Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
When is a Riot not a Riot?
I often disagree with contributors to HoL - sometimes fundamentally. The discussion of the riots was a good example. A wide range of feelings were expressed: anger, fear, grief, shock. And just as wide a range of proposed actions: from calls for severe punishment; to the need to reaffirm community values.
But I don't think that anyone failed to see that something very ugly and very serious happened. Violence, arson, and the destruction of property. Buildings were razed. Shops were looted. Police and firefighters attacked. Some people were forced to flee from burning homes; while others lost businesses they'd built up over years. A young man lost his life.
So I wonder. Am I wrong to get increasingly irritated by the euphemisms creeping in?
Councillors have been summoned to an "Extraordinary" Council meeting on 3 October to discuss "the serious public disorder which took place in Tottenham". Not, you'll notice, the riot.
I've heard people refer to "the disorder" and "the events". The most frequent term is: "the disturbances". With one suggestion that: ". . . the changing face of Tottenham Hale will soon erase memories of this summer's disturbances."
Of course, I appreciate people's good intentions - they want to be upbeat and positive. But is erasing memories really a sensible way to understand and learn from events?
Then on the Council's webpage, I read about the arrival of Anne Lippitt as the temporary Regeneration Programme Director. Her job is to tackle the recovery. From what I hear, Anne is a skilled and highly experienced officer who will make a valuable contribution.
But although this news item did mention riots once, it was otherwise full of absurd and convoluted euphemisms. So stuffed with them, that instead of getting irritated I had to laugh. (Especially the bit about Anne "having lived just a stone’s throw from the High Road as a child.")
So what's happening in Tottenham? It is being "improved" . . . "with fresh vision, aims and outcomes for the area".
Yes, the Council's website is now being written in Obfuscandian!
Tags for Forum Posts: Obfuscandian, Tottenham, disorder, disturbances, euphemism, riots
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
OAE: very interesting piece of history. Only one correction: Scotti was of course Superintending Engineer on Federation Starfleet Ship "USS Enterprise" cruising the galaxy a few years ago.
-
-
Agree about the words that rinse out meaning. For me, a "disturbance" is when the phone rings and I know from the long pause, that its yet another of those irritating calls from India telling me that they're from "Windows" technical support and want to do some kind of scam. I bellow at them that I get many of these calls a week and please, please take me off your database. I am disturbed all right, but it's not in the same league as arson.
There is a list of cliched words used by councils that seek to fudge meaning. "Holistic" for example. PR words are becoming more apparent: "securing the future" is one of my favourite hates! Many politicians preface their statements with, "I want to make this absolutely clear" (or variants). There is jargon in real professions, but its normally techncial or abbreviation. At our local council, we now have a Directorate of "Place and Sustainability", which cleans out more meaning than the previous "Environment". Am I too cynical to suspect that it is in "officers" interests to obfuscate? If you obfuscate, you can hide facts, make it harder to argue with you and avoid taking responsibility.
I see the proportion of repeat offenders involved. It seems to me that this phenomenon may reflect the reluctance to sentence known ferals to serious custodial sentences, due to cost and a misguided sense that imprisonment is unkind. The recent riots may come to be seen as in a special category and not strictly comparable with other summer-time riots in the past.
-
Permalink Reply by maggie on
-
In the same token I really object to the term "ferals". I know it is used to insult and degrade however it is not even accurate. 'Feral children' are children who have been abandoned and totally isolated by family and have to scavenge, or kept caged and isolated, they do not develop language. To use this as a term of abuse is awful, I know the gutter press do but its no excuse. Its not even helpful as some of the looters were well educated and the looting was opportunist, however much of the looting was well organised. The term is in danger of becoming a cliche and used to obfuscate "If you obfuscate, you can hide facts, make it harder to argue with you and avoid taking responsibility" (Clive Carter). The people who took part in the riot and the (possibly different) people who took part in the subsequent looting are also part of our society.
-
-
Bring home the troops from Afghanistan. Bring back the Riot Act. They're both needed. Nip everything in the bud. Give us back our Nation.
-
-
Maggie, these characters may be part of your "society", whatever that means, but they sure aint part of my society! They're obviously not part of any law-abiding society. "Our society" is a vague term. If it means human, then they are members of society, but that's a pretty low bar.
It should be obvious from the context that the term feral does not mean children brought up by wolves in the forest. It means the uncontrollable, undisciplined gentlemen who went out committing arson, criminal damage and stealing.
What we've seen is a by-product of a criminal justice system that has been failing for a long time.
Ex-PM John Major suggested some years ago that we need to understand a little less and condemn a little more. I agree. One person's "abuse" is another's condemnation.
