London Riots

Dave,

Regarding the ban on social media, Moubarak did the same thing. The difference is that Moubarak was a dictator and he had been in power for over 30 years.

I don't understand how the looters are the first to blame. Isn't the state first responsible for raising uneducated and violent individuals little opportunities?
 
Again, this technology is in it's infancy as well as the unintended consequences of said technology. I think it is an interesting topic to see how this sort of thing can be channeled, regulated, or something else. :confused:
 
Dave,

I agree with you, it's interesting to see how this develops.

But I still think that if the government cuts the transmission channels that people use to communicate (social networks, cellphones), they are just showing that they haven't been doing a good job.
 
here in the US, especially in our inner-cities, there is dearth of father figures. either dad has moved to another city to escape responsibilities, or dad just doesn't care, or dad is drug-wasted or dead. we are left with a third generation - perhaps fourth - of boys raised by mothers and grandmothers, many of whom (perhaps most) are too busy, or too lazy, or too drug-hammered to care.
is this the case in inner-city UK and/or Europe?
 
London riots: photographers targeted by looters

London riots: photographers targeted by looters

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/aug/09/london-riots-photographers-targeted

"However a lot of photographers, including those working for agencies, are now trying to remain as inconspicuous as possibly by using high definition flip cameras that look like mobile phones but take professional quality images. The Canon G11 is an example of one used by quite a few agency photographers." -- from the story in the Guardian.

Powerful AFP images:

http://www.leonneal.com/blog/2011/08/12/london-riots-august-2011/
 
paulfish4570 said:
here in the US, especially in our inner-cities, there is dearth of father figures. either dad has moved to another city to escape responsibilities, or dad just doesn't care, or dad is drug-wasted or dead. we are left with a third generation - perhaps fourth - of boys raised by mothers and grandmothers, many of whom (perhaps most) are too busy, or too lazy, or too drug-hammered to care.
is this the case in inner-city UK and/or Europe?
Click to expand...

That`s the problem in these inner city areas in the UK, Paul
Add to that a lack of jobs ..two or three generations that have never seen work ,rampant consumerism coupled with a breakdown in Church and community structures.
Nobody has taught them consideration or personal responsibility .
They`ve therefore created their own values and authority figures .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe some people have forgotten that the right to freedom of speech also carries the responsibility to use that right in a manner not likely to harm or put at risk others. Add to that vested interests will use the misuse of social networking as an excuse to gain more control over it given the current Terrorist climate. It may cost everyone more of their privacy and freedoms in the long run.

Bob
 
Michael Markey said:
That`s the problem in these inner city areas in the UK, Paul
Add to that a lack of jobs ..two or three generations that have never seen work ,rampant consumerism coupled with a breakdown in Church and community structures.
Nobody has taught them consideration or personal responsibility .
They`ve therefore created their own values and authority figures .
Click to expand...

Well put Michael, same scenario here in the US, unfortunately.

But compared to Britain, things here are quiet - TOO quiet, as they used to say in the old movies. ;-(

Of course, here the police will not be standing around unarmed, they will have automatic weapons. Likewise the rioters. Maybe that is keeping a temporary lid on things. Sort of like the US and USSR during the cold war - each side knew the other could inflict a lot of damage, so both sides stood down.

Randy
 
I heard a presentation a few days ago that is very relevant to what is being discussed here in these recent posts. The presenter was describing a study that has identified the five major influences on youth and tracked them over several decades. The influences were not dependent on ethnicity or socio-economic status (according to the study). Let me throw out a tidbit.

According to the presenter, the five major influences on a youth growing up in the 1950's was - in order of importance:
1) Home
2) School
3) Church
4) Peers
5) TV

The five major influences identified in the 2000's was:
1) Videos (TV and games)
2) Internet
3) Computers
4) Movies
5) Network TV

I'm not so sure I agree with this so don't flame me personally if you disagree; I'm passing along a bit of information I encountered. I have e-mailed the presenter for the study he referenced. I will post it as soon as I receive it - otherwise it's just a "he said" discussion.

