I wasn’t in London for the recent bout of rioting. Nor was I in Egypt for the revolution earlier this year.
But watching news from the U.S., I gained a bit of insight into those events — and a lot of insight into Western thought.
In January, U.S. news stories told of meaningful protests in Egypt. CNN spoke about “demonstrations against corruption and failing economic policies,” and highlighted police brutality early on.
BBC correspondent Jon Leyne spoke of “wrong-footed” police and protestors starting “to think anything is possible.” In short, the U.S. was nothing short of inspired.
Fast-forward a few months to August. We watched CNN fill the screen with images of fire and police after “three nights of violence in London.” ABC called it chaos. Casual followers of the story heard of no reasoning behind these riots.
Just a bunch of crazy youngsters burning buildings in a civilized nation not too unlike ours, viewers believed.
However, these situations had more similarities than many complacent U.S. citizens cared to acknowledge. Protesters in London had genuine grievances.
Many cite the police shooting of a 29-year-old black man as the catalyst, according to CNN. The Australian reports circumstances of his death are unclear — some claim he shot first, while others maintain he didn’t even draw a weapon.
While the shooting may have sparked the unrest, history suggests other factors are to blame. “The failure of the markets goes hand in hand with human blight,” wrote Mary Riddell in a Telegraph article that cites “a crumbling nation” for producing a class of rioters.
The UK is not alone in this phenomenon.
From the 1786 Shay’s Rebellion to the 1992 Los Angeles riots, socio-economic hardship has been identified with unrest in the U.S.
Some claim riots are simply about looting and destruction.
In an ABC article, a UK resident claimed “youths” used the recent riot to “kit themselves out … with T-shirts and everything.”
Maybe these young people didn’t directly cite unemployment or finances for their actions. But if they’d had a job to lose or money to buy the things they stole, would they have been as likely to loot?
And sure, some of the perpetrators may have jumped on the bandwagon. But unfortunately, politics and bandwagons go hand-in-hand.
And what about the Egyptian looters who ripped the heads off mummies in the Egyptian Museum?
Egyptian protestors also stole, hurt and killed, but that didn’t seem to discount their reasoning in the eyes of the U.S.
Because riots in Egypt were carried out in the sparkling name of democracy, violence there was somehow permissible. But democracy, however tried and true, is not the end-all be-all solution.
Just living in a nation called democratic is not enough. Burning and looting isn’t the answer, but neither is complacency with ornamental terms. Nonetheless, the US exudes complacency.
According to Real Clear Politics, 52 percent of the nation disapproves of President Barack Obama. But only 56.9 percent of the voting-age population even voted in 2008, according to George Mason University research.
“If people think they have a choice, they’re happy,” ASU philosophy junior Khayree Billingslea said. “They’ll tolerate an actual lack of freedom.”
Unrest does not belong only in an African nation with a corrupt leader. While destruction rarely solves problems, protests are not as outlandish in a Western democratic nation as the media make them out to be.
Reach the columnist at algrego1@asu.edu.
