The London Riots and the Liberal Crypto-Fascist Aftermath

You don’t need me to go ond on describing the events of the last few nights, because we all know what has happened. We’ve all been glued to our TVs, giving ourselves square eyes while being spoonfed reactionary bile from news reporters intent on crushing reasonable (read: Leftist) opinion in favour of their own gleeful coverage of the rioting. These events are being treated as if they were a form of entertainment rather than the presentation of serious facts with a really existing social context.

The army of Big Society ideologues look to clean up London

Public opinion has seen a massive shift to the right. This has been demonstrated by the thousands of tweets and Facebook messages calling for violent retribution to be enforced on those caught rioting instead of a sensible call for us all to understand the social conditons that have led people to riot (be that consumer ideology, thuggery or general disaffection). This deeply conservative shift has been surprising, but perhaps it shouldn’t be.

What this really shows is the inherant contradiction in postmodern liberal ideology. Indeed, there seems to be a nasty undercurrent of middle class resentment towards disenfranchised, perhaps working class, youths expressed in the aftermath of the riots. The ideological manipulation at the heart of the clean up operation doesn’t help. As my compadre and Birkbeck classmate Jacob Bard-Rosenberg of The Third Estate puts it:

Sifting through the tweets tagged with #riotcleanup there is swift equivocation: at once the physical act of clearing rubble from the streets merges with the act of cleansing the street of black youths. The cleaning of streets amounts to the wiping away of traces of social unrest. Cracks in society are smoothed over and at once an oppressed underclass is rendered invisible again.

While I agree with Jacob’s sentiment about #riotcleanup being about “cleansing”, “cleaning”, and “wiping away the traces of social unrest”, I think this is more obviously about people expunging their own class resentment by using traditionally racist tropes to conceal a really-existing underlying classism and racism, rather than blatant racism in itself. The news channels have called on ordinary people (often white, almost always middle-class) to stand in as social commentators. This isn’t unusual in an age where everybody has access to global communication networks, where everybody has a voice, where everybody seems intent on using that voice to shout as loudly as possible.

What is unusual, however, is language used by those interviewed. Here, rioters have been described variously as “animals” and “feral rats”. The point concealed here is that the people doing the rioting are unclean, diseased, or subhuman not simply because they are black, not simply because they are working class, but because they refuse to do what white middle class people, who own the clean, shiny, shops being looted, expect people to do. Our repressed desires for stability in the face of rapid social change seem to be embodied by the great unwashed left behind by middle class expectations to come out of the recession and the spending cuts unscathed. This is nothing more than an illusory idea of “progress” made by taking tough economic decisions that will direct the fortunes of those who need public services, and yes, jobs, the most. In the wake of the riots, however, this “progress” proves itself to be even more of an illusion than we already thought it was: it is middle-class self-hatred seeking to erase its own working-class past. The connection between folksy wartime cheeriness expressed in the Keep Calm and Carry On sentiment, which conceals a brutality, fear and hardship experienced predominantly by white working-class people, and #riotcleanup is no coincidence.

Ultimately, these riots, and the public opinion garnered by their constant coverage, have allowed people who normally self-identify as “liberals” to show their true colours. Calls for use of water cannon, rubber bullets, or, worse still, bringing in the army and instating martial law, come largely from people who usually claim to be society’s most permissive and the most tolerant. Instead, these people are proving themselves to be postmodern crypto-fascists, churning out folksy, yet bilious, petty bourgeois bigotry. Just check out your own twitter feed and Facebook page if you don’t believe me. The problem here is the massive contraction between this supposed liberal permissiveness and the need for security which is expressed in the emerging authoritarian streak without being synthesised by a formal liberal doctrine.

It’s a culture of excessive tolerance that sees “liberals” being the first to overtly celebrate other peoples’ cultures and the supposed plight of minority groups. But, in reality, conceals their unnerving fetishisation of their own liberal indulgence, of their own act of tolerance. Here, people use a form of relativising liberal historicism to cleanse themselves of their own guilt for seeing themselves as belonging to a culture whose past is rooted in racist, imperialist exploitation. As such, they renounce their own culture in any way that can, and they are the first to scream about how disgusted they are by the obvious racism of the BNP and the EDL. These people reject the “imperialist” universalisation of cultural norms (homosexuality, women’s rights, their own free-speaking liberal agenda) but wilfully ignore that agenda when confronted by bigotry espoused by people who belong to the supposedly downtrodden minorities they so fetishise: homophobic currents in, for example, Pentecostal Christianity, of which many followers are black West Indian people or misogyny in, for example, certain prominent strains of Islamism.

