5
4
4
The British government has charged that the riots are being caused by an increase in "criminality". This is patently ridiculous. What is the difference in London or Manchester now than last year? If these riots are presumed to be the act of "criminals", then what triggered these "criminals" to riot? If "criminality" is the reason why people are on the streets destroying neighborhoods and looting shops, why is it happening all over the country? Did the "criminals" all get together and decide to stage a riot in different cities so that they could hone their "criminal" skills?
There must be some underlying reason why people feel that they need to go out on the streets and break things and to steal from shopkeepers, or was this week just a moment where all the "criminals" decided to act out all at once? This is the supposition that the British Prime Minister, David Cameron is making. This is a situation that shows just how preposterous politicians can be.
When you analyze the situation, what you see is people filing the streets and displaying very anti-social behavior. What the British government is asking the people of Britain and also the rest of the world to do is to assume that there are very many "criminals" in England. While I can agree that the people on the streets are committing criminal acts, I don't believe that all of them decided to be "criminals", and moreover, all on the same day. There must be an underlying reason why this happened in England. There is also a reason why the British government is using such a ridiculous assumption as to the cause of the riots.
I would like to point out a few things and also ask a few questions of the British Prime Minister;
1. Why is there such a disparity between the rich and the poor? Why has income risen for the upper classes while the lower classes have seen a reduction in theirs?
2. Why is Great Britain waging wars in Afghanistan, Libya and other countries under the guise of delivering "democracy" while they are part of a culture that worships class structure?
3. Why is it that "people of color" are living in neighborhoods that are substandard while the richest neighborhoods have very few minorities especially when you consider that the practice of slavery ended so long ago in Britain? Are the minorities just racially inferior to the white people?
4. Why is it that people of every race are rioting in the streets? If you take PM Cameron at his word, it's probably so that they can steal a wide-screen TV.
5. Could it possibly be that corporations are purchasing influence from members of Parliament at the expense of the common people in England?
6. Could it be the possibility that their former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who is now facing extradition to The Hague for war crimes stemming out of the Iraq War, make citizens feel deceived about the war? http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/57361,news-comment,news-politics,war-crime-case-against-tony-blair-is-now-rock-solid
7. Are people rioting because the standard of living gotten has plummeted? The recession has pushed living standards in Britain to below the 2005 general election level. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/dec/31/economic-growth-recession-uk
8. Are people more than just a little bit angry when they are informed that the U.K. faces the sharpest spending cuts since WWII while cutting over half a million jobs? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39754325/ns/world_news-europe/t/uk-faces-sharpest-spending-cuts-wwii/#.TkbxUYJvCZY
9. Are the people angry because many colleges and universities are being forced to close due to British spending cuts while at the same time London is spending millions on foreign wars?
10. Are the lower classes angry because the budget for new social housing would be cut by 60% over four years?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11579979
These are just a few reasons why people in the U.K. might be more than just a little bit angry. I sincerely doubt that people in London, Manchester and other cities in Britain have all decided to become "criminals".
1 | 2
