Responses to the Riots reveal the Prejudices of the Liberal Left

This morning the FTSE100 fell in early trade to 4,866.48, meaning the onset of a new stock market crash and no doubt international economic misery from us all...

But who cares about that?! People were smashing stuff up in London, Liverpool and Birmingham last night!

No, more than usual!

There is a tendency here to try and politicise the riots that began in Tottenham and tore through Hackney, Brixton, Croydon and on to Liverpool, Birmingham and Bristol.

Riots don't happen out of the blue I'll give you that. But if ever there was a case of oppurtunism, the Tottenham riots were just that. On the back of a perfectly legitimate, peaceful demonstration outside Tottenham police station, a series of gangsters and thugs have taken the oppurtunity to go on a rampage around the country, looting and pillaging. Naturally a lot of people are "having opinions" on why this is happening.

The view being taken by a lot the various left-liberal and horribly middle-class commentators (not to mention Ken Livingstone) takes these riots from a high structuralist perch. These riots are not a response to specific policies or, really, even a specific incident (the shooting of Mark Duggan can't possibly still be relevant) so we're basically having to take it as read that this is general response to the socio-economic circumstances that they find themselves in. Well, duh. That's why they're expressing their anger in the form of looting local shops and smashing uo the houses of people often in exactly the same situation as they are? Yeah, wow, power to the people!

The stance being taken by a lot of political commentators is simply patronising. Who is Dan Hodges to say "Our streets are aflame. Now black Britain will be allowed its say"?

Sorry, because black people are such a bunch of ignorant savages that they can't express themselves except through violence?

It's also this idea of mass movement someone signifying political legitimacy. There are robberies and shootings all the time in these same areas of London, but I rarely see these same people being hailed as an political commentators. But when they all gang together to do exactly the same thing on a larger scale, it's a folk movement!

The only thing I'd say this really proves is that the poorer areas of London have given rise to gang culture. That's clearly the case. And that needs to be addressed - but the people who are trying to defend the actions of violent thugs due to their circumstances and the policies of the government are on a par with defending Anders Behring Breivik's shootings as the inevitable cause of Islamic immigration.

If I see some graffitti, or banners or any example proving a politicsed intent from the rioters then I concede a political intent. But to try and categorise a group of thinking, reasoning people as being a mindless reactive mass who can only express themselves on the most base level to circumstances beyond their control is actually the most insulting macro-sociological attitude to take and completely ignores the input of individuals, completely ignores the plight of the victims and is an enourmously patronising high-on-a-pedastal attitude from a bunch of pseudo-liberal commentators who of course would never stoop to that level themselves...

In a way, I'd prefer it if they did just want to nick a widescreen TV. At least that proves some kind of individual motivation.