Mobs in UK

So then, you want to impose rtional thought and order on a situation which is, by definition, chaotic and irrational.

I disagree that the situation is chaotic and irrational. People tend to follow patterns most of the time, especially when they do not think. It's possible to study such patterns through empirical research.

Doesn't really sound productive, does it?

Once you have begun to build a bulk of data that show correlation between the behavior and something else, you can begin with that something else to prevent future turmoil. We aren't quite Minority Report, but when you know the pattern well enough you can prevent many crimes that have yet to happen. However, it takes time until you can see statistical results and not every solution will be effective. What you do not want to do is to go blind and "trust your gut". If we could, the riots wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Do you actually think that each rioter sat there and thought to themselves, "All things considered, I'd rather have tea with the Queen, but for *this* particular issue, I shall burn it all to the ground, steal whatever catches my fancy, and maybe kill a person or two."

They call it mob mentality for a reason. You get a small group of people with a gripe (it was reported over here that the very first spasm was over the police killing some young gangbanger, like JDR mentioned earlier, and everything went to shit from there) and the herd starts to gather and follow. The herd doesn't know what caused the movement, and very likely doesn't care. If you interviewed all the rioters, I doubt you'd get more than 1 in 10 that would attempt to justify their actions.

Yes, I believe that each rioter sat there and thought that to themselves. Kinda. You see, a thought like that doesn't need to form over a day. You used another word for the established thought-pattern that grown over time; "gripe".

When an event happens, your conscious thought will shut off and long established scripts will take over. What people will do in this instant situation, is a summary of what happened up to that point. This is why there are those who join the riot and strike, those who run and those who becomes heroes. The action have been implemented before the scene.

But it's true, most of the time, the person may not even be aware of why they acted like they did. We might not understand our own behavior. However, this is again where the study comes in. When we know that the statistical average of people who are in a certain situation react in a certain pattern, we can explain each rioters behavior. Kinda like you just did (seems to be "mob-mentality").

But mobs aren't random. That's what I am saying. There is a reason the mob strike in London but not in Sweden or the US. To figure out why you have to study how the mob ticks.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
I dont know if this is true but it sounds amazing. How many kids do I need to get for million pound home? Apperently atleast some of the less-fortunate get to live like rich under the benefits.
69Wuw.jpg
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
3,160
Location
Europa Universalis
Yeah, I'm sure all these people live in a palace - milking the system. Yeah, they definitely represent the entirety of the core issue.

Here's my take on it:

When there's a limit to the amount of resources available, and the system allows the few to hold the VAST majority of resources in their hands - you will face a problem with those who don't have access to these resources.

If you tell yourself that people who sit on the wealth are the ones "deserving" it, then I have to say you have a very different idea of what it means to deserve a decent living.

In any case, the whole concept of deserving wealth is really beside the point. This particular problem will be there for as long as resources are not divided equally.
 
I dont know if this is true but it sounds amazing. How many kids do I need to get for million pound home? Apperently atleast some of the less-fortunate get to live like rich under the benefits.

I applied Cognitive Psychology to Sociology and reached a conclusion.

With a wide category/concept that includes a large population, it's easy to create a very powerful illusion. With a category wide enough to include 100.000 people it's easy to find 10 cases that proves a point. Basic probability will allow you to find at least 10 criminals for example. Displayed together the point seems irrefutable. Until you repeat the search with another category that includes 100.000.

Faced with this two questions should be asked;
1. Are there quantitive data that breaks from the baserate.
2. Is the category justified?
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
I pointed out that there was some - possibly six such cases. I never claimed that they represent any sizable portion of the less-fortunate. You people run to wrong conclusions like hungry pack of coyotes.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
3,160
Location
Europa Universalis
I pointed out that there was some - possibly six such cases. I never claimed that they represent any sizable portion of the less-fortunate. You people run to wrong conclusions like hungry pack of coyotes.

But why bring up these minority cases? I mean, we shouldn't have much difficulty finding examples of rich people "milking the system" either, right?

It's kinda pointless, to my mind.
 
But why bring up these minority cases? I mean, we shouldn't have much difficulty finding examples of rich people "milking the system" either, right?

It's kinda pointless, to my mind.
I have never heard of such cases in Finland so I found it interesting especially when these people have lived years in these houses. I would imagine them to be just temporary solution but I guess thats not the case. Also you could always ponder this from the point of view that this is just the top of the iceberg.

If you get worked over every pointless post in this forum you might overstress yourself. Relax Dart.

