London Calling

[giblets]

Since:

-Mothers are favoured in custody cases even when abusive

Don't mothers traditionally care for children?

-Men are expected to pay child support for kids that aren't even genetically theirs!

Traditionally knowledge of genetics wasn't available. Plus, nothing nontraditional about making men support a family financially.

-Since religious people are mocked

Is the state doing this? Really?

-Since heterosexuality hasn't been normative any more

So if the state isn't at war with homosexuals, it must be at war with traditional families? There's no way to peacefully coexist with both? And you think the state is supposed to engage in social engineering by trying to set norms?

-Since motherhood has been devalued

How is this the state's fault? You seem to blame the state for everything society does, as if you think the state is supposed to engage in social engineering.

-Since the welfare state has eliminated all incentives for women to find productive men instead of sex men for mates.

What, you think women only want men for money and sex?

Also what's up with you? Every state in the history of ever has been at war with the family. Because family is in direct competition to a man's loyalty to a religion/state! Even early Christianity was very unfriendly to marriage and family (do I need to bring up quites to prove this?). Duh, read up on some sociological papers dude.

Really? Simply collecting taxes is an act of war against families now?

[MOBIUS]

this is something i wondered about. it might be a good idea for resident to get themselves organised to defend their streets and communities. although this would involve people acknowleding the existence of their neighbours and talking to them, which might be a bit hard in london.

Big Society

Amazon biggest gainers in Sports & Leisure sales rank over the past 24 hours

Somehow I doubt the English have suddenly got addicted to baseball overnight...

[The Mad Monk]

What he needs to do is make it appear like he gives a ****.

Yeah, like The Queen.

[Heraclitus]

Don't mothers traditionally care for children?

No. Traditionally a mother and father would provide and care for the children together, single motherhood was shunned. Divorce either wasn't allowed or it it was custody of the children was male by default.

Don't mothers traditionally care for children?
Traditionally knowledge of genetics wasn't available. Plus, nothing nontraditional about making men support a family financially.

Not if his wife was unfaithful and there was proof of this.

Is the state doing this? Really?

Very well, tell me what kind of evidence would theoretically convince you of this?

So if the state isn't at war with homosexuals, it must be at war with traditional families?

Status is zero sum.

There's no way to peacefully coexist with both?

There is, the ancient Greeks proved this, but it requires women taking a status hit.

And you think the state is supposed to engage in social engineering by trying to set norms?

Are you saying you don't? Honestly? Its kind of hard to have a welfare state without this. Actually its kind of hard to have laws without this.

How is this the state's fault? You seem to blame the state for everything society does, as if you think the state is supposed to engage in social engineering.

This is actually a good point. No fundamentally I don't blame the state primarily for this. It was more or less a natural change that happened due to changes in the underlying economic incentives together with technological progress.

The state however has been using and exacerbating the situation this for its own advantage.

More women in the workforce >
more taxable bodies (lower birthrates are the next politicians problem)
Women promoted beyond their merit with affirmative action > guaranteed votes

Also the sate is engaged in social engineering all the time, or do you dispute this?

What, you think women only want men for money and sex?

No not at all. But I do think women will follow their sexual instinct more when one of the factors is missing.

[BeBMan]

Also what's up with you? Every state in the history of ever has been at war with the family. Because family is in direct competition to a man's loyalty to a religion/state! Even early Christianity was very unfriendly to marriage and family. Dude, read up on some sociological papers.

I don't buy this. Why would loyalty to family exclude loyalty to religion/state? Where's the competition?

[Heraclitus]

Really? Simply collecting taxes is an act of war against families now?

Wait wut? How did you read taxation into this?

When I say loyalty, I mean literally loyalty. As in selling out your parents ff they speak against your ruler. Turning in your daughter for witchcraft. ect.

Some such actions such as shooting your own son for murder or turning him in to be executed for it are tragic but for the greater good, others like teaching a 7 year old how to spot counter-revolutionary comments her parents make and report them to a comrade are there just to maintain the particular the elite.

I don't buy this. Why would loyalty to family exclude loyalty to religion/state? Where's the competition?

Family and state loyalty can come into conflict. The state wants the person to choose the state rather than family.

Also a family is something people dedicate their energy too, if you are celibate dedicating your life to an ideal/state/church seems like something more lasting that non existing children. There is a reason eunuchs ended up running several empires through history.

These aren't new observations you can find similar themes in Homer’s Odyssey, and Sophocles’ Oedipus the King and Antigone.



Also its hard to miss how states and religions often hack affection we have towards family members by using the same words for religious concepts or rulers.

Father, Mother, Brother, Sister.

Think about where you will hear these words used except in a family context?

[Hauldren Collider]

Well, arsonists are civilians but firefighters still stop their activities. I still don't get it. I can't imagine someone being afraid to call the firefighters when their home is on fire just because firefighters occasionally participate in riot control.

QFT

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Also what is up with this faux political agnosticism? Riots are politics. The French and Americans learned this 200 years ago, welcome to modernity.

