Wednesday, 10 August 2011

Get... The Comfy Chair!

There have been calls to get the army and water cannon on the streets to quell the riots. I don't think that's such a great idea. The army are not trained in police work and these are, after all, children we are dealing with.

Okay, they are horrible, disgusting, feral, incomprehensible and illiterate, drunk and drugged to the eyeballs and have an attitude a mother wolverine would boot them out of the burrow for, but they are still children. None of them are mine, I am delighted to note, but then if they had been, they wouldn't have been out rioting.

What? Can't stop them? Where do they get their food, where do they get their washing and ironing done, and what would they do if they came home to find a shiny new kennel in the garden containing their bed and no dog? Yes, you can stop them. Wait until they're getting ready for Saturday night and they find their favourite white hoodie is still in the wash basket from last weekend and they have no clean underwear. They'll soon find time to consider your point of view.

My father very rarely raised a hand to me or my brother. I only recall one proper whacking and that was over forty years ago. I remember it well, and I'm still wary of arguing with him even though he's now very old indeed and much slower than he was. After that event, he never needed to hit us again. He just had to look as though he might.

My mother was, and remains, a very little woman but if you wanted to have your dinner without it being run under the cold tap first, you wouldn't mess with her either.

These things were not child abuse. Child abuse is where the child never knows if they'll be whacked just because Dad's in a bad mood or Mum's run out of gin. Child abuse is torment for the sake of torment, without reason. No, those things were not child abuse. They were discipline.

They never happened without good reason, and we often gave good reason because we were right little sods. However, we learned not to do it again (or not to get caught next time) and we never mugged anyone, never stole anything and never burned anything important.

It worked like this. We'd consider what happened when we were caught letting tyres down or putting an earwig in some kid's hair and telling them it would burrow into their ears and lay eggs in their brain. Then we'd extrapolate that to what was likely to happen if we did something much worse, such as stealing from a pensioner. The extrapolation soon began to look like it could involve some very unpleasant things and we decided against it. This only works if the punishment is always in proportion to the offence. Otherwise no extrapolation is possible and there's no difference between writing on a wall and setting fire to a cat. Which is what the legal system is now set up to achieve: no relationship between offence and punishment.

We learned something important. There were consequences to being a little sod and the consequence is not nearly as much fun as watching a kid who believes he'll wake up one night with a family of earwigs burrowing out through his eyes. Although that one was very nearly worth it. In fact, one day I hope to reprise it with one of the modern adult dopes. These days I won't even need a real earwig.

The tyres weren't worth it. When you're seven, pumping up a car tyre manually is seriously hard work.

It wasn't a hard childhood, nor was it a strict one. My explosives experiments in the garden were tolerated because I didn't blow up anyone or anything that mattered. Most were old plastic or wood models that I'd run out of room for. Somewhere I might still have photos. Picking off the slugs with pellets fired from an airgun brought no more than rolled eyes from my father, and no comment at all. I suspect because my version of slug pellets was more effective than his. Accidents were not punished, not even the infamous Nitromors incident, because I wasn't to know that it could do to clothing what it did to paint.

There was no abuse at all in my childhood. Sometimes I had to sit a little carefully, sometimes I had to go to bed while all the other kids were still outside, sometimes I had to eat cold wet food but all of those things happened because I caused them to happen. They were punishments for being a git. I understood that and became less of a git as a result, at least, if there was anyone watching.

Teachers could whack us but only with reason. It was a school covering a few mining towns and whacking a miner's child without good reason was not a good idea if you only had a teacher's physique. If you were whacked with good reason you never told your parents. You'd only risk another whacking.

In these enlightened times, of course, teachers are held responsible for a class full of gits but are not allowed to touch them at all, even in self defence. Parents are told that even raising their voices will make their children grow up odd and I've noticed some of them pointing at me when they say it. We had boundaries, and crossing those boundaries was unpleasant. There are no boundaries any more. No consequences.