I think you didnt really comment it because its pointless but because you think that if few poor people strike lucky they shouldnt be looked badly even if it the way they got it was through benefits. Thats okay though. Im not looking at them badly. Im just curious (and a bit jelous).
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
3,160
Location
Europa Universalis
I have never heard of such cases in Finland so I found it interesting especially when these people have lived years in these houses. I would imagine them to be just temporary solution but I guess thats not the case. Also you could always ponder this from the point of view that this is just the top of the iceberg.

Well, fair enough.

I personally suffer no illusions that "poor people" or "people without resources" are going about their lives in a particularly legal fashion. That's kinda the point, actually, that with fewer means - you'll have greater cause for breaking the law or taking advantage of it.

So, I guess it's just par for the course to me.

In my mind, it's not the people we should be looking at - because we can't change human nature. Well, maybe we can - but it's pretty hard to establish how.

I'd rather we look at the system, and how we could potentially improve it.

If you get worked over every pointless post in this forum you might overstress yourself. Relax Dart.

I don't really get "worked up" - I'm just trying to understand. I'm generally quite relaxed.

I think it's more when these observations turn into endless multiquote debates that I get exhausted. I think it's my mistake that I often expect people to want to understand where I'm coming from, rather than ripping what I say apart because they don't like it. Ideally, I just want people to be understood - and since I have no problem with the actual disagreement, I find myself surprised all the time - as it seems people have a problem with me disagreeing.

Then again, I'm sure it feels the same way from the opposing viewpoint.

I think you didnt really comment it because its pointless but because you think that if few poor people strike lucky they shouldnt be looked badly even if it the way they got it was through benefits. Thats okay though. Im not looking at them badly. Im just curious (and a bit jelous).

True, I actually thought you had a point :)

But it's nice to hear that it wasn't what I thought it was - as that would be something to challenge for me.
 
I read an article recently where they interviewed young people in different countries in Europe. I have to say I was surprised, even a lot of youths with education didn't have that much hope about their future.

Yes, even here.

No-one has hope anymore.

Apart from those who have wealth.

Okay, I'm sounding like a socialist again, but it is a fact that ANY crisis can be "puffered" much better by those who have lots of money than by those who have not.

And -what I just don't understand is, why ALL societies on this world (except the communist ones, who are imho bad to the exactly other extreme) implicitely or explicitely support those who have wealth … You can see it everywhere.

There will be social unrest. And everyone in both business and in politics will clim they wouldn't know where this comes this from.

And ESPECIALLY those lobbyisdts who are nudging nudging nudging politicians to do economy-friendly laws will claim that they don't have even the slightest idea what might be the cause for this social unrest …

And economy is about : Minimal costs ( = the lowest possible wages) with maximum profits (either for the company or for the bosses or both),
and the bosses often are stockholders of the same company - which means that indirectly - via the company shares - the profits go directly into their wallets … And sometimes into Swiss, to avoid taxing …

And the ones who already have lots of money are the only ones who are able to buy LOTS of stock, BECAUSE they have so much money … Which means that it's basically a kind of circle, imho.

"Those who already have, those will be given."
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
One of the worse crime to me is tax avoidance. Its the haves cheating the the have nots. However its not treated with contempt at all. Many of the tax avoiders get honours, ffs!

Yet the Prime Minister David Cameron is making big fuss about the riots and hardly anything about the tax avoiders. Don't get me wrong, what the rioters did was very wrong but not as wrong as what the tax avoiders are doing.

In fact the tax avoiders are going to be rewarded! If you earn over 150000, then you pay 50% tax. They want to get rid of that tax now since they think no one is paying 50% tax!!!!
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
If we forget ownership for a moment. A bunch of people ends up on a piece of land and need to shape up the land to benefit those who lives there. Some would say that no ruler is needed. That's not empirical. From tribal societies, to companies, to a free market, to egalitarian experiments set up by social psychologists, rulers either take power or are given the trust to rule. Even after the collapse of Somalia warlords eventually took power.

One way to solve this problem is to have an elected power that gets power only if they do the bidding of the people. This way a ruler that go bad can be safely removed from power. That rule is an administrator, a slave to the system rather than on top of the system.

But there are more sources of power than being elected. Money is power in a culture that recognizes it's power (like scitzophrenia is a power in a culture that believes in spirits). Controlling a large part of the market is power. Ruling a company is power. This is why a democratic system based on elections cannot function if it also protects the accumulation of too much wealth.

This is why neither communism or anarch-capitalism works. As soon as you get rid of the power a power take it's place, whether it's the ruler of a large company or the leader of the party. Neither have any reason to give that power up and neither can be removed without a system to remove them.

