Knife bin ransacked by street gang

If a society has no violence or problems at all a small amount of people will get violent or make problems at times just because of that. It's human nature. Some folks antagonize a (seemingly) problemless/streamlined society. I did too as a teen in the 90s (happily not with knifes and shit but still)

 

I really liked this line for some reason. Reminds me of me in the 70s.

 

You're not supposed to notice the ethnicity or culture of "alleged" criminals carrying long blades. Slap yourself, do it now!

 

Didn't help i got raised as a protestant christian in a very streamlined country and got as a young teen into the glorious and brand new black metal musicgenre, notorious for pissing on conformity and christianity. The lack of real serious societal issues also helped (everything seemed at least solvable), it was a very positive time here. Computers and the internet were new and would make everything better lol Unless one had a problem with security and to lesser extent conformity the future seemed rather bright. As we can see in other well managed neighbourhoods a lack of real worries and an abundance of trivial concerns (esp from parents) can create some of the worst adolescents

 

Asmodean said, in relevant part:
"As we can see in other well managed neighbourhoods a lack of real worries and an abundance of trivial concerns (esp from parents) can create some of the worst adolescents "

To which I must reply:
You, Sir, have a talent for understatement.

 

Asmo

And some of the best – I mean it doesn’t have to be that way for every narcissistic adolescent that become a hippy for the drugs and the hope of casual sex there were others campaigning for CND and against the Vietnam War and so on with many other movements.

Just look today at all the kids from well managed neighbourhoods (and those that are not so well managed) that are part of the climate crisis movement.

As to those that get into knives and crime to me it is a matter of hope if people believe that the future is worth having, that things can be changed for the better then there is hope. Where there is a lack of hope then people stop caring, so you get those that don’t care about using a knife, don’t care about getting into crime.

If you grind people down, burden them with poverty and contempt then people can lose hope.

And this is where you can get manipulation by the right who try to put the blame on the individual alone with the implication that nothing can be done nothing can be changed for the better.

 

Yups, that's why I worded it like this:

 

Interesting but I’d ask does it have to be – people can learn not to be violent if there is no reason to be violent, anger can be redirected away from violent behaviour.

I mean what you are describing sounds more like mental health problems than ‘human nature’[/quote]

 

It's natural that a tiny amount of humans in a well structured society has mental health issues. Does it have to be? Perhaps not, but at this point it simply seems the case

 

And I would hope that in a well-structured society people with mental health problems got treatment and help. The point I was making was that there seemed to be people here that were implying those involved in violent behaviour where ‘culturally’ inclined to violent behaviour due to race/religion.

 

Culture/subculture and religion can be determining factors it seems. It's rarely the whole source of a troubled mind but it definitely can facilitate violent behavior and convictions

 

But people can have the same culture or religion and not be violent so is it the culture or religion that creates the violence. Are all Muslims violent as suggested because by nature Muslim culture and religion are violent?

 

No, but a significant amount of muslims and christians hold discriminating convictions and would act violently on them because of their religion/(sub)culture (hence why its great our mainstream culture has become secular).

 

Is it a significant amount and do people act violently because of their religion or because they are inclined towards violence, I mean why do many of the same religion not act violently? Why do some people embraces the discriminating parts of a religion while others do not? Why are some Christians homophobic and others not.

 

As an atheist I‘m a great believer in secularism and believe that all public education should be secular in nature and that there should always be a separation of church and state. But I’m also a believer in persuasion rather than persecution.

Ok this is going to be short so it’s a simplistic generalisation but here goes

It seems to me that this is a battle of ideas for hearts and minds. So secular ideas need to be attractive and persuasive to compete with religious ideas. To me secularism needs to be about the hope and that progress toward a better life is possible.

Religions often rely on the hope of a better ‘life’ after death that suffering in this world doesn’t matter because in the next one you will ‘live’ in paradise for eternity.

This was often supported by those that exploited as it served their interests very well but then more liberal thinkers began wondering why people couldn’t have both a better life on earth as well as in heaven, and then others started asking if heaven even existed so why meekly except hardship and exploitation when there was no chance of paradise or of them eventually ‘inheriting the earth’

Ok so the 20th century the dominating secular ideas based on hope and earthy progress were those of the left and in many places these were taken up because they were based on hope and bringing about a better life for people in this world.

The problem was that wealth hated these left wing ideas that they saw as a threat to the dominance of wealth and it sponsored conservatives groups in opposition to it. It was very successful in this in the US where is was able to spread fear and hatred of left wing ideas to often hysterical levels (the red scares).

Around the globe US foreign policy in the 20th century was centred on opposing the rise of left wing ideas and movements, and in doing so it often supported Conservative, anti-progressive groups and time and again found itself in opposition to democracy because people would vote for left leaning parties committed to progressive social and economic reform. With left wing ideas suppressed many turned to religion.

For example in Iran the US helped overthrow the democratic elected government (that was trying to get more money for the state from the oil companies) and set up the bloody handed Shah then the US helped in the suppression of left wingers in the country this helped in the rise of the Mullahs. And in Afghanistan the US backed the undereducated rural religious conservatives against the educated secular urban left wingers.

Anyway the Berlin wall came down and as one neo-con but it that was the end of history US style capitalism had won and a the dominant idea in the west became neoliberalism.

Neoliberalism is not about the hope or progress, it is very hard to win hearts and minds to a philosophy based on serving the interests of the few against the many.

The US is still the most dominant western power if not the global one – but is it inspiring, is it a place to emulate if you are one of the common people? If neoliberalism is its big idea and you see what has happen to it under those ideas that have spread to one degree or another in many western countries then is it surprising that others are looking around for other stars to follow.

Ok just some thoughts.

 

Regarding street gangs I found this article rather interesting.....


Operation Vanilla Gorilla leads to arrest of 43 members of white supremacist street gang in Georgia.



Operation Vanilla Gorilla leads to arrest of 43 members of white supremacist street gang in Georgia. - The Immoral Minority

 

lol

 

Yes, even if it would 'only' be 10% it would be a significant amount. You disagree?
Just like the knife pulling hooligans get facilitated in their violence by their (sub)culture, so are discriminating religious folks facilitated by their culture and religion. You disagree with this observation?

I'm not making this argument to piss on, blame or condemn these religions. So forgive me if I don't see the point in answering these questions in this thread. We are in agreement that its not only the culture or religion that is to blame. But you pointing out that a lot of followers of these religions don't act discriminating or violent does not render the religion and culture blameless. It does not change that a significant amount of christians and muslims find validation for such behavior and convictions in their culture and religion. Same with hooligans and their subculture, or (wannabe) gangsters with knifes and their street culture. That a majority of folks enjoy soccer peacefully or are part of or into street culture without getting violent or discriminating does not change that a minority, which still undeniably can be described as a significant amount, is violent and discriminating partly because of the (sub)culture they're part of/following/affiliate themselves with.

 

I'm sure it's no coincidence