London Riots - OR - What's your favourite thing about Hitler?

[Ali]

Soooo.... you ARE for letting criminals pay, eye for an eye, thooth for a tooth? I don't quite get it. Is being a dictator a crime different from any other kind? That's actually worse than what you condemned to this second.

If that's directed towards me, I'll assume it was written before I added the depressingly-necessary-on-the-internet disclaimer in parenthises:

For a dictator, swinging from a lamppost is natural causes.

(I'm still a hippy opponent of capital punishment in all its forms, of course, just not very sympathetic in some cases.)

EDIT: For future reference, yes being a dictator IS different to other kinds of crime. Obviously. In that it has different characteristics.

[NsMn]

I'm not talking about capital punishment, what I mean is that executing someone without a trial is not only harsher than having stronger punishments, but it's also against the principle of rule-by-law.
Or, as historian Ernst Nolte once put it:

I demand justice for everybody, even for Adolf Hitler!

[LUniqueDan]

Little nostalgia passing by.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivOvQBlaRIQ

[Atelier]

Aside from that, I'm astounded how anybody can actually defend them. Oh they are such poor souls. Their lives are so oppressive, so hard, in comparison to people dying from starvation and disease in Kenyan refugee camps. It's not fair how they're given the chance at a free education.

I tell you why: Because you know SHIT about them. They all live their individual lives and you know SHIT about their lives. Don't try to pigeonhole all the looters.

Ok, don't assume I don't know about their lives, because you know jack shit about me. I couldn't say 'us' or 'our' because I'm not one of them. Either way I'm hardly socially/financially superior and I certainly didn't profess to be. To avoid generalising, I'll break down the looters some other way shall I, and then hopefully I can explain what I meant.

Each looter made an absolute willful choice to take part. I have been talking about the looters who claim they're treated unfairly by the state, not the 'lower' class as a whole. Not the old ladies and gentlemen or average law-abiding citizens living just up the road/two tower-block floors up from said looters, who lead identical lives (in financial and social senses), but clearly they are not identically moral. Just remember that not everybody in Tottenham, poor areas of Manchester, Liverpool, and other flash-points went out rioting, because that is a crucially important point.

Now, in my opinion each looter falls into at least one of these categories:

1. Showing the police they're not in charge
2. Uprising against the rich
3. Free stuff
4. A laugh/nothing else to do
5. Genuine political statement

Now, the first category is simply brought about by a lack of respect for authority, or an alternative explained in the next paragraph. If they just go out looting, because they don't respect authority and want to throw bricks at police, they are anarchists and are doing it for the adrenaline rush (and of course, those sorts of people fall into multiple of the above categories too). I can't think of anything else to say about these people. You would be crazy to deny it's a fact of life that some people really are brain-dead. This also basically sums up category 4. Look here or here - the last one makes me laugh. Another dolt blamed Tony Blair. And don't forget, over 2000 people have been arrested for involvement in these riots now. Just think of all the hundreds and hundreds of people they didn't interview, who would have made equally and indubitably more ridiculous statements. Then you will begin to understand why I generalise these looters.

Alternatively, category 1 rioters genuinely feel oppressed by the police and the repressed hostility just boiled over. Now this was quite clearly what first instigated the riots - if Mark Duggan wasn't shot I believe this would never have happened. At least, until another opportunity arose. A protest march organised by family members and members of the community went to the local police station looking for answers about his death. When they waited for 3 or 4 hours the crowd got agitated and things turned nasty and there was a face-off in the streets. Of course these people had every right to protest! But the protest turned into a riot which gave momentum to other would-be rioters and anarchists across the country, who had nothing to do with Mark Duggan!

So, the second category is a serious example of people being brought up to believe that materialism is life's only goal. Having a 'protest' against the rich and 'redistributing'* (ie stealing) the wealth would not achieve and has not achieved anything and it's a lame excuse. The third category is similar but has more to do with once-in-a-lifetime opportunism. These unprecedented riots happen and people immediately call for societal change, because sure let's blame it on society. It must be society's fault! Has nobody realised that the fundamental problem could be with people's attitudes and outlooks on life; is British society really betraying these people, or are these people instilled with distorted expectations of the state?

I referenced Kenyan refugee camps (spawned off of Somalian famines) because it was the first thing to spring to mind. It wasn't just a guilt trip, it was part of my point above. Such people would give anything to come and live in Britain (asylum seekers), because the quality of life here is almost incomparable to what they're used to. It's interchangeable with anything. More permanent slums in Mumbai, people dying in Tripoli as you read this, dozens of other humanitarian crises world-wide; and yes, I do feel lucky I don't live in those countries and have half of the problems of the people living there. I do not expect anything more from the government than what is currently given. This is why (which I mandatorily have to say: in my opinion), category 5 looters who think they go out looting for solely a political purpose are... deluded. Nobody with a true political cause would go out looting shops... it just doesn't make sense to me.