But when it comes to the riots, it seems that the liberals are the first to denounce the rioters as being dirty, ugly, demonic, feral, disgusting. All this despite the fact that the people using this language know that many of the rioters are often young black males. All this despite the fact that they know about the history of prejudice in British society, and in the police, directed towards young black males. All this despite the fact that they know about the ways in which racists describe young black males. As such, these people don’t seem to understand the political position they claim to hold, and they are the first to sell out to reactionary authoritarianism when things get rough. It is ideology at its most obvious: people see through these commands and yet choose to follow the script anyway.

Perhaps the worst element of this concealed prejudice is that thse liberal-fascists are blind to the class divides in which they themselves participate. This finds particular expression in the gentrification of areas like Hackney, which saw rioting on Monday night, where ordinary working-class and lower-middle class people are being driven out by ever-rising rents and property prices. Why? Because namby-pamby permissive liberals want to live in artfully dishevelled low-rent ex-council pads because they like the “brutalist bohemian aesthetic”. What they forget is that these places, like the Pembury Housing Estate which was overrun on Monday night, are social housing projects designed for poor people by rich people who didn’t have to live in them.

Jacob continues, writing that

The reward offered for such action [helping out with the clean up operation] is “true community”, or “community spirit”. In the face of such rampant dehumanization, these new communities, the battalions of #riotcleanup, reassert their supposed true humanity. And such a new humanity is a badge to be worn with pride. It is forgotten by many that it is premised on exclusion, on the sweeping away of neighbours. Raise your broom to the sky and create the world anew, a world without unrest in the face of poverty and oppression. A world in which black youths, and the real antagonisms of society, are consigned to oblivion.

It’s not just about young black males. It’s about class. But those things still kinda go hand in hand, huh?

About these ads

25 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

25 Responses to The London Riots and the Liberal Crypto-Fascist Aftermath

  1. Nothing like widespread destruction of property to make people show their ugly true colours and dehumanise those involved. Lolcapitalism.

  2. Geoff

    To say it’s about class is to demonise the millions of working class people who DIDN’T riot, though. It’s about violence and mob mentality, not class, not race, not disenfranchisement. And to say that the negative reaction was “middle class” is to forget the shopkeepers defending their properties.

    If anything, those excusing the violence as a valid working-class expression of frustration clearly doesn’t understand that working class people can also be able to express their frustration without looting, pillaging and arson.

  3. The public is rightfully horrified at the rioting. You don’t have to be oblivious to the underlying causes to demand, not retribution, but justice for the perpetrators of looting and arson which are without question criminal acts. These were rioters, not insurrectionists. They weren’t marching on the palace. They were destroying their own neighborhoods and the homes and livelihoods of the people who live there. I know about boredom and disaffection and disaffiliation and resentment, but what point, political or ideological, is being made by torching someone’s home or walking home with a flat screen TV or an armload of useless phones? Or mugging an injured kid on the street? What exactly is the lesson that the “rich” are supposed to learn from that?

    • Leah Levane

      perhaps that if people at the top controlling society create rules (and even break them) for their own advantage, and that we have an economy based on greed and acquisition, dependent on us wanting more and never being satisfied; a society where what you have matters more than what you are, where trillions can be spent on weapons and war but not on social development projects or decent housing….then it is not surprising if people at the bottom want to grab a bit of the cake and also “get away with it” (Bankers’ bonuses, MPs, expenses, police corruption accepting bribes from the gutter press, etc. etc. None of this is to condone the actions of rioters, especially the fires and murders or even the looting; seeking to understand is not seeking to condone; but condemnation will not create the change that is needed in our community.

      Perhaps a lesson about hypocrisy – the bizarre antics of the Bullingdon Club that Cameron and doubtless Johnson deeply regret – did not lead to criminal records, but were dismissed as something akin to high jinks and covered up in exchange for Daddy covering the cost of repairs. Yet we have seen, for example, a young (and certainly foolish) man who stole £3.50 worth of water receiving a 6 month jail sentence…..where is the understanding that some people got caught up in this moment? And yes I was on the edge of some rioters on their way to Peckham or the Walworth Road and I was frightened….but that was also in the moment; I am more frightened about the overall direction of our society and the limited and hypocritical response of our so called leaders!

