Sounds like a defence of the looting in US cities.
Shouldn’t you at least hold your fire till you’ve heard me out?
That’s what Trump said! But seriously, the violence we’re witnessing in several US cities following the death by choking of George Floyd, is arguably the most widespread civil disturbance in the US in decades.
And there’s a rationale for it?
Sociologists, historians and economists have been trying to understand why such violent outbursts happen, and they have some theories about it. These theories may apply also to riots and looting in other geographies, including in India.
In a seminal research paper from 1969, titled Dissensus and Consensus in Community Emergencies: Patterns of Looting and Property Norms, sociologists EL Quarantelli and Russell R Dynes at the Ohio State University set out to “advance an explanation of looting in terms of changes in certain crucial group norms, particularly those pertaining to property, at times of major crises.” Critically, they made a distinction between looting behaviour during times of natural disasters (when people may be desperate) and during times of civil disturbance.
That seems an important distinction.
Yes, and according to them, one of the striking aspects about looting in civil disturbances is its collective character: looters often work together in pairs, as family units or small groups — in contrast to natural disasters, where it is carried out by “solitary individuals”. Additionally, during civil disturbances, looting “is not a private act”: goods are taken openly and in full view of others. Whereas in natural disasters, such looting as occurs is covert and secret, they added.
What accounts for the brazenness?
Quanrantelli and Dynes reasoned that in civil disturbances, there is a “redefinition of property rights”: if property is thought of as the shared understanding of who can do what with the valued resources within a community, that understanding breaks down during civil disturbances, they noted.
Does this justify the violence?
Violence doesn’t solve anything. But as Paul Heideman, a scholar of American Studies at Rutgers University-Newark, notes in a recent article in American Left magazine Jacobin, rioting is “a rational response to grinding poverty and oppression” — and can be effective in forcing social change. Historian Ashley M Howard, in her 2012 paper Prairie Fires: Urban rebellions as black working class politics even disavows the use of the word ‘riots’ and ‘rioters’, and sees the “urban rebellions” (of the 1960s) as “a form of gendered, working-class black community activism.”
To me, that sounds like an apologia for looting.
Perhaps, but guess who else has ‘defended’ looting? When the US invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, the power vacuum triggered an epidemic of looting of hospitals, museums and businesses. US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld airily dismissed it, saying: “Freedom is untidy.”
Britain’s Defence Minister Geoff Hoon, faithful to his Labour Party’s economic philosophy of wealth redistribution, said that the looters were actually “liberating” the items from the erstwhile regime and “redistributing that wealth among the Iraqi people.”
Will any good come of all this now?
In a 2019 paper, Can Violent Protest Change Local Policy Support?, social and political scientists Ryan D Enos, Aaron R Kaufman and Melissa L Sands, who studied the political landscape after the 1992 Los Angeles riots following the police beating of Rodney King, concluded that the riot caused a liberal shift in policy support — most likely as a result of increased mobilisation of both African-American and White voters. We could see something similar this time too.
A weekly column that helps you ask the right questions
A letter from the Editor
The coronavirus crisis has changed the world completely in the last few months. All of us have been locked into our homes, economic activity has come to a near standstill. Everyone has been impacted.
Including your favourite business and financial newspaper. Our printing and distribution chains have been severely disrupted across the country, leaving readers without access to newspapers. Newspaper delivery agents have also been unable to service their customers because of multiple restrictions.
In these difficult times, we, at BusinessLine have been working continuously every day so that you are informed about all the developments – whether on the pandemic, on policy responses, or the impact on the world of business and finance. Our team has been working round the clock to keep track of developments so that you – the reader – gets accurate information and actionable insights so that you can protect your jobs, businesses, finances and investments.
We are trying our best to ensure the newspaper reaches your hands every day. We have also ensured that even if your paper is not delivered, you can access BusinessLine in the e-paper format – just as it appears in print. Our website and apps too, are updated every minute, so that you can access the information you want anywhere, anytime.
But all this comes at a heavy cost. As you are aware, the lockdowns have wiped out almost all our entire revenue stream. Sustaining our quality journalism has become extremely challenging. That we have managed so far is thanks to your support. I thank all our subscribers – print and digital – for your support.
I appeal to all or readers to help us navigate these challenging times and help sustain one of the truly independent and credible voices in the world of Indian journalism. Doing so is easy. You can help us enormously simply by subscribing to our digital or e-paper editions. We offer several affordable subscription plans for our website, which includes Portfolio, our investment advisory section that offers rich investment advice from our highly qualified, in-house Research Bureau, the only such team in the Indian newspaper industry.
A little help from you can make a huge difference to the cause of quality journalism!
Support Quality Journalism