That isn't any better than saying jews are greedy or black people are inferior.

Now I'm suddenly only a post away from saying that?? It is so desperately different and I can't even see how you managed to bring race into this argument at all.

* How I heard it described in one interview with a rioter



Anyway the topic has completely changed now so I think it's about time we updated the AGS political compass

[InCreator]

Now everyone keeps talking of "deterrence", but what does that really mean? Essentially, deterrence as WHAM and co. define it is fear. Fear of harsh punishment. Fear of death. But what, really, does this fear accomplish? Practically, the fear does not stem from the criminal act itself, but rather of getting caught and facing the consequences, however severe they may be. Let us examine which criminal acts would be eradicated through this fear. For crimes of passion and opportunity, one is aware only of the immediate results of the act (e.g. dead spouse, new TV, adrenaline rush), and is unfocused on or discounting of possible punishment that would await one after capture. For premeditated cases, the perpetration takes the steps necessary to avoid apprehension and intends on escape. Whether they would spend 10, 25, or 50 years in prison of face the death penalty would have negligible effect on someone who intends to get away with it.

Either I don't get it or you don't.

Fear? Fear is very human and basic stuff. How to we raise kids? "You fuck this up, you'll be grounded/dispelled/scolded/whatever". Fear. Fear of unwanted consequences to unruly action.

What is wrong with fear? We get fear injected into us every day. Living in democracy is one endless fear that it might end at some moment. How did brits feel when gangs were on the street? Afraid. How do you counter fear? With hugs? Also, fear is what triggers our survival instincts so we'd be extinct without fear. For example, we got so damn afraid after WWII that we cannot freely talk about it even now, 70 years later. But how much this fear changed world! Space race, anyone?

But yeah, political compass pretty much sums this thread up and shows what a bunch of rebellious hippies we have here. If anybody should govern our newfound state, it's WHAM. Not because he's reborn Stalin, but because a true leader cannot be a undecisive hippie. That's what separates kings and rabble.

As for races, it's not the skin color, but culture that makes people act different.
And yes, people with this or that race have separate culture omitted to the race, so unfortunately, everything said can be taken as attack against both of things.
I'd say "people of African culture are this or that" and crappy thing is, saying "black people are this or that" would be almost same, since most black people leave in Africa so hippes start yelling "racist" before I get to end the sentence.
It's also interesting that "not racist"  is more important to be nowadays than "honest". Eh, we'll regret this one day. But then it's too late. But this is totally offtopic here.

[NsMn]

As for races, it's not the skin color, but culture that makes people act different.
And yes, people with this or that race have separate culture omitted to the race, so unfortunately, everything said can be taken as attack against both of things.
I'd say "people of African culture are this or that" and crappy thing is, saying "black people are this or that" and it would be almost same, since most black people leave in Africa.
It's also interesting that "not racist"  is more important to be nowadays than "honest". Eh, we'll regret this one day. But then it's too late. But this is totally offtopic here.

Especially since today, not being racist only means accepting other cultures, whether similar to ours or horribly inhumane (like those indian tribes who let their children jump from a tower), but one's own cultural surroundings can be insulted as one likes. One example would be the constant atheist vs. christian argument in Europe, but if you criticize Islam, THEN you're clearly a racist.

[Calin Leafshade]

Fear? Fear is very human and basic stuff. How to we raise kids? "You fuck this up, you'll be grounded/dispelled/scolded/whatever". Fear. Fear of unwanted consequences to unruly action.

I think this is where we fundamentally differ.

I don't believe that fear is an effective governing method or rather I don't think it is the *most* effective. We are, by nature, a social species that instinctively works together. The best way to lower crime rates is better education, both moral and otherwise. Certainly there are aberrations in society that need to be kept separate for everyone's safety but that is not the rule.

If WHAM's assertions were correct, that people are either law abiding by nature or they should be killed then the only way he could account for the widely unbalanced prison population is racism and facism. Why are you more likely to be in prison if you are a poor, black male? Why are you less likely to be in prison if you are more educated even when factoring in things like wealth?

Further more, going back to InCreators point about raising children, what do you think happens to children that are taught right and wrong using fear and violence? Children learn from their parents by *emulation*. If a childs father uses fear and intimidation to tell them what to do then they associate that behaviour as acceptable and use it to get what they want. Children with violent childhoods are far more likely to end up in prison than those without.

"I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law."
-Aristotle

[WHAM]

We are, by nature, a social species that instinctively works together. The best way to lower crime rates is better education, both moral and otherwise.

No we aren't! Human beings tend to only work for their own personal good. Laws are in place to ensure as many people as possible agree on what is good for YOU and through that, what is good for the community as a whole. Break the law = punishment = not good for YOU = you are discouraged from breaking the law.