  4. Pingback: Twitted by bev13thdisciple

  5. Dave

    I think there’s some fair points in this post. But I also think you’ve fallen into your own trap by taking what certain soundbites of the media have reported (the lady who had her shop trashed had every right to call the looters “feral rats”) and applying to the an entire group of people, in this case the good middle-class folk of Clapham Junction (which has a fair mix of both races and classes).

    Your main problem is that you’ve completely confused race and class prejudice with common British decency. You over-estimate the political motivations of the folks cleaning up – they are not in London to drive out the poor and flaunt their liberalism – they’re just common, decent folks looking to make a small difference to the place they live in, in the small way they feel able in the face of incredible aggression and intimidation.

  6. NCB x

    I think it is utterly shameful for you to attack a collective for being afraid. Some of these people have had their community looted and set on fire and they want to tell the world that they’re united in cleaning it up. You layering on this a cynical undertow is pretty shitty, mate. Their symbol could have been overtly-aggressive: ‘you come back round here again and we’ll smash your face in’; but it isn’t, the symbol they’ve chosen to represent themselves as your (multi-ethnic, multi-demographic) picture shows us, is the broom. Held aloft in the image of tribe (that kind of destabilizes you and your mate’s argument by the way, what with its extra-imperial, extra-bourgeois connotations).

    Mostly, though, you’ve just applied the same sweeping (get it) deconstruction of their collective character as anyone fixated on race or class has ever done. It is a sentiment that says: ‘They are not this, they are that’- you’re still lumping people together and telling them how they feel about something on the strength of the words or actions of a minority – now am I talking about racists; so-called liberal -fascists or your article?

  7. Tanya Daly

    Sorry, but a lot of what has been said here is incredibly racist. Look at the pictures of the people involved in the clean up and its a massive mix of colours and ages, look at the areas attacked, it was places of poorer people so not an attack of the poor on the rich; they would have gone to Fulham if it was. This was outrageous because in truth, they had no basis for their actions and chose to then hide behind ” oh, we are oppressed yoofs” when challenged on their behaviour. This was about criminals exhibiting criminal behaviour en masse, nothing more than that.

  8. Pingback: Human rights? They’re only for human beings. « teampangloss

  9. Mo

    Yes we do need to think about the social reasons that would drive people to do what they are doing, but the weight this writer gives to class and race and Jacob’s interpretations of the cleanup group is utter crap. Those involved in the riots are black and white and asian, so why so much emphasis on black youth? Also, if you were to carry out a socio-economic study of those taking part in the cleanup, I think you’d find both middle class shop owners and their working class employees, who probably live nearby, cleaning up.

    I think the hyper-racialisation of Jacob’s interpretation of the language used in the cleanup tweets is scraping the barrel. A community is coming together to cleanup what has been destroyed, how else would you describe the activity? I don’t think they’re referring to ethnic (or class) cleansing, but perhaps Londoners do have a genocidal streak to them, I don’t know.

    And I don’t think the broadcast media has been right-wing or one-sided. I’ve seen a lot of youth workers and left-wing commentators on tv making the case that a good number of these youths are disaffected (obviously) and need help (again, obviously).

    And yes the cuts have probably hit these areas rather badly and has negatively affected these vulnerable youngsters, but we have to be careful not to make disaffection and vulnerability synonymous with criminal and violent and thereby excuse the latter two as mere failures of the state. Just because you are disaffected, it does not mean you are expected to turn to criminality, just because you are vulnerable, it cannot excuse your violence. Furthermore, we cannot be in a situation whereby a Labour government throws money at these communities to keep their youth quiet and then all hell is let loose when funding is reduced (justifiably or not) by the Tories. The schools and youth centres can do so much, WHERE ARE THE BLOODY PARENTS?!

    Studies about criminal behaviour have concluded that desire, opportunity, and ability are the three factors that determine whether someone, irrespective of class or race will commit a crime. The rioters had all three, especially opportunity and ability, and they exploited the situation. That is inexcusable and they should face the consequences.
    When a young white or black man or woman states proudly on national television that he/she is rioting and looting because “we can do what we want” and he/she feels angry at the police because “they nick you for stupid stuff” (like theft, assault, arson), then there is something wrong at home and not just with society.

    Ultimately this guy needs to stop talking crap, like saying the reason the cleanup people are so angry at the rioters is not because they are black or working class, but because they refuse to act middle class. The entire blog is so obsessed in race and class that it fails utterly to capture the ‘above the fray, holier than thou’ nuance he is sooo desperately trying to claw out of this situation.

