London's Burning

[Mudfuzz]

i mean, when they were peacefully protesting there weren't threads on ILF about it.

viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19028

[D.o.S.]

In my experience, breaking shit and enacting violence doesn't generally get people to agree with what you're doing.

I'm not justifying it but there are numerous examples in history if you care to look. I also want to point out that in wars or political revolutions, history is written by the winners, not the agree-ers. so the question should really be "has anyone ever had a successful campaign of anything ever in history with a little violence"

It's hard to gain sympathetic ears to your cause if you're running around destroying people's neighborhoods.

That's what I'm talking about.

You're leaping ahead about six stages beyond that. Not that you're wrong (far from it), but it's one thing to run a campaign (say, a Cuba/Chile/South America in the last 50 years) and another to fuck shit up for a cause ala the Weather Underground or the E.L.F.

So the question should really be "has a minority group successfully managed to bring its message to the fore of the local political discourse and cause the majority of otherwise apathetic civilians support said message by resorting to violent activity?"



Answer's no, for those of you keeping score at home.

[My name is Mudd]

i mean, when they were peacefully protesting there weren't threads on ILF about it.

http://www.ilovefuzz.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19028

Not to go all O/T, but WTF is THAT about?

[Mudfuzz]

i mean, when they were peacefully protesting there weren't threads on ILF about it.

viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19028

Not to go all O/T, but WTF is THAT about?

My point is we have threads on whatever someone feels like making one on when they want and then we discuss or wonder off... If she had wanted to "discuss when they were peacefully protesting" unownunown could have started that subject.

[dubkitty]

it's a passive-aggressive way of saying "well since nobody was paying attention to the nothing they were saying before they were rioting or to the single protest that the rioters took over, it's OK for people to burn England down."

Anarchy: Looks Great From 2,500 Miles Away™!

[unownunown]

oh no, i meant i didn't know then, just like most people didn't know (i think?). i'm just saying, media mostly will cover violent shit like that, and violence just catches attention.

edit: i didn't say it was okay at all.

[Mudfuzz]

it's a passive-aggressive way of saying "well since nobody was paying attention to the nothing they were saying before they were rioting or to the single protest that the rioters took over, it's OK for people to burn England down."

Anarchy: Looks Great From 2,500 Miles Away™!

People become frustrated, give into anger and mob thought. And while I do not agree with violent protests what I have a prob with the most [it just makes my brain hurt a little, ya'know...] is looting.. it defeats the whole fucking point If you don't believe in being peaceful fine overturn fucking cars and set them on fire or something, don't use it as a excuse to be a fucking thief, how does that make your point?

[dubkitty]

sorry. i misunderstood you then. it seems like a lot of people are making that kind of immediate leap to thinking they were justified.

the thing is, like someone said above, there was only the one demonstration with Mark Duggan's family, and the family and small number of peaceful protestors had to run for it when the rioters in back of the crowd started to kick off. the rioters didn't come down for a cause, they came down for a chance to start shit, like when the Lakers win the championship. and i really don't think people in Nottingham and Birmingham are burning shit because somebody got shot in a bust by a London cop...that's like rioting in San Diego because someone got shot in an Oakland traffic chase.

[culturejam]

seriously, do you think that if you asked any of those people who Kropotkin was they wouldn't think you were offering them something to smoke?

I honestly hadn't heard any claims of actual political anarchism in these riots. Being angry at cops or looting a store doesn't make you an anarchist.

I think the term "anarchist" is a word that people who don't understand anarchism use in place of "hooligan" or "selfish looter".

Kropotkin's idea of Anarchism has nothing to do with looting stores out of pure opportunism. Actually, that (taking as much as you can for yourself as the opportunity arises) is a lot more like capitalism than anarchism, in my opinion.

[dubkitty]

i'd be willing to bet large amounts of money that 95% of the people with circled-A stickers or patches, or who otherwise like to think of themselves as anarchists, don't know anything about anarchism or political theory at all. and that goes double for the people who talk about the UK riots as anarchic in a political sense. what i've been seeing is media types who conflate "anarchy" as a buzzword with the standard Fabian talking points.

[snipelfritz]

But anarchy is teh punk rawk! I'ma spray paint it e'erywhere to get back at mean mister police man for taking my skateboard away.

EDIT: I understand England has a long history of deeply engrained class division and hopelessness in lower class youth, but on a dumb superficial level it's very difficult to think about English people and not picture either tea-sippping fancy-pants or newspaper wielding Dickens characters.

[allicio]

I live in the UK and I can sum up in one word the reason for these riots and looting.
Scum.
A large problem in the UK at the moment is that in certain areas we are on our second and third generation of people that live on the welfare state. These people have never worked for anything in there lives, have no respect for other peoples property or posessions and whole heartedly believe that the country owes them! What there owed exactly nobody knows! These people are organising looting and civil unrest via Facebook and twitter, Its just utter lawlessness!
There is no real reason for any of it. The police force have been wrapped up in so much political correctness in the last few years they are shit scared to act forcefully. I honestly believe they are no more corrupt than any other force in Europe.
And have handled the situation as best as they can considering they have there hands tied.
Theres no need at all for any of this its just scum being scum?

[My name is Mudd]

Not to go all O/T, but WTF is THAT about?

My point is...

What I was asking about up there is what's the meat thread about?

[Mudfuzz]

Not to go all O/T, but WTF is THAT about?

My point is...

What I was asking about up there is what's the meat thread about?

Ohhh... it's the new carrots

[dubkitty]

now, there's a trend i can get with.