Vobluda
Well-known
Exactly, I just didn't dare to move from social/ethic part of the thing to politics.
I echo every word you say, but at the risk of sounding like a bleeding-heart liberal, I'd add
4: Ever increasing gap between rich and poor, leading to a feeling that they've very little to lose.
They're wrong, of course, but if as a group the poor and powerless become still poorer and more powerless, then the poor as a group willl riot more. Look at English history in the late 18th and early 19th century (urbanization after the Industrial Revolution).
Of course poverty in this sense is relative: I suspect that 99% or more of rioters have a roof over their heads, and that they also have enough (more than enough?) to eat. So maybe it's time to stop calling it 'poverty' (which it isn't, by any reasonable definition) and to start concentrating on the phrase 'wealth gap' instead. If people start realizing thast they are not, in fact, actually living in poverty because they have only one colour television, they might (but only might) feel less hard done by.
Cheers,
R.