    We get it, we need to “understand” that when they loot T-Mobile for ANOTHER Blackberry, they are just crying out for help; we need to “listen” to the fire alarms for burning homes and businesses and invest more money into youth centres; we should not “lecture” them about self-improvement, getting educated, a job and taking advantage of the opportunities that their parents couldn’t even dream of.

    Bulshit!

  10. thembi

    I am from Peckham and I am angry too

    I am from Peckham SE15 (I now live in East Africa): I grew up in those streets you write about. In 2002 ran a (very small) youth club on North Peckham estate, working specifically with media (hand held cameras) using techniques we developed doing peace and reconcilitation work in Kayleitsha, a South African township. A slum really. The tools we used to broker conversation between the PAC and the ANC were the same ones we used with angry young men yielding AK 47′s, small weaponry, knives, in my own home area, SE15.
    I argued with Leroy (one of my favourite people) for two years about why ‘white people’
    wouldn’t employ him and his friends, about how the world he knew, the language he uses, automatically excludes him for multiple power structures, forums, from ‘being acceptable’ to the establishment. We wrote up a jokey translation manual: even then, Pre-Wire, they were referring to ‘feds’ and ‘greens’ and props. (Police, money and friends). I thought of Leroy today, about what it means to have ‘no voice’, no agency, not to connect, to feel so angry that all you CAN do is riot- There’s a comment on the Penny Red Blog (see http://pennyred.blogspot.com/2011/08/panic-on-streets-of-london.html?spref=fb) .that jumps out as real, and meaningful to me, “In one NBC report, a young man in Tottenham was asked if rioting really achieved anything: “Yes,” said the young man. “You wouldn’t be talking to me now if we didn’t riot, would you? Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press. Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you.”
    *

    I can probably put names and personalities to the people who burned, broke, pillaged and rampaged my home town, my neighbourhood, the places where I have emotional and historical
    investment and narratives. These ‘thugs’ were my client group, some of the funniest, most challenging years of my life. I saw more uncertainty, humour, more depression, more failure and self doubt in those fifteen young men (who from a distance were terrifying, you’d think they were trying to be Tupac- lookalikes) than I can begin to describe.
    I’ve been a journalist mostly, but also a youth worker, for seven years: I started young and foolish (15) my circulation good: I did outreach work- this meant hanging out, at night, in winter, in what I now know to be the ‘bad’ estates in Hackney, Peckham and Whitechapel. My job was to go and talk to those huddles of teenagers loitering in the piss-filled stairwells. And hopefully to get invited in to their homes. I was horrified. Houses where Syhletti families huddled eight to a room, swathes of black mould creeping around us, only the five year old with a grasp of English. A Jamaican dad-less family whose living room had approximately nothing, I mean NOTHING in it. Just a box, with a few clothes. When the police sealed off the flat following the arrest of his oldest brother, Barclay* was devastated: he couldn’t get into his bedroom to access the laptop we leant him and he’d learnt to use. At 22 he was writing his first ever essay. And now he couldn’t.. I took Jamie*, the middle son, shopping: he’d never been beyond the end of his road, never been out of the borough. He didn’t believe me when I told him honey was made by bees, not shops. One night, I was hassled by a random woman in Peckham, with three of the guys with me: I have never felt so protected in all my life. It was feral, and it was scarey, and I realised why gangs are not a luxury, they’re a necessity. Later, working in Cornwall, I taught Laura basic maths, so she could work out how much of her child benefit was going to pay off the tv on Hire Purchase. She couldn’t be persuaded that a diet of pasties, and a boyfriend who beat her (at least he talks to my kid!) wasn’t a good thing. Couldn’t countenance it.

    I trained as a journalist- knowing only that many people had good stories- Studs Turkel style- and I wanted to tell them. Motivated by political South African parents- with a very can do attitude and a penetrating take on ethnicity: we are a highly diverse bunch- all creeds, most religions, many colours, the key to me seemed to be access. Women’s Hour loved me: And because I sound nice and middle class if I want to, (I’m a shocking mimic and have a good ear) I got into the BBC in the first place. Even without the name Penny or Annabellle or Henrietta. Really, they exist.
    I could interview homeless women on the street at night or young women in Brixton about sexist Ragga lyrics: I wasn’t afraid, I got real stories, out of real people whom I liked, and whom I found funny and engaging- why should I be frightened, they weren’t so different from me.
    Actually they were:of course they were, and are: I am connected, super-educated, posh, linked in, have had, and continue to have, access to platforms of public conversation, to power structures and the confidence and sheer chutzpah to overcome ‘being a girl’ or not going to public school. But perhaps my essential sense of foreignness, my disbelief at the English class system, the English inability to ‘take people as they are’ and my parents track record of invigorating racial politics made me care less. One moment they were terrorists, the next national heros. Bollocks to the media, the mainstream, I WILL DO THE DEFINING, THANK YOU! I’ve always felt outside. The typical writers’ malaise. For a long time I believed that taking people seriously- whatever their income level, class, race or religion, was enough. We’d find bonds in shared experience, in being human.