Riots are politics, but in this case it has nothing to do with immigration... and I support MikeH - open another thread where you can convince yourself to death on how this is immigration related

[OneFootInTheGrave]

#riotcleanup is awesome.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ots?CMP=twt_gu

http://entertainment.stv.tv/showbiz/265590-kaiser-chiefs-grab-brooms-and-join-riot-clean-up-campaign/

[Heraclitus]

Riots are politics, but in this case it has nothing to do with immigration... and I support MikeH - open another thread where you can convince yourself to death on how this is immigration related

Nothing to do with immigration is a strong statement considering the riots have been sparked by Afro-Caribbean unrest and most of the rioters are descendants of third world immigrants. In a best case scenario that's like saying Gavrilo had nothing to do with how WWI unfolded at worst its like saying that Anglo immigration to Texas had nothing to do with it changing hands from Mexico to the US. In any case all I was saying is that riots like these are as common in modern Europe as they are because of the multicultural society Western Europe has become.


Though I agree immigration did not start or cause the rot.

[BeBMan]

Family and state loyalty can come into conflict. The state wants the person to choose the state rather than family.

I'd accept the "can", but not the following assertion which turns the "can" into some general phenomenon.

Also a family is something people dedicate their energy too, if you are celibate dedicating your life to an ideal/state/church seems like something more lasting that non existing children. There is a reason eunuchs ended up running several empires through history.

There's probably also reasons why lot's of kings, emperors and rulers of all kinds weren't eunuchs.

These aren't new observations you can find similar themes in Homer’s Odyssey, and Sophocles’ Oedipus the King and Antigone

And you can find political life in ancient Rome modeled to a large degree after family relations/values. And modern states often give benefits to families/married couples rather than singles. Sure you sometimes need to divide your "energy" away from the family (like you do in other cases, for example when working), but to describe this as "war" as if the state makes constant efforts to destroy family life makes little sense.

[lightblue]

Well, arsonists are civilians but firefighters still stop their activities. I still don't get it. I can't imagine someone being afraid to call the firefighters when their home is on fire just because firefighters occasionally participate in riot control.

I think it is more that firefighters will be more likely to be attacked outside of riot situations if they participate in riot control.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14465188

here is one for you... what the rioters say, first sounds white while the second one black... and they both say the same thing.

---

here is a recent report which is indicative

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1558580/After-school-clubs-will-combat-yob-culture.html

According to an earlier IPPR report, which was based on surveys and reports spanning the last 50 years, British adolescents spend longer in the company of other teens - and less time with adults and parents - than most other young people around the world.

Only 64 per cent eat with their parents in Britain compared to 89 per cent in France and 93 per cent in Italy.

As a result, gang membership is much higher than in most other countries, affecting a "significant proportion of British youth", the report said.

The IPPR said British teenagers drink more - and from an earlier age - than their European counterparts. Cannabis remained by far the most common drug among young people, with 12 per cent taking it in the last 12 months. In seven years, the number of children using other stimulants, such as poppers, doubled from 84,000 to 144,000, while the use of glue and solvents soared sevenfold from 28,000 to 168,000.

Teenagers from poor homes remained the worst offenders because they are more likely to be left unsupervised, said the study. In a blow to the Government, it said working class children were more likely to be condemned to a life of poverty than in previous generations.

coming out with a wrong conclusion though (in the rest of the article, as if one more hour in school would solve anything mg: ) which is typical for UK "think-tanks" though. Otherwise culturally, and governmentally UK has been pushing people either to work to no end, and give their kids to nurseries/child minders/schools to raise, or on the other hand for the "bottom" on social support this goes into parents doing nothing, and kids organizing their own lives to try to "make" it... with the parents at the bottom anchored to stay there, as once you have no job, or a cleaning job, noone will ever hire you for anything decent, and there is no way, easy or hard, to get yourself educated to move on... from a generation to a generation...

Ultimately I guess that the property boom put the lid on the whole issue for 15 years or so (as everyone had "money", even though it was borrowed), but now when the chickens have come home to roost, it's shocking. This semi-social state was created by Thatcher, which was addressing different problems in a wrong way... it took a while, but here are the results, and that has nothing to do with immigration.

[DanS]

#riotcleanup is awesome.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...ots?CMP=twt_gu

Brilliant. I would have expected vigilantes to want a piece of the twitter action too.

[lightblue]

Nothing to do with immigration is a strong statement considering the riots have been sparked by Afro-Caribbean unrest and most of the rioters are descendants of third world immigrants. In a best case scenario that's like saying Gavrilo had nothing to do with how WWI unfolded at worst its like saying that Anglo immigration to Texas had nothing to do with it changing hands from Mexico to the US. In any case all I was saying is that riots like these are as common in modern Europe as they are because of the multicultural society Western Europe has become.


Though I agree immigration did not start or cause the rot.

Let me guess, you think a mixed-race person with maybe 1 black grandparent and 3 white grandparents is black? A lot of the kids in the videos you posted would probably have 1 or 2 black grandparents, but are they white or are they black? I would class them as British and leave it at that, you probably wouldn't. The Asian kids are probably more homogenously asian (due to intermarrying with cousins back in Pakistan etc.).