Riot Round Up

As 'riot week' here at Sleaze Diary draws to a close, I'd like to reflect on the events of the past few days, (I'm sounding like Jerry Springer here, I know). Disappointingly, and unsurprisingly, our politicians and media still seem to be intent upon trying to write off the civil unrest as being merely opportunistic criminal activity. Apparently we're not allowed to say that, whilst it might have been criminal activity, it undoubtedly has its roots in social and economic deprivation, a sense of political disenfranchisement and the rise of our consumerist society with its emphasis upon acquisition and materialistic values. To be fair to Dave, it isn't entirely his fault - we're reaping the bitter harvest sown by successive governments, both Labour and Tory, since the late 1970s. That said, I have no doubt that his Godforsaken excuse for an administrations mean-spirited and economically illiterate policies provided the final straw. The riots were an expression of a deep seated anger at the way those of the bottom have been treated. Unfortunately, those involved this time were unable to articulate this anger in any form except mindless violence and destruction.

But, of course, our political leaders can't admit this - they can't admit responsibility. It scares them. You can see the fear behind Cameron's preposterous macho posturing and name calling. These riots have clearly demonstrated that when a large enough section of society decides it doesn't want to be governed, there is very little the state can do. They're just lucky that this time the unrest was unfocused and didn't have clear leadership or a political agenda. Next time, they might not be so lucky. Which is why I think it is important that the Labour Party finds some balls and tries to tap into and harness this simmering resentment in the service of legitimate political protest, before some extremist rabble rouser does. Sadly, I don't see it happening. Instead, the only solutions being offered are idiocies like 'turning off' Twitter and texting when there is civil unrest. Sorry, but isn't that what we were criticising those 'nasty' regimes in Egypt and Libya for doing only a few months ago? As for the notion of stopping the benefits of convicted looters and evicting them from their council houses, (not that anyone is stereotyping looters and rioters), what do you think they'll do for money and shelter instead? That's right, they'll burgle a few more houses, mug a few more grannies, sell more drugs and squat in someone's house.

Still, thanks to Dave we now know that the riots were all down to the police failing to be tough enough on looters. Actually, I think the police got it right - their focus seemed to be more on preventing death or injury than protecting property. Which I think is laudable. Not to mention effective - the loss of life was kept mercifully low. That said, it's significant, I think, that the main emphasis on the part of both media and politicians has been the terrible destruction and theft of property. The people who died or were injured are mentioned only as an afterthought. Such attitudes are sadly indicative of what's wrong with with our society. But let's look at the positive side of these riots for a minute - Michael Winner is reportedly threatening to leave the country and hundreds of thousands of music CDs belonging to independent record labels were destroyed when a warehouse burned down. Let's face it, we all know that most of the stuff put out by independent labels is just as shit as stuff out out by the majors. But more pretentious.