Lefties are claiming it's all down to cuts. They are crowing that 'the people are rising up against the capitalist oppressor, innit?'. They insist that this is a reaction to the Tories or the police or deprivation or whatever bollocks they can think up. They've even tried to claim that the EDL and the BNP are actually setting the fires and doing the looting. So far they haven't claimed it's all down to far-right Norwegian snipers but there's still time.

Rubbish. These are children. Some as young as eleven, an age when I was making harmless little weedkiller bombs and putting wild lizards into girls' lunchboxes. There was a teacher-consequence for that one. I didn't do it again.

These children have no jobs, not because there are no jobs, but because many of them are too young to be legally employed. If they had jobs the Left would be screaming about child labour. These children neither know nor care about politics and imaginary cuts. Deprivation? They are wearing clothes that cost more than half my wardrobe. None look underfed and none are barefoot. If the lefties think the average fifteen-year-old even thinks about pensions, they are twice as deranged as I thought they were.

The Lefties think these are 'protests' but there are no protests. Nobody is demanding anything. Not one placard to be seen. No students, no union members, no long-term unemployed, nobody made redundant, nobody at risk of losing their home, nothing.

These are children brought up without boundaries. The Tories are not to blame. Creating this monster took many years. Labour years. Children start school at the age of five. By now, those who started when Tiny Blur took over would be around twenty. Coincidence?

Labour created the monster quite deliberately because they thought they could control it. The tragedy is that they still think they can. They think these riots are all Socialist riots against capitalism while the looters load up with all the capitalism they can get their hands on.

While I'd like to think that I would never have been part of any such thing, I have to wonder. What if I had been brought up with no discipline at all? What if my attempts to terrorise other children with mind games had not been stamped on, but had been encouraged as 'creativity'? What if the lizard episode, the ant hill escapade and the great grasshopper classroom escape had been seen not as behaviour to be corrected but as 'an interest in the environment'?

If that had happened, I would not have curtailed my nefarious childhood activities. I would, most likely, have extended them to the fullest of my ability. Like all children I would have been probing for the boundaries of acceptable behaviour and when I met no resistance, I would have assumed that I had not yet reached that boundary.

Yes, those children looting and burning are revolting, wretched, arrogant idiots but they didn't do that to themselves. Disgusting numbers of children leave school illiterate but they would find it hard to teach themselves. Children are starting school not toilet trained and unable to dress themselves. Not because they refuse to do it but because they have not been taught how.

Socialism created these children. They took away the boundaries and let the children think they were untouchable. Now those children are acting as though they are untouchable and doing as they were taught to do. Doing whatever they want. There are no consequences.

It's not too late. They can be given boundaries again, but will that happen? It doesn't look like it. Not when a Tory councillor in Birmingham suggests these rioters should not be punished. A Tory! The party of Laura Norda now contains men such as this? Meanwhile Labour's Tom Harris wants the death penalty for those same little scroats who stole his car radio. Something of a switch there?

Are the Tories going to make these rioters go to bed without supper or is that now classed as abuse? Will they be told to sit on the naughty step for ten minutes and poked with soft cushions until they cheer up? No, they will be rewarded with ASBOS and free iPods to add to the pile they've just picked up on a late-night shopping trip to Argos.

Yes, they robbed Argos. They robbed the cheapest shop on the high street. What do they teach the kids in school these days?

It was the culture of no-blame and no-consequence that led to these riots. Not cuts, not jobs, not race, not religion, not the banks, not this alleged 'deprivation', none of it. Socialism let these children believe they can do just as they please, and now they are doing just as they please. Where's the surprise?

The lefties created this juvenile monster. They still think it's theirs to control.

It recognises no control. It's been taught not to.

Oh, and the punishment they can expect is far worse than being made to sit in the comfy chair. They will exerience the horror of... this!

So it's not going to stop any time soon. The government, of any colour, won't let it. Why would they? They still have that civil contingencies act to play with.

