Urban Rebellions from the US in the 60s to UK today

[Jimmie Higgins]

I though this was a well done Socialist Worker article that brings some historical perspective on some of the debates about the UK riots that have popped up on this website in the last week.

Urban rebellions and social change (http://socialistworker.org/2011/08/12/urban-revolts-and-social-change)


The riots, in effect, were the "forcible entry" of the Black masses into political discussions that usually treated them and their communities as invisible or irrelevant. Black poverty, deprivation and racism in urban areas went from being political non-issues to one of the most important issues of the decade.

Consider this about Britain today: When was the last time there was a discussion about racism and poverty in Britain outside of left-wing publications? In the aftermath of the London Rebellion, there is a global discussion about these issues--something inconceivable even weeks ago.

[Feodor Augustus]

Not to piss on your (or Socialist Worker's) parade, but I think the racial element of the US riots is far more pronounced, while the class element of the UK ones is what has taken centre stage. There are just as many poor and disaffected white youths rioting and looting in London as there are black, perhaps more in absolute terms, whereas the same cannot be said of the riots in the 1960s in the US. That's not to say that there aren't race-related issues here, however at the same time it seems a much wider issue of poverty and social alienation amongst inner city youth, irrespective of colour.

[CAleftist]

Not to piss on your (or Socialist Worker's) parade, but I think the racial element of the US riots is far more pronounced, while the class element of the UK ones is what has taken centre stage. There are just as many poor and disaffected white youths rioting and looting in London as there are black, perhaps more in absolute terms, whereas the same cannot be said of the riots in the 1960s in the US. That's not to say that there aren't race-related issues here, however at the same time it seems a much wider issue of poverty and social alienation amongst inner city youth, irrespective of colour.

Well in America, race and class are very much intertwined. While plenty of whites are in poverty, a disproportionate number of non-whites are in extreme poverty, lack educational and job opportunities, and in general, have got the worst ends of the capitalist system.

It also should be noted that poor whites in America tend to be spread out in rural areas, while poor blacks are very concentrated in inner cities-which is where the rioting usually takes place.

[Feodor Augustus]

It also should be noted that poor whites in America tend to be spread out in rural areas, while poor blacks are very concentrated in inner cities-which is where the rioting usually takes place.

Absolutely. Which is why, to some degree, to draw a simplistic parallel between the UK and the US is not all that apt. The specifics of both situations seem, to me anyway, rather different.

[CAleftist]

Absolutely. Which is why, to some degree, to draw a simplistic parallel between the UK and the US is not all that apt. The specifics of both situations seem, to me anyway, rather different.

That, and also, white people in America have on average much more accumulated family wealth (even many poor whites) than the average black or Hispanic families (many of whom have NO accumulated wealth at all).

Plus, those material conditions create a pervasive psychological anxiety in whites-they feel pressured on the one hand by the ruling class to "keep up", and on the other hand, feel threatened by poor people of color. So they are defensive and reactionary.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Not to piss on your (or Socialist Worker's) parade, but I think the racial element of the US riots is far more pronounced, while the class element of the UK ones is what has taken centre stage. There are just as many poor and disaffected white youths rioting and looting in London as there are black, perhaps more in absolute terms, whereas the same cannot be said of the riots in the 1960s in the US. That's not to say that there aren't race-related issues here, however at the same time it seems a much wider issue of poverty and social alienation amongst inner city youth, irrespective of colour.

Did you not read the article or did you just miss the main points? Maybe I quoted the wrong part since that section talked about "race and poverty" being put into national focus by the riots.

But as to the real arguments of the article: how does the different racial element of the UK riots mean that any of the arguments in the piece are invalid? Is austerity not resulting in harsher attacks on poor people and ethnic minorities in general - resulting in this shooting? Does the demographics of this riot mean that people are not asking...
why people "burn down their own communities?"This article IMO is addressing the questions thrown up by this riot - many which have been echoed on the debates on this website... is this really going to do anything, is this a legitimate expression of class anger or just "opportunistic looting" etc. That's why I posted it.

Also, regarding US history: the urban rebellions of the 1960s were most definitely CLASS rebellions of mostly African Americans. Sure they were very uniform in demographics but we are also talking about a highly segregated society - that segregation, not "higher average wealth of whites" (I wonder does that average also include the 400 or so multi-billionaires of the .01% who are probably mostly white... that would throw off the scale a bit) is why manifestations of class anger are often also segregated. Middle class blacks were not rioting when they couldn't get into universities, they tried to appeal to liberals and win through legal battles and eventually through a protest movement centered largely in the US south. The urban rebellions however were much more based in class-anger and working class problems with rent and joblessness and lack of services for workers and obviously police harassment and having no other way to bring attention to these problems.

[Devrim]

I read this article. To me it seemed like an excuse to write a historical article about riots in the US. There is nothing wrong with that in itself. It doesn't have much connection to what is going on in the UK, but so what really.

Devrim

[Jimmie Higgins]

I read this article. To me it seemed like an excuse to write a historical article about riots in the US.Yeah, I can see your point, and this is this writers area of focus (history of the civil rights movement in the US) but I think it makes sense that radicals writing for an American audience use American examples of rebellions still in living memory to shed light on current events. But I don't think she was trying to draw direct parallels, more that she was trying to use that history to clarify some of the arguments now about these current riots.


There is nothing wrong with that in itself. It doesn't have much connection to what is going on in the UKThe accusations that riots only destroy working class neighborhoods and jobs, that riots are "illegitimate" forms of protest, that riots only provoke backlash... all arguments taken on in this article haven not only been common in mainstream US and UK coverage of the riots but have been echoed here on RevLeft by leftists... that's why I posted this.

Anyway, if people aren't interested fine but I'm kind of confused why folks even bothered responding if they see this as totally irrelevant.

[Coach Trotsky]

That, and also, white people in America have on average much more accumulated family wealth (even many poor whites) than the average black or Hispanic families (many of whom have NO accumulated wealth at all).

Plus, those material conditions create a pervasive psychological anxiety in whites-they feel pressured on the one hand by the ruling class to "keep up", and on the other hand, feel threatened by poor people of color. So they are defensive and reactionary.

Well, except for the youth of the poor whites, especially those of us from 'broken homes', who are have-nots with no future under this system. This never was "our America" in the slightest, and we'd have to be high as a kite to flirt with the idea that upward mobility avenues in this system were available to us. If anything we have far more in common with urban poor minority youth than we have in common with the "white American middle class", and the system itself sees us just like it sees poor minorities as (fill in the blank with the ruling elite's favorite epithets du jour against those at the bottom of this society..."chavs", "animals", "scum", "trash", "losers", "underclass", etc).