4 ms·

There are some great pieces written on this. The author is just in an academic bubble. If you go to a riotous situation on the ground you will encounter people

There are some great pieces written on this. The author is just in an academic bubble. If you go to a riotous situation on the ground you will encounter people spreading and handing out plenty of free literature espousing the views the rioters hold about their activities. It is a common topic of discussion and formalization, just not in an academic context generally. One example I saw that was particularly interesting is [0]. [0] http://www.ultra-com.org/project/why-riot/ http://www.ultra-com.org/project/why-riot/

bakuninsbart 5y ago
Similarly here: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-you-are-not-the-target-audience https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-you-a... It is very much a topic within far-left circles, the issue is rather that there are very few far-left circles in anglo-saxon academia due to a lack of interest in the subject matter by the people funding the universities there. That said, both of the articles are interesting reads, but assume lots of premises as true without exploring them further. A unified theory doesn't exist as far as I know.
Mathnerd314 5y ago
Let's go through the article's table w.r.t. the ultra letter: Freedom preserving, Equality promoting - Indeed, he is overthrowing the elites Voices of the unheard, Conditions of a polity's most disadvantaged - Indeed, according to his economic overview, he is quite poor and marginalized Basic liberal democratic framework (life, liberty, property) - he frames this as not being able to buy a house, and the elites owning everything, so in some sense yes, this is about the distribution of property Inability to seek redress through parliamentary procedures - Yes, the political parties are "fundamentally corrupt" and activism is "rigged". Although, he doesn't mention ever actually calling his representatives. Unjust law - he is contesting capitalism, so in some sense yes Unjust dispersal order - he says the riots are the "excuse" for authorities, so yes, presumably there is some suppression going on Crowd behavior, Legitimate targets, Proportionality - unclear, he talks about riots in general rather than specific riots. But going off of William Gillis's article these are chosen after "careful deliberation", so there is some form of self-policing going on. So the conclusion I get is that Havercroft's article is essentially pro-riot, although there is a lot of waffling.

bakuninsbart 5y ago

Similarly here: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-you-are-not-the-target-audience https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-you-a... It is very much a topic within far-left circles, the issue is rather that there are very few far-left circles in anglo-saxon academia due to a lack of interest in the subject matter by the people funding the universities there. That said, both of the articles are interesting reads, but assume lots of premises as true without exploring them further. A unified theory doesn't exist as far as I know.

Mathnerd314 5y ago

Let's go through the article's table w.r.t. the ultra letter: Freedom preserving, Equality promoting - Indeed, he is overthrowing the elites Voices of the unheard, Conditions of a polity's most disadvantaged - Indeed, according to his economic overview, he is quite poor and marginalized Basic liberal democratic framework (life, liberty, property) - he frames this as not being able to buy a house, and the elites owning everything, so in some sense yes, this is about the distribution of property Inability to seek redress through parliamentary procedures - Yes, the political parties are "fundamentally corrupt" and activism is "rigged". Although, he doesn't mention ever actually calling his representatives. Unjust law - he is contesting capitalism, so in some sense yes Unjust dispersal order - he says the riots are the "excuse" for authorities, so yes, presumably there is some suppression going on Crowd behavior, Legitimate targets, Proportionality - unclear, he talks about riots in general rather than specific riots. But going off of William Gillis's article these are chosen after "careful deliberation", so there is some form of self-policing going on. So the conclusion I get is that Havercroft's article is essentially pro-riot, although there is a lot of waffling.