Why do people riot? Trying to make sense of senseless behaviour

The year 2011 is likely to go down in history as a year of turmoil. As the world’s crippled economy lurches dangerously close to a second precipice, scenes of social unrest have been played out again and again on our television screens. Political establishments in the Middle East are battling against civilian uprisings, and the debt crisis in Greece prompted waves of violent public protest.

And now the British public has been gripped by a series of shocking events taking place right in our own back yards. The shooting of one man on Thursday seems to have triggered an unforeseen outbreak of vandalism and mass theft that is frightening for two reasons. Firstly, the scale of people involved and secondly, the absence of any single obvious grievance or cause.

Can the London riots be blamed on society?

It’s impossible to discount the problems of social exclusion and deprivation that have been offered by various commentators as explanations for the rioting and looting that spread from London to Birmingham and other major cities including Liverpool and Bristol.

Writing for The Independent, youth charities founder Camila Batmangelidjh claims that, “Society relies on collaborative behaviour; individuals are held accountable because belonging brings personal benefit. Fear or shame of being alienated keeps most of us pro-social.”

The argument is that these acts, including arson and looting, are perpetrated by people who reap no personal benefit from being a part of society, and so feel no compunction in rebelling against its rules.

Are the authorities just not tough enough?

Many commentators have called for more decisive action to be taken by the police. Increasingly, people are questioning the traditional unwillingness – expressed by Home Secretary Teresa May – to militarise proceedings by deploying non-lethal weapons, or calling in the armed forces. Conservative blogger Melanie Phillips argues that “hiring an outsider untainted by this culture [to lead the Metropolitan Police] would seem to be essential.”

Personally, I would be uncomfortable with a militarised police force, but it seems to me that the criminals are taking advantage of this softly-softly approach. After three days of chaos, I don’t believe many would blame the authorities for temporarily taking a harder line now in order to restore order to the streets.

Blame the recession?

It’s certainly no surprise that these events come at a time of deep financial uncertainty and large scale unemployment. While we hear much about the ‘squeezed middle’ – average earners struggling to stay afloat – less attention is paid to those who have already sunk under. Clearly, the chance to stick a finger up at authority, join a collective movement and get their hands on some money and merchandise proved too great a temptation for hundreds of unemployed, inner city youths.

Is it human nature?

Much has been written about mob mentality and the tendency of humans to rebellion. In an environment where group anarchy has taken hold, it is terrifying how quickly people will disregard the laws they normally follow. Reports of men and women casually loading their handbags, backpacks and cars with goods from shop shelves perfectly illustrate this easy transition to lawlessness.

What can we do?

In the short term, it seems that a security crackdown, even a curfew if necessary, is the only way to put an end to the criminal mayhem which the BBC, in typical tentative fashion, initially termed ‘a disturbance.’

The more difficult part will be to tackle the issues at the root of this round of civil unrest. As history shows, riots break out in times of inequality and economic hardship. Society needs to properly address the lack of prospects faced by many young people in our cities, and invest in long-term solutions to unemployment and lack of education. Unfortunately, the virtually penniless state of the public sector means that all this is far more easily said than done.