I think what is true and important to understand is that the influences that shaped our lives (and the consequences) are different from what influences or deters the actions of youth today. Just saying, "Well when I was a kid..." is not always useful. We have to consider these youth in the current environment they live in and the surrounding influences. I don't have any miraculous answers; I wish I did.
 
SciAggie said:
According to the presenter, the five major influences on a youth growing up in the 1950's was - in order of importance:
1) Home
2) School
3) Church
4) Peers
5) TV

The five major influences identified in the 2000's was:
1) Videos (TV and games)
2) Internet
3) Computers
4) Movies
5) Network TV
Click to expand...

Interesting that all of the five current influences are brought to us by corporations and all require purchase/rent. However, I'm sure there would be no problems if people were encouraged to beat their children more often, and more brutally. The psychological and sexual abuse that the church provides would also help, especially the boys.
 
Last edited:
Ranchu said:
Interesting that all of the five current influences are brought to us by corporations and all require purchase/rent. However, I'm sure there would be no problems if people were allowed to beat their children.
Click to expand...

Yes the trend was clearly away from the influences of the home, church, and school and replaced by different types of media introduced by emerging technologies (that one must pay for). Several participants from the session I attended remarked that services for pay provide content driven by profits and not the common good. Quite a frightening paradigm shift from what most of us experienced in our youth.
 
The above statement is not a blanket condemnation of business search for profit. After reading my own post, it seems my statements could be taken that way and that is not my position.
 
Comparing commercial influence with specific religious influence (i.e. one particular sect or religion), I'm not sure the cash nexus isn't safer.

If you doubt this, don't think of your own religion/sect. Think of one you don't agree with.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Comparing commercial influence with specific religious influence (i.e. one particular sect or religion), I'm not sure the cash nexus isn't safer.

If you doubt this, don't think of your own religion/sect. Think of one you don't agree with.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Good point Roger. The presenter I mention made a distinction that the influence of church did not matter as to any religion at all. He was really not speaking about the spiritual aspect so much as the social norms one learns in the institutional setting of the church. For example, the socially accepted norms of dress, behavior, how to interact with adults, etc. Reflecting on my own experiences, I think I did learn a great deal in church as a youth about how to interact with others and what the social norms were. That is totally separate from any value judgement about the spiritual aspect of church that I agree we should avoid in this discussion. In my own community the weekly attendance to church by the public is a low percentage of the overall population, so youth here do miss out on that opportunity for social education not related to religion. Did I make sense?
 
SciAggie said:
According to the presenter, the five major influences on a youth growing up in the 1950's was - in order of importance:
1) Home
2) School
3) Church
4) Peers
5) TV

The five major influences identified in the 2000's was:
1) Videos (TV and games)
2) Internet
3) Computers
4) Movies
5) Network TV
Click to expand...

So where were books, magazines, newspapers, movies and comics in the fifties (when TV still was far from omnipresent, especially in lower income families)? What possible influence could "computers" have outside of Internet and games, what is the difference between "Video(TV)" and "Movies", other than the distribution format? And don't at least middle class children still go to school and have at least one parent? And what generous sponsor is supposed to be buying up all the books, comics and magazines still being sold, and where is his personal landfill? And has music really never been a determining factor for youths, then or now?

There are a bit too many points where these rankings don't match even the most basic reality check...
 
Last edited:
Ranchu said:
The psychological and sexual abuse that the church provides would also help, especially the boys.
Click to expand...

I`m at a bit of a loss to know how to respond to that without sounding dismissive of what clearly is unacceptable behaviour especially by a body that`s is supposed to care for temporal and spiritual welfare .
Suffice to say that I`d not let it obscure the greater good.
I know of what I speak having attended an all boys Catholic school, all be it one run by lay people.
Punishments were severe and involved regular beatings whether or not any transgression had occurred.
That was to teach you that life wasn`t fair.
I also seem to recall the rather imaginative use of electricity as an aid to teaching.
I`d be the last one therefore to suggest such an approach in this or any other case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom