Riots: London (and elsewhere) 2011.

It survived Hitler’s bombers during the Blitz but today the House of Reeves furniture store in Croydon has been razed to the ground by rioters.
The British Gazette is sure that its readers will have reacted to the riots with a mixture of shock, horror and anger.
There is of course a huge amount of talk coming forth from the mouths of politicians and others involved in public life. Some of it is sensible. Some of it, coming from such as Red Ken Livingston is depressingly predictable.
So, speaking the truth unto the nations, let us nail one falsehood down immediately:

– THIS IS NOT POLITICAL. IT IS CRIMINAL –

Yes, there was a shooting by police of a man and there is some question over the circumstances surrounding the shooting. Yes, there was a reaction by those in the community from which this man came. The riots across London, and now Birmingham and Nottingham however have got NOTHING to do with this.
It is said that the rioters feel they are not part of the community. This is politically correct garbage. These rioters are largely adolescent male youths and young men in the 20s. They are communicating by BlackBerry and are going about their business – looting. This is what these criminals are: Looters. They are sadly joined by others such as women with children who, not taking part in the riots, are nevertheless helping themselves to property that is not theirs.
There are numerous causes:
– the schools have for long now have been preoccupied by a culture of children’s rights. No child can be physically chastised. Teachers have little by way of effective sanctions so far as discipline is concerned.
– there is the preoccupation with “rights” not responsibilities.
– this abdication of loco parentis has now transmitted itself down the generations and today’s rioters who of course are criminal delinquents are themselves the offspring of delinquents.
– then there is the question of race. This has of course been shied away from by the mainstream media but the British Gazette will not shy away from addressing this issue: let it be stated categorically; the rioters are not from one ethnic background. We have seen on our TV screens youths who are clearly “white” as well as youths who are “black.” Others are clearly of mixed race – now referred to by the politically correct term, “dual heritage.” It is however clear that a large proportion of the rioters are “black” men.
The acceptance of this was demonstrated on last night’s Newsnight (BBC2) when the broadcaster and columnist, Darcus Howe took Edwina Curry to task from never being in the position of suffering racial discrimination – because she is “white”. Mr Howe’s point was that his 15 year old grandson knew that the riots were being planned and also told viewers that this youth had been stopped several times by the police and searched. Mr Howe is of the opinion that the police were exercising racial prejudice against his grandson. Mr Howe was of the opinion that if the police “softened their approach” to young persons such as his grandson, the riots would not occur. Mr Howe was backed up in this opinion to some extent by Mr Livingston.
The British Gazette is in no doubt that Mr Howe’s grandson does indeed feel himself to be a victim of racial prejudice. This of course is a problem. It is a problem because over several decades now, young people from the ethnic minorities – particularly “blacks” – have been raised in a society that walks on eggshells around them. This is evidenced by the terms that are used to describe them. Initially referred to as “West Indians” they became “coloured persons” this term being humorously lampooned as “a person of the coloured persuasion” by the character Arthur Daley. Then came the term “Afro-Caribbean”, then “black British” and now “black”. Compare the sensitivity about a mere name with the way that Australians have and still do refer to English people – “pommie bastards” – it could be said that this term is as every bit as insulting as the word “nigger.” The consequences of using each term differ enormously – one will result in a shrug, the other will result in a criminal record. Any English person objecting to being referred to as a “pommie” or a “pom” would be considered brittle, over sensitive and unreasonable. This reflects the traditional robustness of human interaction. No such robustness surrounds the “black community” everybody must walk on eggshells around them.
Who suffers from this situation: ironically, it is the black youths themselves. Educationalists are worried over the under-performance of black youths in schools. The problem is not that these youths are naturally dim. They are not. It is the existence of a situation that when such a youth suffers a set back – such as a poor exam result, a failed job interview, they put it down to racial prejudice against them. The problem starts before this however as many such youths believe that society is prejudiced against them and therefore it is not worth studying hard as the rules of the game are rigged against them. This is a comfortable illusion as it means that they need never feel that they are responsible for their own failure – it is always another person’s fault. This is why such youths find it so difficult to get a job.
The culture of the politically correct society we live in is serving only to perpetuate this false belief.
As to the consequences of the riots themselves: these are very severe. For a start, private capital will be loathed to invest in these areas. Furthermore, people will find their property will now be worth less – on an already depressed housing market. People who can will move away from these areas.
So what needs to be done:
Long term: we need to change society fundamentally. We need to get rid of the culture that leads to such as the Equality and Human Rights Commission. In the modern terminology – this quango is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Short term:
– Reverse the cuts to the Police forces. No police officer should be made redundant – that is not to say that none should be redeployed. Far from spending less on the police, we should, public spending cuts notwithstanding, be spending more on the police. And on such as CCTV cameras. It is oft said that the first duty of government is the protection of the state. This is true and is commonly referred to as expenditure on the armed forces. This “first duty” should be taken to include the protection of the public generally – against civil disorder and crime.
– recruit many more police officers to be trained as specialist riot police. Equip these officers with such as water cannon (the water contains marking compounds which enable the authorities to identify the rioters afterwards). Have such as CS gas and plastic baton rounds deployed. Equip our police with the Land Rover Defenders as used in Northern Ireland.