If WHAM's assertions were correct, that people are either law abiding by nature or they should be killed then the only way he could account for the widely unbalanced prison population is racism and facism. Why are you more likely to be in prison if you are a poor, black male? Why are you less likely to be in prison if you are more educated even when factoring in things like wealth?

It is the poor and the minorities who, in their greed and perceived misery ("boo-hoo, I am poor and miserable because I cannot afford a new TV, when millions of people are literally starving to death, but that's neither here nor there!") turn to their animalistic side, abandon the law and abandon humanity and break the law for their own personal gain, like the looters from whom this discussion/debate began from. This is another issue we must be able to resolve, sooner, rather than later: too many people = uneven distribution of wealth = unhappiness in those who perceive themselves as being "poor"

Further more, going back to InCreators point about raising children, what do you think happens to children that are taught right and wrong using fear and violence? Children learn from their parents by *emulation*. If a childs father uses fear and intimidation to tell them what to do then they associate that behaviour as acceptable and use it to get what they want. Children with violent childhoods are far more likely to end up in prison than those without.

Knowing what the mind of the majority here is, I'll get branded for this, but I remember how I was punished as a kid. There were threats of violence, mild but still violence, if I misbehaved repeatedly. If I went far enouh out of line, I got physically punished (spanking etc). I suffered such punishment on three occasions, and I learned from them.
Do not come home by bedtime = punishment = I did not repeat this mistake
Do not take something without permission (steal) = punishment = I did not repeat this mistake
Do not lie to your parents = punishment = I have not told a lie to my parents since the age of 13

Biggest issue of modern society is not the laws or punishments, it is the fact that people are not given the rules, the laws of society, at a young enough age and they do not know what is OK and what is not when they grow up.

Also: I haven't gotten a single fine, have not had a single issue with the police, have never broken the law (well, I did speed that one time, but that's not exactly a major crime now is it?) and have had a normal life in a small apartment, doing 10 hour days at work, living with my girlfriend. I guess that's all the violence and threat thereof I suffered in childhood making me a bad and twisted person, eh?

[Calin Leafshade]

have never broken the law (well, I did speed that one time, but that's not exactly a major crime now is it?)

Speeding is a serious crime that could cause harm to small children. I think (and the king agrees with me because he happens to prefer bicycles) that you should be executed for your crime. You have just confessed to the crime so no appeals will be given.

You will be executed in 5 minutes.

[InCreator]

I do not understand Calin at all.

Look, at some point humans decided to live together. But to make everybody clear how it's going to work, the force/will of majority was established. Laws are just its written form, ethics is the unwritten one.

Say, as a member of this civilization, I want to just walk to this exact spot on the planet. Can I? No damn way. Because between me and the place I want to go is a country border and rest of the civilization pays money for people to guard it. With firearms... I walk, they shoot and nobody cares what I think about this.
The earth is divided by those major groups and they WILL maim and kill if needed, to ensure their laws and right to it. That's called "protecting your country". They are stealing, begging and researching for more and more efficient killing machines every day to be even better at shooting my sorry ass.

Say, I want to walk around naked. What will rest of the humans do? They will send people in blue uniforms who will rob me of my freedom or if I resist, possibly even my life. And I can't do shit about this because majority has agreed that one should not walk around naked. So in fear of imprisonment and death I will definitely not do this. Or stop paying tax. Or anything else.

What I'm saying is that fear is with me all times. Don't howl with the wolves and you're the dinner. By just being born into this or that country, local majority instantly claims me as their own and immediately forces their demands/laws/culture/taxes on me.

Criminals, looters, etc just deny this reality. Say, local crime rate is 7%. That means that concept of fear works for 93% of people. And now let's abandon fear as a psychological tool just because it didn't work for 100%?

Death is the ultimate fear for human being. I seriously, even despite all the statistics in the world cannot see as being less efficient than lifetime imprisonment. As for criminals, I personally know a quite a lot of them and I don't rehabilitation is very likely. Criminal is usually someone who just doesn't give a shit what happens. That's very primary characteristic for anyone turned to serious crime, unless it's a rare case impulsive thing with no preliminary criminal intent.

That said, I'm not saying one should execute anyone for looting London, but if there's no strict and immediate consequences, brits better spend the money they collected for new car or own business in nearest pub, because there could be more of the riots due shitty, eurosoftâ,,¢ justice system. I'm quite sure that heavy immigration plays part in increasing crime rates too, which in the other hand is caused by inequal nature of capitalist countries. If we'd all hunt our food, one forest wouldn't be substantially more desirable than other. And in soviet union, everywhere sucked, so there was no major difference between living in, say - Latvia vs. Ukraine.

[Nickel]

The text says: "London assigns Breivik: Youth riots stopped."
It's a satirical magazin from germany.

[NsMn]

I used to like the Titanic magazine, but I don't quite get this.

