claim that since people were so stupid, deciding things based on democracy made absolutely no sense and would get us all into a lot of trouble one of these days. I always disputed this, arguing that democracy wasn't nearly as bad as he was making it out to be, and it hadn't managed to totally wreck the country over the last couple of centuries. But based on the events of the last few years, I've had to admit he really had a pretty fair point.

Whiskey said...

Major chain stores were looted/burnt, and one famous furniture store in the same family (English not Pakistani or the like) for 150 years was burnt down, no reason other than arson "fun."

And yes it is worth noting, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, and Scotland which all have Pakistanis, Indians, and Caribbean Blacks had as of this date no rioting. Edinburgh and Glasgow have plenty of all them, but no riots. I have no idea why either.

Anonymous said...

"Rioting is now a new, official Olympic sport", reported an excited BBC commentator. "At last, there's a sport at which England can genuinely hope to be competitive.
This is a perfect outlet for our inner city youth, some of whom are justly frustrated at being shut out of chess or synchronized swimming".

The British team is practising hard, and expected to "walk away" with the gold, silver and bronze.

Anon.

Kylie said...

"'Rioting is now a new, official Olympic sport', reported an excited BBC commentator. 'At last, there's a sport at which England can genuinely hope to be competitive.
This is a perfect outlet for our inner city youth, some of whom are justly frustrated at being shut out of chess or synchronized swimming'.

The British team is practising hard, and expected to 'walk away' with the gold, silver and bronze."


Let's hope they do; otherwise I shudder to think how much damage they'll do with the Olympic torch.

Anonymous said...

"Why the riots? The Left's party line never changes: not enough jobs, not enough state welfare."

Since riots started in the 60s with beginning of massive welfare, shouldn't the logical conclusion be 'welfare leads to riots'?

Anonymous said...

"Why do looters loot?"

How about

"Why do white liberals take flight from black areas?"

Anonymous said...

Well... the invaders finally burst out of the Immigration Trojan Horse(or Bus). It looks like the ending of TROY.

Reg Cæsar said...

Second, there are minimum wage laws, which hit black teenage males most of all. --DCThrowback

No one could survive on what their labor is actually worth.

The foreign-born should be subject to severely high minimum-wage laws: at least $20/hr. If you can't make that right off the boat, you should get right back on it and sail home. You have no place here.

Entry-level wages should be reserved for one's own.

Anonymous said...

British military helpless against rioters

Unreconstructed Palecon said...

The article says the riots may be coming to the United States.

Not to the Red States.

We're armed to the teeth.

And "they" know it.


I always disputed this, arguing that democracy wasn't nearly as bad as he was making it out to be, and it hadn't managed to totally wreck the country over the last couple of centuries. But based on the events of the last few years, I've had to admit he really had a pretty fair point.

Yeah, well at least our ancestors had the prescience to bequeath us the RKBA.

So tell your friend to go shove it.

Anonymous said...

When you are on welfare you don't care if you have an arrest record. When you have no career you don't care if someone posts you rioting on facebook. When you don't need to maintain a reputation in the community in order to make ends meat why bother?

Anonymous said...

An exceptionally intelligent but completely apolitical scientific friend of my mine always used to claim that since people were so stupid, deciding things based on democracy made absolutely no sense and would get us all into a lot of trouble one of these days. I always disputed this, arguing that democracy wasn't nearly as bad as he was making it out to be, and it hadn't managed to totally wreck the country over the last couple of centuries. But based on the events of the last few years, I've had to admit he really had a pretty fair point.

8/11/11 10:40 PM
------

You and your friend have your terms confused. "Democracy" is not the problem.

"Universal Sufferage" is the problem. People that contribute nothing should receive just that: NOTHING.

Athens and The Original USA did not grant Universal Sufferage. Things were different then.

The populace needs something to strive for. If they have no goal, you see what happens. Having a job, having a house, having two parents raise their biological children, not being convicted felons are goals to receive your vote. In other words only productive members of society should vote.

Eric said...

Since riots started in the 60s with beginning of massive welfare, shouldn't the logical conclusion be 'welfare leads to riots'?

Riots didn't start in the '60s. There have been periodic riots in the US since before it was a country.

Truth said...

"Riots didn't start in the '60s. There have been periodic riots in the US since before it was a country."

Bingo!

The Boston Tea Party was a riot, so were the revolutionary war and the Southern Succession.

RKU said...

Unreconstructed Palecon: The article says the riots may be coming to the United States...Not to the Red States...We're armed to the teeth...Yeah, well at least our ancestors had the prescience to bequeath us the RKBA.

