You, me, the bankers, George Clooney. We’re all looters.

by Ed

Frightful, isn’t it? Scores of people, surging through the cities, swarming into shops, grabbing, taking, jostling, greedy for more. Frenzied, self-absorbed, no thought for the wider community…

I mean, don’t you just hate Christmas shopping? In fact, any busy Saturday in town?

I’m being flippant here – but I’m also aiming to make a serious point. Everyone’s of course shocked by the rioting and looting this last week. Judging by Facebook comments etc, quite a few folk seem depressed, ashamed of Britain, etc.

And of course, the good folk at the Daily Mail, the Express, etc have had a field day. Because, with everyone a bit down in the dumps (the austerity, falling house prices, rising petrol prices, the stock markets in tumult, etc), these events have certainly boosted the spirits and the self-righteousness of Middle England. (‘Gosh, isn’t this rioting awful? Who are these scum, these thugs? Where are their parents? I’m awfully glad that we’re not like them. Blah blah blah.’)

In fact though, I don’t think they are so different to the looters and rioters. And neither am I – and nor are any of us. Why? Because the looting is – I suggest – absolutely of one spirit with our whole consumer culture, of mindless acquisition, irresponsibility, materialism. Looting of course isn’t legal and is therefore socially unacceptable, and it’s more obviously violent (more on that below) – but in spirit, I think it’s barely indistinguishable. On that basis, I’m as equally depressed by the looting as I am by any given shopping centre on a Saturday.

But hold you, on say. The looting was (a) theft, and (b) violent – and therefore wholly different. I disagree.

First, on what basis are most shoppers shopping? Credit – the very foundation of our consumerism culture. That is, people buying stuff with money that isn’t really theirs. Where does credit come from then? Who does it belong to? Credit’s based on an assumption of future earnings. But as the credit crunch and recession have shown, our credit-based consumer economy is bankrupt – a totally delusional and unsustainable model.

(It’s far too easy to just blame the economic crash on the bankers, to assume it’s about poor banking. The bankers are just the tip of the iceberg. Our whole economy is built on thin air and wishful thinking, and we’re all implicated – because we all choose to believe and participate in it.)

So the government bailed us out, and – through that – we’re collectively loaded to the eyeballs with debt. Who’ll pay that debt? Future generations. So I’d suggest that today’s consumers – all of us – are fuelling our habits courtesy of tomorrow’s taxpayers. That is, we’re nicking from the future.

And we’re also nicking from marginalised people in the present – for instance, the good people of countries like Congo who are having the natural resources of their land pillaged for our consumer habits. By way of example, the mineral coltan – used in every one of our mobile phones – is mined on the cheap by international companies in places like Congo, then fuels those companies’ profits, providing a tidy income to their shareholders and the wealthy elite of Congo… and spells nothing but a few crap jobs and environmental disaster for the normal people living there.

And what of the violence and destruction? Surely that sets the looting apart from our everyday shopping habits. No, not really – it just makes it more visible. Let’s face facts: behind the scenes, consumerism is horribly violent. Through it, we’re raping the planet, abusing/enslaving large swathes of humanity (sweatshops, the coltan example above, etc), and all becoming increasingly individualised, depressed, disempowered (a violence against ourselves, our neighbours, our communities).

Furthermore, we’re told that direct violence is absolutely fine – when conducted by the ‘right’ people, against ‘bad’ people. Like when we invade a rogue nation, or seek to topple a dictator. (Saddam? Gaddafi? Charles Taylor and Foday Sankoh in Liberia and Sierra Leone? Hitler and the Nazis?) I’m not condoning despotism anyway, but there’s an infinitely grey area regarding the legitimacy of violence.

(Similarly, violence is absolutely fine when conducted by the ‘good guys’ in films and on TV, against ‘bad’ people – and our imaginations are constantly shaped by that myth.)

Of course, I really feel sorry for the shop owners and others who’ve been on the receiving end of this week’s looting. And even more so those affected by yesterday’s tragic deaths – which indeed take the rioting to a new level. Indeed, in no way am I seeking to condone or excuse the looting or violence – quite the opposite.

But we have to ask: what really lies underneath this violence, what can we learn, and what could we do differently? I don’t think the ‘scum’ rioters are simply to blame, nor their parents and sub-cultures. Nor is it simply down to government cuts or police head-handedness – although both surely played a part in triggering recent events.

All of the above contributed to the events, but in fact – shock, horror – I think we’re all to blame… Or at least, we’re all implicated – because blame and demonisation aren’t going to achieve anything.

Indeed, we need to look forward. What will the repercussions of these events be? Lots of people are clamouring for ramping up police powers, a crackdown on civil liberties, etc – so that the consumerism bandwagon can roll on just a little while longer, and we can sleep soundly at night – safe from the ‘thugs’.

Instead though, let’s seize this opportunity. The riots have – in dramatic fashion – made visible the violence hidden in the fabric of our consumerist culture. Let’s step back, reflect, debate. What kind of society do we want? And what are we each going to do about it? Together, we have the power to make change – if we choose.

Finally, you ask, what’s poor George Clooney got to do it? In a delicious irony, the film Ocean’s 13 was on TV over the weekend. So, just as the riots and looting were really getting going (and the participants getting demonised), millions of us were settling down to watch a film that glamorises… THEFT. But hey, George (and Brad Pitt, and co) – they dress so well, they use cool lingo, and they’re so suave. So that makes it ok, I guess…

(Note: this blog quite possibly doesn’t reflect the opinions of my colleagues nor trustees. But they’re all away on holiday, so what the hell.)

Advertisement

Tags: Looting. Riots. Theft. Consumerism. Daily Mail. Middle England. George Clooney. Hitler. House prices. Credit crunch.