[Atelier]

Indeed. What an odd sense of humour.

[WHAM]

I like it! 

[LUniqueDan]

I'm suprise that the convo didn't halt yet.

[Snarky]

There's throwing around "Hitler/nazi/fascist" as an insult (what Godwin's law applies to), and then there's "What you have outlined is literally the philosophy and political program of fascism," which happens more rarely because few people are actually willing to defend fascism and argue that Hitler is only known as a bad guy because he lost.

The conversation is still pretty much redundant at that point, just because of how discredited that position is.

As a side note, trying to explain all human behavior as motivated by fear (and hence claiming that fear is the only way to instill desired behavior), apart from being depressing, is as reductive and simplistic as Freud explaining everything with sex, or classical economists with the maximization of profit. These are motivations, yes, but they are not the only motivations.

[Calin Leafshade]

If the only reason you dont go around killing people is because you are afraid of the law then you can stay at least 3 countries away from me.
That literally makes you a psychopath in the medical sense of the word.

[WHAM]

If the only reason you dont go around killing people is because you are afraid of the law then you can stay at least 3 countries away from me.
That literally makes you a psychopath in the medical sense of the word.

Let's look at a country that does not have a police force, shall we?
Iraq?

The nation's police force have been basically driven into hiding, and the foreign military forces who are present are unable to maintain a safe environment. Terrorist movements have risen to seemingly limitless power, vehicles transporting local civilian police to training are bombed to keep a police force from forming and the people...? Live happily ever after? I doubt that...

Indiscriminate bombings of military, police and civilian targets are damn near daily over there, and I can't help but wonder WHY? Why is there nothing stopping these madmen, these animals?

Yes, I am aware the reason Iraq does not have a police force is the war, and yes this is a special situation, but if you cannot see the pattern here, you must be blind! Police were removed from society -> Criminal scum has nothing to really fear as the closest thing to law is far overstretched, poorly trained and ineffective (Coalition troops are good soldiers, but now jack shit about serving and protecting) -> criminal scum keeps a police force from regaining strength -> Anarchy

[Ali]

Indiscriminate bombings of military, police and civilian targets are damn near daily over there, and I can't help but wonder WHY? Why is there nothing stopping these madmen, these animals?

Honestly, it's as if you're a doing an impression of a naive authoritarian (who is otherwise a pretty nice guy, I think).

Why? You answer your own question. An ill-conceived cynically motivated war, which allowed terrorist groups to capitalise upon growing resentment towards the US and the power vacuum left by Saddam's ousting. They're not mad, they're not animals. They are sane human beings, committing terrible acts. The regular attacks on members of the public are morally indefensible, but there is so much more behind them than the lack of a police force.

Bearing in mind that some of the attacks are suicide bombings, in what way could fear prevent them being committed?

There was an interesting study  2009 by Victoria Talwar of McGill University (which I read about in Born Liars) comparing two African schools. One of which had a discipline code similar to a European School, and a neighboring school with a much harsher regime of in which corporal punishment and public humiliation could be expected for even small misdemeanors. Both schools were pretty similar in social and economic terms.

The researchers played a game with children from both schools, in which the children were given an opportunity to cheat. They all did (they do across all cultures, apparently), but the children from the more draconian school resisted cheating for much, much longer.

So far, so good for beatings.

However, the children were then asked if they cheated. Children from the first school often admitted cheating quite quickly, though a few lied.

Interestingly, almost all the children from the second school lied. With a level of expertise from the younger children which shocked the researchers.

I would say, this is because they lived in a violent fear-led regime which rendered morality irrelevant.

[InCreator]

That literally makes you a psychopath in the medical sense of the word.

In terms of psychiatry, yes,

In every other, normal human being.

Killing (or preparing for it) is what we do best, spend most money on and what is responsible for scientific breakthroughs for millenniums. I would even go as far to say that we need old good war every now and then, to rebuild, improve and invent new stuff. Coming back to space race and nuclear power here is easiest but there's so awfully much more stuff that are more or less war-related.

Also, killing is natural. All lifeforms are in some kind of food chain where's killing involved. Either as eater or the dinner.

Even if we say it's unnatural for humans, it's just hypocrisy, because tonnes of meat were produced as I typed this post and I'm going to eat some of it soon. And at even most holy hippie mode, I don't see any of pacifists doing much to -- say -- help people not get killed in some remote African hellhole.

Or let's try another view: Out of 100 latest video games released until right now, how many of them contains killing someone as an objective? Which types sell best? etc...
There's no point in arguing that "it's just a media conspiracy" because most people really really do enjoy shooting at stuff/people and raining hell from the skies. Games are made exactly like people like them, and how they like them most. I doubt most gamers would ever really kill anyone, but if it's out of question at all, why are we getting more and more realistic kill simulators every day?