In this context, I couldn't care less what a person's education is: it's their conduct, behaviour and character that matter. If "some of the looters were well educated", then they have even less excuse than the rest of the gentlemen involved. Some of the gentlemen involved had late model, valuable cars. Should that make us feel more sympathy for them? I don't own a car.
Some residents in Tottenham came close to being burnt alive. If that had happened and the arsonists had been caught, they would probably have been charged with manslaughter. I condemn them. I hope the arsonists are apprehended, convicted and receive long custodial sentences. And in the short to medium term, we need more prisons. Hope that's clear!
-
-
Indeed, we mustn't forget the Ladies too.
What concerns me about those who appear to apologise for criminal conduct and might sympathise with them, is that concern for the victims of crime tends to be forgotten. This seems to be an enduring theme of our criminal justice system as currently configured, whereby most attention - and even some care - is lavished on the perpetrators.
Victims are expected to get on and get over it. In the riots, those who were fortunate in Tottenham not to be burnt alive nonetheless lost their homes. Some shopkeeers had their livelihoods ruined and many suffered big losses. They shouldn't be forgotten when dealing with those ladies and gentlemen responsible.
The "events" that transpired were more than the words "disorder" or "disturbance" imply, as Alan suggests.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
It concerns me, Clive, that in a quick re-read of threads on HoL about the riots, I can't find comments which "appear to apologise for criminal conduct and might sympathise with them".
Nor can I spot anything which suggests that "concern for the victims of crime tends to be forgotten". Or that: "victims are expected to get on and get over it."
In fact, what I've read suggest the opposite. Perhaps you would correct me and point out the threads which support your sweeping assertions.
* * *
Many years ago a friend of mine was involved in Women's Aid and in campaigns to raise public awareness about the abuse and violence many women suffered. And the impact on the children involved.
One day she astonished me by talking with empathy and concern about the need to understand and reach-out to the men involved. But she wasn't condoning or apologising for what they'd done. She explained that without them changing, the cycle would continue; with other women and other children.
-
-
Alan not all the world's discussions are contained within threads on HoL and my comments relate to the wider world, even beyond Haringey: i.e. our creaking criminal justice system. The sweeping assertion I make is that the criminal justice system appears to direct more care and attention on the perpetrators of crime ... and the victims tend to be forgotten.
Did any residents in your Ward suffer directly from the riots? Have you spoken to any about what punishments might be appropriate? The language you rightly complain of at the top of this thread seems to minimise what happened.
In the short run many of these the ladies and gentlemen involved (we mustn't call them feral out of fear of offending them) need to be kept away from society, or from the rest of society - depending on whether one considers them members of our society.
I am concerned that this government may be cutting back on prison building programmes and worry that some (not only those involved in the riots in Tottenham) who deserve custodial sentences may be receiving lessor punishment because of the lack of places. And, IMO, punishment ought to be consistent.
In the long run, we can speculate on 101 reasons why these people behave as the do and possibly try to prevent such people growing up to conduct themselves in this way.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
If I had ripped your letterbox off of its stand at the end of your driveway in the middle of the night and placed it carefully on your doorstep, would you have had me locked up?
If I'd set fire to the for sale board outside your house (after getting a friend to knock on your door to make sure you saw it), would you have had me locked up?
If I'd accepted a free drink from a friend working in a bar, would you have had us both locked up?
You're proud to be known as a "hang 'em and burn 'em bloke", aren't you? It doesn't work.
-
-
It concerns me, John, that in a quick re-read of threads on HoL about the riots, I can't find comments which support your claim that I or anyone else has said "hang em" (it is incidental that I don't support capital punishment).
Nor can I spot anything which suggests that anyone said "burn em". Or that anyone has claimed that capital punishment would work. Those serving custodial sentences may well commit further crimes in prison, but they don't commit further crimes in wider society, as long as they're in prison. In that sense, prison does work.
The suggestion that any punishment should involve burning offenders is in questionable taste, since burning is what these gentlemen were doing, amongst other things.
It shouldn't be forgotten that some residents came close to being burnt to death and it was only chance that prevented it, and not by any restraint by the rioters, whose actions were regardless of property or life.
-
-
-
Oh Clive you're right, somehow I got "hang 'em and burn 'em" from "bang 'em up". My bad.
-
-
Permalink Reply by pamish on
-
@ CC, I believe that the gentlemen who found it necessary to set the Carpet Shop afire, realised that there were people upstairs and ran through their corridors telling them to get out. One of them must have twigged that murder is slightly worse than arson.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
