Sunday, August 14, 2011

A parody of social unity

The global village concept has relied on technological advancements to unite the world. The informational networks become crucial to keep people connected. They are considered the routes to celebrate diversity in societies growing increasingly multicultural. However, as the London riots demonstrate, the spread of dysfunctional attitudes make a parody of social unity. 

Globalization opened up markets beyond national borders. The Internet was meant to bring together diverse cultures. Economic development was expected on one hand, and spirituality on the other. The assumption has been that the new knowledge facilitates the ready acceptance of differences. And yet, London burned...!


Over several days, flash mobs all over sprang into action faster than they could be controlled. The systemic machinery was caught flatfooted. Violence became contagious with diverse groups joining in on muggings, robbings, lootings, arson and pitched battles with police.

 Addley writes:

… familiar and well-loved streets were turned, for a time, into alien, frightening battle zones … shocking because of their speed and unpredictability, but also because of their geographical and socioeconomic scope.

The British Prime Minister opinioned that pockets of society  were sick. The impression might be that criminal gangs were responsible. However, is that the troublemakers were not clearly identifiable as such. Shockingly, they cut across societynot only white, black, Asian, men, women, children, old or young alone, and neither local nor outsiders, but strange combinations of all of these.

Technology was used effectively to organize the rampage, leaving authorities struggling to keep up. Blackberry messenger, facebook, and twitter spread word like wildfire among the rioters. In the context, social mobility took on new meaning.

Lewis and Harkin write:

… territorial markers which would usually delineate young people's residential areas – known as 'endz', 'bits' and 'gates' – appear to have melted away. "On a normal day it wouldn't be allowed – going in to someone else's area. A lot of them, on a normal day, wouldn't know each other and they might be fighting … This is bringing them together."

Some authors identify alienation, anger, boredom and mischief as the common factors in the chaos.  Some say the long police history of heavy-handedness with the underclass has boiled over. Others point to government policies forcing brutal cuts and austerity measures onto populations. The ordinary experience widening social inequalities, while the richest ten percent reportedly become one hundred times better off at their expense.
In the present context, Power comments:
…consumerism predicated on personal debt has been pushed for years as the solution to a faltering economy … Decades of individualism, competition and state-encouraged selfishness – combined with a systematic crushing of unions and the ever-increasing criminalisation of dissent – have made Britain one of the most unequal countries in the developed world.
I should think that the sense of inequality perceived among social groups is more than a recent occurrence - in fact, a legacy of past imperial practices over populations. Essentially, the interpretations of life naturally differ with cultures. In Western philosophies, for instance, goals have traditionally based on the idea that people have but one lifetime to make an impact.  Since survival is of the fittest, individualism must be favoured. Through centuries, the outlook broke new ground, but it also broke moral and ethical boundaries. 

Western explorers have sailed boldly into unchartered waters to discover the ends of the world driven by the spirit of adventure. The self-reliance and openness to new experiences allowed finding new frontiers. They pushed gathering of new knowledge beyond existing limits.

Tales of wealthy foreign cultures by numerous travellers spawned expeditions to unknown regions also in search of gold, spices, silks, and so on, initially for simple trade in oriental goods. However, economic depressions, internal stresses and market protectionism changed the Western outlook to territorial takeovers. In relentless pursuit of the capture and control of treasured resources, traders became political extensions of their monarchies abroad.

Political fractures within and between communities were exploited to divide and rule.  Ultimately continents were successfully colonized. The English, for instance, were able to boast that the sun never set on their empire. The people they assumed power over were perceived livestock that could be used and abused in slave and labour trades.

Western expansionism flourished also because the foreign lands were peopled by deferent, inward-looking cultures. The Eastern philosophies upheld collectivism, and the ideal of community before self. They tended towards peace of mind, harmonious reciprocity and cosmic karma. However, they were manipulated to lose even national identity for several centuries.


Globalization has most benefited the corporate world, and mostly those located in the West. It enables companies become multinational, to employ skills from a global workforce. But at the same time, rapid changes in reality have been far more than most people could cope with. Despite new markets, local availability of jobs for the underprivileged is rendered uncertain, because outsourcing is common. This cements cross-cultural animosities, although the divisive practice is an indigenous product honed over centuries.

Technology has indeed transformed reality. However, economic and political power games have resisted change. The informational networks have also juxtaposed social issues of past and present in people's minds. They have enabled greater awareness of differences against similarities between diverse people. 

Issues of the present reactivate memories of past racial and cultural inequalities among minority groups. Although demographic migrations post-globalization turned societies heterogeneous, interrelationships between social fractions are ambiguous at best. Distinct cultures coexist in society, but have hardly reconciled with the values of others, especially the majority. Habitual thought and practice remains entrenched in ethnic perspectives. Thus, social divides harboured in the mind never really close. 

The historical wounds of inequalities among minority groups and other social have-nots  also carry forward, mounting tensions generation to generationTheir collective rage might even make the past indignities feel real in the environment here and now. It seems a shame that the rioters turned to destruction as the only way to communication.  It is perhaps more shameful that despite claims of celebrating diversity, Western powers-that-be are yet to get over selfish consumerism, and to harmonize relations with all others that share the same universe, including those within their own societies.


References for this post:

  1. Addley, Esther. “London riots: 'A generation who don't respect their parents or police'guardian.co.uk The Guardian. Tuesday 9 August 2011. 
  2. Lewis, Paul and Harkin, James. “Who are the rioters? Young men from poor areas ... but that's not the full storyguardian.co.uk The Guardian. 10 August 2011. 
  3. "Imperialism in Asia" wikipedia.org. Wikipedia the free encyclopedia. 25 July 2011. 
  4. The story behind the mugging that shocked the world” Reuters report. stuff.co.nz.  Stuff.co.nz. 11/08/2011. 

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

We (the British) may have captured and coloniesed many parts of the world but we did do some good.
We introduced you all to Cricket!!!!

Ham said...

The problems were major and severe. Some were spontanious but many were planned and executed by criminals and gangs.
Reports said that people had heard groups of people organising tactics and getting more people engaged to stretch resources.
I think as a rule people feel more comfortable within their own groups, which are again usually based on culture, colour, creed, religion and class rather than a location although because humans tend to be a "Herd animal" like groups do live colse together for security and a good feeling. This is why Diversity as very hard to achieve as people prefer to be with "their own kind", they understand the culture, the rules, the feelings and for others, even those willing to do so, it is hard to break in.
It makes me worder why they would want to distroy their local community which suggests that it was groups from other areas destroying other people areas.

Clearly there were two types of people involved. Those who thought steeling a few pairs of shoes was a bit of fun and organised groups steeling from shops to order. The organised groups all hid their faces whereas the fun seakers didn't and so are easier to catch.

In Britain we are faced with reducing a huge debt and everyone is paying the price. Those with little now have even less but benefits are one of the causes of the debt in the first place.
We are not alone in having a class system ranging from those with a lot to those who have virtually nothing - in the Asian subcontinent I believe they have 6 classes from Braman (top) to Untouchables (the lowest of the low). Here even those with nothing can achieve a better standard of living IF THEY CHOOSE TO WORK HARD but many don't they choose to take money and do nothing.

There are some who cannot achieve anything and need help but there are also many who just can't be bothered.

I'm afraid it's a good thing I'm not mayor of London otherwise i think I may have used Chinese or Syrian tactics and issued machine guns to the police and told them to fire at the knees and then arrested those people in hospital. Not sure you would have had the same level of trouble if that was the responce.