The Black Hand
Unclean
What would you know about pomo, you live in the nineteenth century.
Hahahhahahaha that's obviously the smell of bullshite emanating from your direction.
football violence vs political violence
- Thread starter bluestreak
- Start date
Hahahhahahaha that's obviously the smell of bullshite emanating from your direction.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
fucking hell man
Police said Walker, from Stafford, had not taken part in the clash between 30 Charlton and 15 Southampton fans at Maze Hill, but had been instrumental in arranging the incident in a series of web postings, e-mails and phone calls.
and he got more than 2 years for that ffs...
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Does this have something to do with soccer hooliganism?
TopCat
Putin fanboy
The police took a pasting on the poll tax riots.
That was a long time ago. You can't seriously be suggesting that physically assaulting the police is a sensible tactic? Unless you have a lot of guns it's suicide.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It's a sensible tactic if you want to get things changed enough not to mind losing your freedom for a while. It may land you in jail for a few years, but if enough of you do it, some of your demands will be met. All governments will make concessions if they fear a breakdown in order. They will lash out nastily, but they will also make concessions.
And in another Poll Tax-style riot, the police would not use guns. British civil society would not tolerate a Mexico- or China-style massacre of protesters.
ETA: Mind you, if it happened, the resultant upheaval could provide the best opportunity for a renewal of the social contract since 1945.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
I have done it and seen it done and the police never yet have fired a shot, no bullets, no baton rounds, just a lot of CCTV and video and big prison sentances.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Maybe. My experience of the police teaches me that you should never underestimate their capacity for incompetence.
Yeah well its true that the British cops are amazingly tolerant. I remember someone posted a video of the "Bash the Rich" march on MATB a few months ago. Posh little punk rockers swearing at the police and being patronizingly patted on their heads for their trouble. In the States they'd have been dead times ten.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I think it's pretty clear that riots can result in change, and far more effectively than marching around. IMO though that's only likely to happen when you get a lot of non-activist type people starting to get involved. If you've got a self-contained group of left-wing types trying to take on the Police it might work once through surprise, but they'll just come back next time with more force.
Onket
Je suis [CONTENT REMOVED]
Depends who you are.
Do you have any examples of where a riot resulted in the change that the rioters wanted?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
The storming of the Bastille?
Betcha every person who took part in that was dead within five years.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
The Bread Riots in St Petersburg, 1917.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Mississippi race riots, 1962.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Riots in Kenya and other British colonies in the 1950s that led to independence.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
... And of course, the Poll Tax Riot in the UK.
Although that was a significant moment there were other changes already in effect that made it so. Otherwise it would have been just another bloody riot.
We've hopefully become a little more advanced since then.
The problem with mob violence is that to use it as a rule for getting what you want allows it to be used by any group wanting anything.
That's all well and good as long as you're on the rioting side. But not so hot when you're the darkie or crip or whatever being rioted against.
You don't legitimise violence because you think your cause is right.
Every fucker thinks their cause is right.
Again. I think it's a mistake to think it was the violence that instigated the change. The causes had popular support.. that was what was important.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
You think the Russian Revolution could have succeeded without violence just because it had popular support?
Of course, without popular support, the causes would not have succeeded, but I think you underestimate the power of violence. There is absolutely no way that the British would have abandoned their empire with such haste if they had not seen their authority being undermined.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
This is precisely how all violence has always been seen to be legitimised.
Governments can do it with armies. The unarmed populace must make do with collective bargaining by riot.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Our weaponry certainly has. Clever old advanced us with our nuclear bombs.
I don't underestimate the power of violence.. that's exactly my point. I think you do.
The point is that without the popular cause the violence would have been nothing but violence.
With the popular cause the violence (in general) is a symptom of mass action that, at best, speeds up the transferrence of power a bit.. but at worst causes irreprable damage to lives, property and social order.
Just isn't worth it.
I think you underestimate how easily violence can spread.. and while you're only thinking about being the one dishing it out.. it's easy to forget that there are folk out there ready to dish it out to you.
You have to include the second part of that sentence... Every fucker thinks their cause is right.
But don't forget there are plenty of causes out there.. and not all of them are right. More importantly none of them should feel that they can get what they want by hurting enough people.
Similar threads