Hmm, that's interesting. Offhand, I'd say that over the last forty-odd years, many, many millions of "mainstream" Americans have been driven out of their homes and neighborhoods, often quite violently, in waves of quasi-ethnic cleansing. And that certainly includes considerable portions of the so-called Red States.

Strangely enough, the RKBA remained fully in effect during this entire period, and in fact the number of firearms in personal ownership vastly increased, while political support for RKBA also skyrocketed. So what, exactly, was the usefulness of this much-exalted RKBA?

My own conclusion is that Mao was quite mistaken, and that under normal conditions power grows out of the barrel of a TV camera, not a gun. And that the WNs have a pretty valid point when they endlessly ridicule the "Faileocons"...

Anonymous said...

"What do the rioters want"?

They just want to be loved.

Anonymous said...

Now could be your only chance ta torch a police car!

Tomorrow you're homeless ...

Tonight it's a blast!

Kylie said...

"over the last forty-odd years, many, many millions of "mainstream" Americans have been driven out of their homes and neighborhoods, often quite violently, in waves of quasi-ethnic cleansing."

If you mean "white flight", it would be more accurate to say they were driven to sell their homes and move out of their neighborhoods by worries about decreasing property values and the threat of violence.

That's quite different from having one's home or business burned down in a riot.

Anonymous said...

Can you dig it? Can you dig it?

Anonymous said...

"Riots didn't start in the '60s. There have been periodic riots in the US since before it was a country."

I was talking about massive black riots.

NOTA said...

RKU:

Similarly, growing up in the Midwest, I always heard people say that a police state could never arise here, because of all the people with guns. It's now more or less routine to have jackbooted thugs raid people's houses in the middle of the night, often killing the dogs and sometimes killing the people, looking for small-time drug dealers. Reading between the lines in what's allowed to come out in the MSM, it's clear that everyone is tracked by their cellphone, and that electronic communications are massively vacuumed up and processed by the NSA. It came out a few years ago that the ICE was running what amounted to a secret network of jails for suspected illegal immigrants, which were known to have sucked up US citizens on occasion, and which were known to have been used explicitly to keep immigrants away from family and lawyers.

My prior beliefs were, frankly, horseshit. Widespread ownership of guns in the US has caused very little push back on any of this stuff. I expect the same to be true of widespread rioting--owning a gun will probably help you defend yourself short-term, bt long term, people with the means will simply move further away from the ghettoes if there's more rioting, at best. (And since the rioters will also be armed, it's not like the 20 gauge shotgun in your closet is some kind of magic rioter-dispersing magic wand.)

Londoner said...

Whiskey is once again either lying or mistaken. Scotland, Wales and Northern Irend have trivial numbers of blacks and only small numbers of other non-Europeans, principally Pakistani and Indian small businessmen. Violence in N.I. is monopolized by sectarian-ethnic conflict, although the Loyalist Unionists are well known to victimize non-whites on occasion. The picture in Scotland is similar, especially In Glasgow and the west, where sectarian tensions mirror and feed off those in N.I. Scotland is a violent society with a high murder rate and much knife crime. Wales is poor and suffers from similar low-level white underclass violence to that found in England.

But it's true, riots such as those seen in England could not happen in S, W or NI for a lack of sheer immigrant numbers and the associated chaos and disharmony, and of course the lack of one group in particular (I'll repeat - Whiskey is lying). The Scots are taking great pleasure in England's misfortune, kidding themselves that it couldn't happen in their country because of their innate superiority as human beings and castigating those few English people who dare to speak the truth about what is happening. The reality is of course that simple demographics is largely to blame.

Anonymous said...

It's now more or less routine to have jackbooted thugs raid people's houses in the middle of the night, often killing the dogs and sometimes killing the people, looking for small-time drug dealers.

The insane proliferation of SWAT teams (and their regularly being used for trivial stuff that Barney Fife would handle on his own in the 50's)is something that should draw more attention.

Liberals would have you think that deep blue states are more sensitive to civil liberties:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/03/01/45-swat-raids-per-day
"Over the last six months of 2009, SWAT teams were deployed 804 times in the state of Maryland, or about 4.5 times per day. In Prince George's County alone, with its 850,000 residents, a SWAT team was deployed about once per day. According to a Baltimore Sun analysis, 94 percent of the state's SWAT deployments were used to serve search or arrest warrants, leaving just 6 percent in response to the kinds of barricades, bank robberies, hostage takings, and emergency situations for which SWAT teams were originally intended.Worse even than those dreary numbers is the fact that more than half of the county’s SWAT deployments were for misdemeanors and nonserious felonies."