    It’s not. It’s much more political than that. It’s also harder work. I have to work hard to remember not to prejudge, not to have preconceptions. I set out to be surprised. I set out to take into account how I am perceived. I ignore a great deal of mainstream opinion. I set out to like people, to allow them to speak, to be curious. Even the really bad ones are fertile: the most extreme (and morally problematic) was listening to active child traffickers recount their own experiences of sexual abuse. I’ve also thought hard about my background, who I am, the contradictions and ‘dirty bits’ in my own history (alcoholism and a close relative whose had serious mental problems and been tossed around by crappy social services.) I am NOT claiming to have an in depth understanding of being marginalised, only a tiny tiny taste. I’ve realised that my family, who were/are creative and brave pioneers all my life, and our crazy friends- African, English, Australian, West Indian, male, female, black, white, sober, drunk, stoned, unemployed, powerful, articulate, gay and straight: nothing was too unusual in our house- have provided good and powerful role models. Change can, and will happen: it’s important we keep listening to each other.

    The biggest difference between me and my interviewees, is that I have mobility. Emotional- I can follow child traffickers for six weeks, then process it later, with good therapists. Geographical: I can go undercover and talked to raped tea estate workers, get on a plane and leave. Intellectual: I am not bound by a particular life view that dictates that thousands of options are not available. I can and will argue my way out of a paper bag. I have solid friends who won’t shoot me if they think I ‘dissed them’ or ‘made a move’ on their guy. Most of all, I have power. I have stability. I have a family who understands agency and who set the example: I feel I matter, I count. Most of the people I’ve interviewed over the years feel they do not matter, they’re not being heard.

    And because of that I feel I owe them something: I am there to tell a story. To tell their story, to dig out the juicy bits, to advocate, to undermine the obvious truths, to revel in the contradictions, not to judge. To let it speak for itself and to trust that our audiences are smart, complicated and can cope.

    Now Leroy works as a ‘consultant’ for various youth projects- as a son of a very big gang leader in Southwark, he absolutely knows, first hand, what poverty and exclusion means. For me, the key issues remain- what does being ‘marginalised’ or ‘political agency and engagement’ actually mean- for those who resort to stealing trainers, knickers, blackberries. How do we actually put into practice some of the theories, the knowledge, about how to lessen the divides, increase promotion and
    visibility in the axis of power? Yes, I am fascinated as to why people destroy Currys, nick phones or immodium (yet it seems obvious to me: we brandish these things in the faces of people who don’t have them, marks of desirability, then are confused when they tell us they want them too! And immodium can dope you out. A cheap hit).

    Why is it that even some of my friends really DON’T believe that despondency, impotence and self-destruction are the direct results of poverty, being stuck? Sure, there are some angry nutters, some dole scroungers, crooks, sure (ironically some of the latter are brilliant to work with, they’re invariably hilariously smart and inventive). But, we need to be honest about our own levels of political power and how much access we DO have, and not pretend that it’s just luck, or hard work: I am angry like the rioters- but I am not helpless, because I’ve given, and learnt, hundreds of strategies not to be.

    Please, can we keep looking outwards: not get so cocooned in our Cath Kitson lives, our North London conversations about silencing, timing, our own procedures, that we forget that there are real people, for whom frustration, depression and anger are normal, stuck with Hire Purchase loans and debts and mould intheir flats, and who have NEVER ever been out of their post code….
    * Names have been changed.

    • Talith

      Thanks for this… as a 40 yr old white guy from middle-class parents, I cannot begin to understand the world you have seen, and that alone is probably enough for you to laugh in my general direction… but just wanted you to know they meant a lot… thanks again.

  11. lkoe skeo

    You make some great points.

    It certainly is interesting how so many middle class people on the ‘left’ are so quickly taking up the idea that these riots must be about nothing. They are offended that anyone would even bring it up.

  12. Moobs

    I was in the very crowd you have pictured. I am certainly white, but the crowd was mixed in its ethnic makeup. We spent 4 hours waiting to be deployed and I had conversations with perhaps 30 people, again, of a number of different races. No-one I spoke to at any point described the rioters in the terms you describe. Instead all the talk was of social exclusion.