There is no excuse for the behaviour of these Ferals. None. They made their choices and they committed the acts themselves. But they are not the only ones to blame here.


JuliaM said...

Spot on!

Anonymous said...

"tyhey are children"!! Are you kidding - have you seen their pictures - they woiuld knock you down and stamp your head flat. Did you hear the 17 year old females (Children !) going on about it was all their due.sychra

Mark Wadsworth said...

"Which is what the legal system is now set up to achieve: no relationship between offence and punishment."

Ah, so you've noticed that. I think it's just part of being an authoritarian government - it creates a climate of fear because you're not sure whether leaving your bin on the pavement is just liable to a fine or whether you'll actually be sent to jail. Or possibly whether you'll be mugged or burgled by someone who does know that the fine for that is ten hours community service.

Ed P said...

Anon: they are only children in the sense of being immature, lacking self-control & irresponsible. But when some young woman seen trying on trainers is identified by a 42 year old woman as, "she's my 22 year old daughter. We don't get on any more, but I wonder how her 4 year old is doing", you can see these humanoids' lives & prospects are over before they've really started. A grandmother at 38!
As if Bliar did not have enough to answer for already, the lying devious war-mongering shit, we can add the cultural destruction his ghastly policies have inflicted on this once-civilised country. But how do you un-breed this underclass? I fear it can no more be corrected than we can be free of creeping sharia and all the other woes now facing us.

Anonymous said...

Spot on LI. I fear that this cannot now be changed other than locking up thousands of people, which gets my vote by the way.

TheBigYin said...

A cracking post LI.

My father very rarely raised a hand to me or my brother. I only recall one proper whacking and that was over forty years ago. I remember it well, and I'm still wary of arguing with him even though he's now very old indeed and much slower than he was. After that event, he never needed to hit us again. He just had to look as though he might.

My dad, well my stepdad actually, never raised a hand to me or my four siblings either but would give us a good verbal bashing while he looked threateningly at a wide brown belt with a massive buckle hanging on a hook at the back of the door. I was a troublesome bastard in those days and on reflection merited a good thrashing around the arse many a time but it never happened.

We were poor and lived in a hell hole that was the tenements of Glasgow in the fifties and never knew the word 'riot' never mind participate in one.

Furor Teutonicus said...

XX None look underfed and none are barefoot.XX

On N-24, a German news channel, they were "interviewing these scum bags.

"Why do you riot?"

"Cus we're hungry, innit".

Na ja? So how do you COOK that fucking plasma T.V you have under your fucking arm then?

But then, subhumans "journalists" NEVER ask the right questions, do they?

cornyborny said...

Bingo, L-I. Bing-o.

The riots can be entirely summarised as 'Socialist Bullshit Meets Reality (In A Sufficiently Widespread And Visible Manner For Everybody On Earth To Notice)'.

Hopefully some good might come of it. That being the tide finally turning against the cultural Marxists. Some hope, I know.

Anonymous said...

"But then, subhumans "journalists" NEVER ask the right questions, do they?"

QFT. There was a report on a local news channel years ago, all bleeding heart stuff about a gypsy guy who'd been refused a pension because he was completely undocumented, with no NI number. Not one of the idiot journos thought to ask him if that meant he'd been paying no tax for 50 years.

Chalcedon said...

Vile little out of control, theieving scrotes. Apparently it is reported that 80% of these little bastards are just that, bastards and with no father at home. No atable family with no male rolemodel. Pointing this out apparently had the left twitterarti in a rage. They just hate anyone being judgemental over an underclass they created by their anti family attitude and oh so 'progessive' nonsense. Of course, these people don't like in Peckham, Totttenham, Birminghan or West Brom.

Chalcedon said...

Sorry for the typos. Need an edit button LI!

Anonymous said...

Wasn't it that commie bitch Thatcher that made smacking a naughty child a "crime"?
Disgusting leftie cow.

kitler said...

