Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dr Malcolm Cross

GET UPDATES FROM Dr Malcolm Cross
 

Psychology can Help Explain, but not Justify, the London Riots

Posted: 10/08/11 01:00

As human beings we have no choice to but make sense of the events around us. What has been occupying a lot of our hearts and minds has been the recent outbreak of destruction, violence and disorder that has filled our streets over the preceding four days in London.

At first we looked to the immediate past - the death of a young man. We want for our own reassurance, an acceptable cause, we want to know if there is someone to blame, because quite rightly we are not comfortable with death on our streets. Was this an individual tragedy arising from a deep seated social problem or the consequence of the proper exercise of policing powers that might have had other outcomes under other circumstances?

What has ensued however has left more questions than answers. The nominal 'cause' for civil disorder has unambiguously ambushed and overtaken events that most recognise as so chaotic, destructive and self serving that it is difficult to relate the two: the events of the death of Mark Duggan on Thursday 4th August and the risk to human life, theft and destruction of public and private property up until today.

Psychologically there are at least two possible approaches to understanding these events: Those of social psychology which takes account of group behavior - the failure to act until someone else takes the lead or the propensity to the follow the crowd.

Individually, however, there are other mechanisms at work. We would not rob our friend's store; we would not throw rocks at strangers or set fire to a shop where our grandmother lived above. So why no concern for shopkeepers, grandmothers or strangers? The answer is that in the overwhelming energy of the moment, with a fictional sense of connection and belonging, we as a mass forget who we are. That is, we forget that it is us, the individual who will have to take responsibility for our actions.

We forget that we are not alone; and paradoxically, aloneness is what we are primarily struggling against. We have mothers, fathers and shopkeepers whom we rely upon and take joy out of sharing a welcome 'good morning' or being pleased that they remember our regular purchase or our names. In turn those people: mothers, fathers and shopkeepers have connections that are at risk under the present set of circumstances.

Psychology can explain why, but its function is not to excuse. Group actions have individual consequences. We should stop talking about how the police will deal with tonight as if further dangerous and destructive events will unfold as an inevitability. We should look forward to the intervention of individual mothers, fathers, grandparents asking: 'where is my loved one' whom I want to protect from this distressing and dangerous mess, regardless of which side of the barricade they are on.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 28
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:34 on 11/08/2011
I agree with William
22:43 on 10/08/2011
People don't say what they really think of the looters because the comment would be deleted. These academic explanations are a distraction to what the root, and unspeakable, cause is.
22:56 on 11/08/2011
I think it is possible to find acceptable language to express your thoughts. No need to hide your thoughts from the world.
20:29 on 10/08/2011
Psychological explanations can tend to pathology, thus attributing an aura of sickness, disease to the rioters.

And this you do with resorting to the banal group action and loss of responsibility.

I would rather have an explanation which focusses upon the symbolic significance because as a collective, a society, we are guided as much by our unconscious motives and needs as our conscious.

Your approach depoliticises and strips meaning out of events laden with significance.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mediumal57
Moderate Extremist
21:09 on 14/08/2011
This is just a rehash of tan age old philosophical dichotomy that exists between those who tend to want look for explanations in the minutae of the parts (individual participation and personal motivations) of a whole event (our dear Doctor above) and those who seek for more sweeping generalisations (group dynamics and the political) - your good-self. Both methinks are necessary for a fuller understanding.

We then of course need somebody to occasionally break free of the old paths and perhaps if possible creatively come up with some truly novel explanations. I freely admit that this isn't going to be me. But I wish someone would. You'd think after nearly two and half thousand years, we'd have advanced a bit more beyond the spats of Plato and Aristotle.
photo
Computer Geek
Logician Atheist Lefty
20:27 on 10/08/2011
But man is basically an animal and when you back an animal into a corner, they will bite. There is not enough attention being paid to this very simple fact. These people have been repeatedly kicked by society and at some point if you keep kicking a dog, what do you think it will do? It will turn around and take your leg off. At that point, a civilized society is supposed to consider their reaction which is either to shoot the dog or fess up to the fact that you shouldn't have kept kicking the dog. When society figures out that they are causing their own demise, they will do something about it. We are not there yet. Perhaps we never will be. Civilized thought is also about accepting responsibility for the very bad choices you've made. Society has become so self-centered that all they can see is how they must benefit from something. Not that an act preserves the species or that it betters mankind's future, just that it gives me something today (or takes something away from someone else deemed not deserving).
22:46 on 10/08/2011
It's London, not a slum in India. I was just in London. Everyone lives quite well in a clean, friendly environment teaming with opportunity.
19:52 on 10/08/2011
The riots were already predicted in the movie 'V for Vendetta'. The government should have paid more attention to this movie and should have taken precautionary measures. Its a shame that our government does not take movies seriously.
20:31 on 10/08/2011
I agree. Sometimes cultural output reads the unconscious, the symbols of what is happening. Government cannot. Please see my comment above.
Sergeant
Dress Right
16:14 on 10/08/2011
Psychology cannot explain these acts of random [or organized] violence. To do that you must know the people doing it and what motivates them. Pundits and those wanting to write books will be opining ad nauseum on this as well as other acts of violence.

The truth is that most poor people aren't violent. Most poor people don't destroy other people's property and do damage to their own neighborhood. And injustice does not drive most people to create more injustice by destroying the property of others.
15:50 on 10/08/2011
I was fortunate enough to be taught by Malcom Cross last year and here is my take on the situation.

A lot of the analysis and debate sparked by recent events has unfortunately suffered from one fatal error rendering most attempts futile and meaningless.

