It's a tough question, I know I don't know the answer.
In Libya, they also had rioters and mobs, and in the UK, they also have protestors.
In contrast, the UK rioters that spawned out of the initial protest was nothing more than an assortment of various criminal groups that used a political excuse to attack and rob ordinary citizens.
That's a resource distribution issue intimately related to the economy. If that isn't politics, nothing is. Almost all riots are related to resource distribution issues, especially when an impoverished underclass engages in looting.
Are you really claiming these riots aren't linked to the massive cuts to public services that happened during the last year?
My favorite new politically correct euphemism for the motivation for theft.
Are you really claiming these riots aren't linked to the massive cuts to public services that happened during the last year?
No. But it seems like a leap of reasoning. Was Anders Brevik's rampage "linked" to an influx of immigrants into Norway? Again, a bit of a leap. In both cases I'd be more inclined to believe that the people involved lack sufficient mental health.
But sure, perhaps the daughters of millionaires, school staff, graphic designers, Olympic ambassadors, and law students who have faced the courts already are suffering at the hands of cuts. That's for the sociologists and rehabilitation officers to figure out in the months to come.
If mental health services were provided to the lower classes AT ALL we would not have these issues.
As it is the majority of the underclass suffers from multiple mental disorders and they cannot get treatment. Mental health treatment is very expensive and is not covered by the government.
For people suffering from actual mental health problems I don't see why they can't get treatment from the NHS like everyone else - ability to pay not being a factor.
However, if by "mental health" you mean the feeling that people "deserve" new trainers/DVD player/etc. without doing anything to earn them I don't see why that is anything to do with the government.
Are you really claiming this?
Phones are not equivalent to:
- medical care
- education
- housing
- sufficient wealth to have children
- healthy food
- self-respect
Public health care. Free state education (which is generally of a good standard, but a waste if you are not self-motivated). Council-provided housing, though supply is short due to failing to replenish the housing stock since right to buy in the 80s. A fairly comprehensive benefit system which scales with number of children. Healthy food is cheaper than junk.
The last one (self-respect) is mostly what determines whether you decide to take advantage of all the UK welfare state offers. Poor money management and general ignorance are the main reasons for the poor having big TV's, satellite service and gadgets, yet failing to pay their bills and their friends. Or getting into crippling credit card debt.
So really if you want to be accurate, its the rich doing their best to keep the poor stupid so they may keep the stupid poor. Sure, there are some really dumb things with welfare in e.g. the hoops you jump through to receive jobseekers allowance but its not as if the opportunities aren't there...
Edit: I see you were talking about mental medical care, which again is provisioned under the NHS. I personally know of NHS services in East London for this, some of which started due to this initiative: http://www.iapt.nhs.uk/ All free. That doesn't dispel stigmas attached to it, or course, but that's irrelevant to your assertion that such services don't exist.
Since when does (relative) lack of wealth in the UK stop people having kids?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/08/11/london-r...
Especially considering as a rioter the police are the guys who want to stop you from rioting & looting, when you want to continue with the rioting & looting.
I believe the police will have to do some soul searching here too.
In particular, the killing of the Jean Charles Menezes, and the way some members of the police force managed to get off scot free with the death of Ian Tomlinson means that the "me first" culture must stop with the police force as well.
There are rotten eggs in all sections of the society, and the arrest of people with stable jobs amongst the rioters proves this.
Of course this doesn't justify the rioting and looting which we have seen in London. Most of which smacks of opportunistic hooliganism.
However, I subscribe to the tenet that good example must come from the top, and it is this type of good example that has been found wanting leading up to the riots.
More often than not, any laws that are put into place involve the acquisition of new technology that can be appropriated by those in power to censor more forms of 'illegal' communication, further down the line.
It's a slippery slope, potentially leading to a repression of the population and almost absolute state control.
There were also accusations that Libya shut off the internet to mask actions of their armed forces against the protestors. Once again, seems like a different beast.