I dont care how others raise their kids but I have abstained from hitting mine. Both are very nice well mannered kids and should they ever go looting I am confident they are smart enough to wear gloves and balaclavas.

Nothing sums up the education system in this country better than the fact that despite days of notification about the rioting, none of the fuck wits on TV have brought any disguise better than an openfaced hoody.

TCM-818 said...

"Wasn't it that commie bitch Thatcher that made smacking a naughty child a "crime"? Disgusting leftie cow."

Yes, because we of course live in a dictatorship in which the President For Life is the only one who ever decides anything.

1. Corporal punishment in UK state schools was banned as the result of a ruling from the ECHR.

2. It's still legal to smack a child outside school.

Facts, eh. Undermining bullshit arguments since 12,284 BC.

Anonymous said...

I don’t know why everyone’s so shocked about this. We’ve had riots before – Brixton, Toxteth, the Miners’ Strike, the Poll Tax riots, the Winter of Discontent - and I’ll wager we’ll have them again. In the days when we had more guts we even had a civil war, for goodness’ sake. They’ll pass, they’ll die down, and we’ll hear politicians chanting their usual mantra about “lessons learned,” but they’ll learn nothing. They learned nothing from the previous ones and they’ll learn nothing from this. They’ll go on ignoring the feral nature of huge swathes of, not just young people, but the whole population; they’ll do nothing to stem the “me, me, me” psychology which pervades present-day thinking from the smoking ban to corporate banking and which has so clearly motivated these present riots; if they look for reasons they’ll look at “deprivation” and “aspirations” and “opportunities.” Most importantly of all they’ll go on ignoring the part which they themselves and countless previous administrations have collectively played in bringing the present situation about.

And in 10 years’ time, we’ll all have that “here we go again” feeling …

Phydeaux said...

Either intitiation of violence is virtuous or it is not.

You cannot both tell a child that violence is wrong and then hit them when they don't do as you say. At least, not without being an insufferable hypocrite.

So which is it?

TCM-818 said...

The answer you're grasping for is 'context', asshole.

What's with the absolutist argument, anyway? I thought hand-wringers were supposed to be into nuance.

Amusing Bunni said...

Very well said, Leggy.

These rabid, feral rats another rat would kick out if it's hole are doing this because they had no upbringing, discipline ANYWHERE, and they know they can get away with it.

Even though they're "children", they should be dealt with severely, and if they are taller than 4 feet, and they are running around, I think they should be shot, at least with rubber bullets....anything less and it's just a game of catch the mouse.

Great post, as usual, you nailed it.

Phydeaux said...

Whilst I don't recognise any context in which the initialisation of violence can be considered virtuous, hitting a child--inflicting pain--because they won't do as you say, are annoying you, have been 'naughty', or any or all of the above, seems to me to be just about the least worthy 'context' I could possibly think of.

Through some perverse Pavlovian conditioning you can indeed treat a child like an animal and teach it to associate 'naughtiness' with violence. I prefer to treat my children as intelligent human beings.

TCM-818 said...

Fine. You carry on thinking that and feeling self-righteous and enlightened.

Ignore the mountain range of graphic evidence that exposes the progressive mindset and the corrosive policies it has given rise to as the biggest busted flush of all time. Don't waste a second thinking about those people who live blameless lives alongside the degenerates and suffer their miserable attentions daily. Don't ask yourself how, despite the free and constant intervention of PC-saturated state agencies, vast numbers of kids up and down the country seem to have turned out as mindless, compassionless, violent imbeciles.

In short, don't bother stepping outside your own mental comfort zone and considering for a moment how your precious sensibilities might not actually be universally applicable.

kitler said...

How do you all know these kids have not been blessed with the love of parental violence? Maybe they have been hit by thier parents so many times violence is all they know.