People have attempted to address and package the issue as if there were one archetypal rioter:

Some claiming it's a "black issue" - where are the role models/fathers? Let's blame Hip-Hop and rap music!
Others claiming it's a "class issue" - it's the underprivileged, "deprived", downtrodden, all lashing out.

Truth is, people who have fallen into this trap could not be more wrong. The events over the past few days are a evidence of a moral issue. People from all walks of life, all ages and shades have been caught on CCTV, are turning up at court and are occupying prison cells across the country. However, the one thing they all have in common is a damaged or non-existent moral compass.

So how do we address this? I would propose...(Post count exceeds 250-words)

READ THE REST HERE:

recommendedreading.blacktechnicolor.com
20:36 on 10/08/2011
If society were so simple, we would have no problems. Moral issues when raised must be discussed in the context of all of society, not some we have chosen to define as deviant because of particular acts. Consumerism seems to share in the blame. Materialism. Capitalism. Welfarism.

Complex. Please see my comment a few above.
21:43 on 10/08/2011
Society is not simple, as I described in my post, it is complex, but my solution is simple and would not be complex to implement.

I did not define any moral issues beyond caring for thy neighbour and appreciating what we have, these aren't arbitrary or subjective - they are core and simple values which can be appreciated and enjoyed universally.

ANY of the "isms" you described would benefit from a population morally inclined towards the concern of others and the appreciation of what we each have in our lives.

The solution I proposed (Working with the less fortunate, supporting charities) would in most cases increase moral fibre in the two simple ways I've described. Any other moral issues beyond those I've highlighted as pivotal are beyond the remit of the issue and solution at hand.

People more concerned with finding objections to potentially workable solutions are the very reason why we are yet to find something that will curb the ever increasing spiral of social decline in our society.

And as such, you are yet to rise to my challenge to find a better one.

So we do nothing? Instead just discuss which morals are "right" and "wrong" as our world continues to tear itself apart?

I hope more people seek solution rather than faffing over resolution in the coming months and years, it is already clear what the issue is, if more people share your view and don't start to see that, we are all in big trouble.
20:53 on 10/08/2011
Thank you for your excellent insights and work. I've read your entire post on this matter and your page link as well. One question: Volunteer opportunities have always abounded. Many of these malcontents may have never chosen (or been persuaded) to utilize these avenues to improve themselves or their communities previously because they were dissuaded from doing so. Either they were deemed unqualified to serve or didn't see the immediate benefit to themselves (WIIFM syndrome). Do you truly feel forcing them to serve now to reduce a longer jail sentence will reinforce/create the sense of community they presently seem to lack/disregard?
lastpost
see biography
09:13 on 10/08/2011
"As human beings we have no choice to but make sense of the events around us."
When an individual is asked questions, that draw their personal rendition of reality into the light for examination. And two of their statements, describing the nature of that construction, contradict one another. What would the normal sensible reaction be? A sobering realization that what they had always taken to be actual reality, isn’t? Or, descent into denial? If you can provide me with the correct answer to that, perhaps you can assist with this: Should we being governed by examples of the latter?

"more questions than answers"
There will always be more questions than answers. However an obstinate determination to not even make an attempt at addressing at least some, isn’t going to help reduce that number.

"the failure to act"
is endemic. That is why we must have independent citizens patrolling inside the apparatus itself, to respond to whistle blowers.

"there are other mechanisms at work"
You can say that again.

"The answer is"
apparently, from what you have written. To treat the symptoms, rather that eradicate the disease. If you want to waste your existence on that futile exercise, be my guest.

"We forget that we are not alone"
We are alone. While we each attempt to exist, inside our own ersatz reality.

"Psychology can explain why"
Then start the recovery process by first healing thyself.

"which side of the barricade"
between “reality” and reality, each of us is on.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bob Metcalfe
Caught at 1st. slip trying to cut
04:41 on 10/08/2011
These kids live in a society that is one of the most unequal in the world. They are unemployed, sometimes I would imagine generationally, they have no prospect of getting a job, no education no qualifications. And nobody in successive governments has taken the slightest bit of notice of them when they're not rioting. So what do you expect them to do? In so far as they're capable of political thought, they're creating a more equal society for themselves. Seems a reasonable justification for me. Particularly as they see their 'elders and betters' engaging in, and to some extent getting away with criminal behaviour on a far grander scale.
Sergeant
Dress Right
16:16 on 10/08/2011
One would think that if you came to a country and did not make it you would perhaps consider going back to your country of "origin".

Then again, with cradle to grave welfare, free healthcare why leave?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bob Metcalfe
Caught at 1st. slip trying to cut
20:57 on 10/08/2011
One would think all thes people are migrants? Wrong.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
02:08 on 10/08/2011
Poverty, unfairness, concentration of wealth into the hands of fewer and fewer people, who get away with murder.

No justice, no peace.
01:19 on 10/08/2011
Dr. Cross: I'm an African American psychologist. If you want to discuss whether the folks who are rebelling against unemployment, lack of services, poverty and racism then you must ask this question: How JUST are the conditions these folks live under in one of the wealthiest nations in Europe? How JUST is state sanctioned violence in Iraq or Afghanistan? Let's not blame the victims with balony psychological explainations for a people in PAIN.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
Two 'alves of coconut!
00:55 on 10/08/2011
Here's a social policy question: How many illegal immigrants does it take, to constitute an army? Maybe, underneath all the education, people are still kind of stupid...or at least wilfully ignorant or something.
08:58 on 10/08/2011
That would be relevant, if only most of the shopkeepers, and business owners weren't immigrants. The overwhelming majority of folk I've seen on the TV are obviously 1st/2nd/3rd generation immigrants trying their best to make a good society. It's the initinerant locals that appear to be the most ignorant here.