    There were reactionaries there, certainly. The woman with “Looters are scum” written across her t-shirt would seem to meet that description, but the my guess is the woman who talked about needing to help the kids organise and to develop their political consciousness probably had not voted for Cameron. Similarly, the man wearing the “this is practical anarchy” T-shirt didn’t strike me as a Tory. Another man held up a sign saying “This is not the big society” and got cheers.

    Amongst those I met was a youth worker and a number of teachers. One woman told me she knew many of the kids rioting. Would ask you to keep an open mind as to the motivations of those present.

  13. Munch

    I do know white, middle-class ‘liberal’ people who behave in the way that you describe and I try to steer clear as much as possible – harder when one of them is your boss! However, my friends who are Black, White, Asian, lesbian, gay, straight, poor, not-so-poor but predominantly female, are getting involved in things like collecting baby clothes and shoes for the centre in Tottenham that is helping people who have lost their homes in the riots, working all night in local hospitals dealing with casualties, helping clean up the streets of glass so that local kids don’t get hurt. Screw the class element of this, what about a gendered analysis? Why is it that on the whole it is left to women or those in the ‘helping’ areas of occupation that are seen as more ‘feminine’ (think paramedics, nursing, voluntary, community and charity sectors) to clean up the sh*t created by, on the whole, men and those in what are percieved to be ‘masculine’ occupations (think politics, police, bankers, criminals)? There is way too much ‘Them’ and ‘Us’ going on about this situation already but for me the only divide that can be seen clearly is that along the line of gender.

  14. memes

    To Thembi, thanks for taking so much time to write that. good stuff, wish there were more yous in the world.

  15. The London looters, thieves and arsonists are scum. End of story. I’d be surprised if the majority could even spell “Dispossessed”.

    “Social Exclusion”? Drivel. They stole, robbed and mugged because they knew they could do so with complete impunity. Anyone who pretends not to know that is living in an alternate reality.

    http://wp.me/pVJuU-cH

  16. Both statements may be true, but care to prove that I’m an idiot for pointing out the blatantly demonstrable fact that the looters are are just opportunist thieves? And they looted and stole did so because they’re not scared of Plod and they were only stopped when met with hard force, e.g. Turks in Dalston and other communities elsewhere.
    The moment a riot develops, no more ‘policing by consent’, it is switched to policing by ‘force’. i.e. tried and tested cracking heads, baton charges and serious injuries to the rioters.

    Given the pathetic statements being put out by Cameron et al, a few more people will have to be murdered by looters for policing by force to re-appear. Until then we can play The London Riots Buzzword Bingo with whiners like you. Let me help with some buzzwords and excuses:
    Root Causes
    Communities
    Cohesion
    Deprivation
    Poverty
    Coalition Cuts
    Protestors
    Dispossessed
    Disenfranchised Youth

    Look and learn at how the Polizei deal successfully with violent rioters: http://wp.me/pVJuU-cH

  17. To prove my point further, the hoodrat underclass revert to their primal instincts – attacking ambulances.
    “An ambulance was attacked .. vandalised and bricks were hurled at a rapid response vehicle in Berkshire. …while attending an emergency 999 call. Its window was smashed while its crew attended to a patient inside their home on Tuesday. Mark Ainsworth, divisional director at the trust, said he was “shocked and disappointed” by the actions of people on Tuesday.” http://tinyurl.com/4xfy3ca

    Attacking ambulance crews must rank alongside attacking and abusing disabled people, in the depraved behaviour scale. It’s truly beyond belief and forgiveness. How could he possibly be “shocked and disappointed”? I’m amazed he kept a kept a straight face when he read out that touchy-feely drivel.

    It’s probably too late to get one of these things. Apparently they make a pleasing ‘ting’ sound when connecting with a looter’s head.
    http://tinyurl.com/3ln6p2t

  18. John Trollop

    you’re the racist one for assuming that the language they use to describe the rioters is racist

  19. Many thanks to everybody who commented.
    Now, please may I direct your attention to a subsequent post where I clarify my argument (which was obviously unclear in the first place, otherwise I wouldn’t have been criticised by some of you for saying things that I didn’t say).

    You can find it here: http://geistbites.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/a-clarification-of-the-london-riots-and-the-crypto-fascist-aftermath/

  20. Lt. Doolittle

    You are a cunt of the first order and I sincerely hope you get what you deserve. What goes around comes around, so be afraid you fucking creep.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s