Moderate socialism is the only system that works. All western countries today have socialist systems, from public schools to wellfare systems. The more of the population that accepts socialism, the better the society works. But socialism is not communism. Socialism allow each one to own what they earned, up to a point. This freedom is essential for many reasons. That's why most western countries also have a private sector and a government sector.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
This is why neither communism or anarch-capitalism works. As soon as you get rid of the power a power take it's place, whether it's the ruler of a large company or the leader of the party. Neither have any reason to give that power up and neither can be removed without a system to remove them.
OK, but now comes a tremendous leap...
Moderate socialism is the only system that works. All western countries today have socialist systems, from public schools to wellfare systems. The more of the population that accepts socialism, the better the society works. But socialism is not communism. Socialism allow each one to own what they earned, up to a point. This freedom is essential for many reasons. That's why most western countries also have a private sector and a government sector.
I don't think you mean "socialism". Technically, schools and welfare have nothing to do with public control of means of production, which is the actual definition of socialism. But regardless of definition quibbles, your logic is to eliminate both extremes and then embrace a single option from many potential choices in the middle. Ain't be right thinkin there. Feel free to supply the appropriate impressive latin.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
OK, but now comes a tremendous leap…
I don't think you mean "socialism". Technically, schools and welfare have nothing to do with public control of means of production, which is the actual definition of socialism. But regardless of definition quibbles, your logic is to eliminate both extremes and then embrace a single option from many potential choices in the middle. Ain't be right thinkin there. Feel free to supply the appropriate impressive latin.

I thought capital was a means of production.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
Here is a really good example that mob mentality cuts both ways. The guy in question was wrongly identified as an arsonist. He had a criminal background from earlier youth. His name was circulated on Facebook and newspapers, and while he was inprisoned for 9 days, his flat was burnt down in retaliation.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
1,163
Location
Scandinavia
A clip from the streets. There's another one on the newsection which I can't link because of —.

Is it about her ? http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/22/why-hackney-heroine-confronted-rioters

Edit : A comment from there :

She was lucky, no doubt left alone because she is a woman, among other considerations. Look what happened to the guy who was trying to put out a fire in Ealing, or the individual foolish enough to attempt to persuade a group of reprobates from breaking into a well known cell phone outlet. The Ealing guy ended up dead, the second character had a powder fire extinguisher emptied in his face.

And another one :

I lived in Hackney for 15 years, half of that in Queensdown road abutting the Pembury estate and the other half in Homerton. I also taught there. Whilst it is true that there is an enormous amount of community spirit, it is also true that, aside from in London fields, the ethnic groups do not mix together in any real sense. Even in the classroom past year 9 the kids just divided along racial lines in the most part and the whole gang thing kicked in. But it was a vibrant place to live, and I enjoyed it. Until I got spat at in Victoria Park for having the temerity to breastfeed.Still, a one off I thought, and let it go. And then, whilst pushing my baby, I made the huge error of confronting a bunch of youths who were bolt cutting a nice bike from it's padlocked site. Slammed up against the wall and spat at, threatened and the gang around my baby, I ended up shaking on the floor clutching my baby and terrified. The whole street vanished. No-one helped. When I reported it to the police, no-one had seen anything, despite my clearly being in the middle of Homerton High Street and the whole of it standing and watching it go on. Not much community spirit then. None, in fact. Or at least, not to me.

I left and I have no intention of ever going back.London lost another teacher willing to work in the "sink" schools. There is a very real problem in Hackney and whilst it may partly be to do with poverty, it's also about an attitude that sucks big time and gangs, drugs and the gang culture, and yes, race. If Mrs P had stood up in Homerton High Street that day she'd have no doubt been listened to, or at least not abused in the way I was. Anyone can call me racist if they want, but the fact is, I was a white woman standing up to someone and nobody black helped me. Nobody white did either, but I don't recall a huge amount of white people being there. Whether they ignored the crime and assault because they were afraid of the kids, or retribution from them, or personal reasons, fact is, they did. And it is surely worth asking why Mrs P could stand up and shout and I could not.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
I thought capital was a means of production.

Not in the classical definition. The means of production refers to the physical aspects of wealth generation, such as factories and machinery. Definitions vary, and may also include roads, railroads, and natural resources.

I'm assuming here that you define "capital" as financial capital, in terms of investments into the means of production. Sometimes folks talk of "natural capital, or even "labor capital".

At any rate, if you look at means of production as a black box, you input capital into the box, and you get out wealth.

So, the basic premise of Socialism is that the state owns companies that encompass the facilities of productions, such as factories. Note that this is the ECONOMIC definition of Socialism. Politically, Socialism can mean a great many of things.
 
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
194
Back
Top Bottom