Rioting and Austerity

Over at The Guardian, we learn that austerity causes riots. Actually, we don’t – despite what the headline says, this is not a “fact”. The “fact” is that there is a correlation between the implementation of some austerity measures and some social unrest. But let’s not dwell on that – we know that this nation’s media are not big on facts. Let’s instead pretend that it is fact and therefore ask the question “so what?”

Seriously, so what if austerity measures cause riots? Does that mean we should never ever cut spending, just in case? Even if spending is at a horrific, unsustainable level? No, of course not. That would be a bit like saying we shouldn’t allow immigration because it causes rioting from EDL louts. A far more sensible policy (if this was “fact”) would be to make sure that, when austerity measures are introduced, thought should be given to the potential impact they might have on social stability. Or to put it another way, the police should expect some rioting, and prepare accordingly (i.e. by doing a bit more than standing by looking blankly when it all kicks off). Furthermore, if the government changed its economic policies owing to these riots, it would be implicitly condoning rioting or, at the very least, saying “rioting works - if you don’t like our policies, burn down a Gregg’s and raid a Foot Locker, and we’ll change them”.

There have been numerous attempts to explain these riots and, to some extent, to excuse those rioting. Such attempts are, as far as I can see, simultaneously unsuccessful and utter bullshit. The riots were caused by (a) the fact that some people like fighting and (b) the fact that some people like free stuff – something that can be facilitated by stealing stuff. Any analysis more complicated than that is frankly adding a gravitas that the situation simply does not call for.