And maybe the looting has nothing to do with race or parental disipline. It might just be that now they have seen on the news that the people who make the law have got away with looting hundreds of thousands of pounds from the taxpayer, and when those who make the law dont obey it, why should anyone else?

TCM-818 said...

Yikes. Another apologist leaps out and fearlessly misses the point.

Re-read LI's post. He nails it. The whole thing is about boundaries. Bound. a. ries. When there aren't any, you get chaos where once you had civilisation. It's really that simple. Parental discipline (or, in other words, parents giving a shit) is just one manifestation of this.

And parental discipline doesn't necessarily have to involve anything physical. My parents never hit me, once. Yet I still know that breaking into an old dear's house and hospitalising her for £20 is wrong.

Wow! How?

Because I can empathise, because I can think of the welfare of others beside myself, because my parents inculcated me with a moral code.

That's one of the most important things the pieces of work we've seen parading their ferity on TV are lacking. And they lack it because progressives in every avenue of the state and media have taken it away from them.

As it happens, I personally dislike it when I see parents telling their kids "No, because I said so" and leaving it there, because the instruction is essentially empty of content: the kid has no meaningful concept beyond 'might is right' to take hold of and think about. But even this is better than just letting little Johnny run into traffic because he has an urge to. It might not directly contribute to his development into a profound thinker, but it does indirectly because he's not dead.

Leg-iron said...

Phydeaux - some kids respond to reasoned arguments, some never will. People, including children, are all different. That's something no government has ever managed to understand. They cannot grasp the concept of the individual so they treat us as amorphous cloes.

While it is true that many children will never need a smack, there are those (as I was) who will learn from one smack and not overstep that boundary again, and those who will just keep being sods no matter what.

That's not new. It's always been that way.

What's new is that children are now all treated the same - only words should be used - and that simply does not work for every child.

Leg-iron said...

Kitler - good point. The government is telling them off for stealing when they've been all over the news themselves - for stealing.

The other side of discipline is setting an example. Why should a child listen to the alcoholic who tells him not to drink?

John Pickworth said...

First thing I'll do when the other 234,684 people above me in the line of succession mysteriously ermmm... disappear; is order the TV News to stop blurring/pixelating the faces of those 'suspected' of doing something naughty.

Fair enough, if some kid commits a minor misdemeanour I'd be the first to say he/she shouldn't have their futures ruined. But when they are kicking in the windows of Carphone Warehouse and carting off several thousand pounds worth of stock, well, that's burglary!

And its not just kids. How many times have we seen adults with their faces protected by the media?

Frankly, if you're at the scene of a well publicised riot - even if you're not actively taking part - then you can hardly complain if your face is broadcast on the news. As for the rest, their mere presence is likely suspicious so why do the media feel the need obscure their identities?

Aside from that, I agree totally with LI's take on discipline. By the way, I too was a child bomb maker too. I got so ambitious that I eventually had to resort to underground testing to protect the neighbour's windows ;-)

Captain Haddock said...

"What? Can't stop them? Where do they get their food, where do they get their washing and ironing done, and what would they do if they came home to find a shiny new kennel in the garden containing their bed and no dog? Yes, you can stop them. Wait until they're getting ready for Saturday night and they find their favourite white hoodie is still in the wash basket from last weekend and they have no clean underwear. They'll soon find time to consider your point of view" ...

Get real LI ..

This kind of feral scum couldn't give a flying fuck whether their clothes are washed, or ironed ..

They do do "getting ready" for a night out, like we used to ..

As for where do they get their food ? .. they fend for themselves because their benefit-dependent mothers are too busy boozing, sniffing assorted powder & having their latest affair .. And most haven't got the foggiest who their fathers were ..

As for using the Army .. where are you going to get them from ? .. Between deployments, post-deployment leave & pre-deployment training, there's no-one left .. there just aren't any barracks filled with soldiers, looking for something to do ..

With regard to Water Cannon .. "We don't "do" Water Cannon" for the simple reason that we don't have any .. The Police in Northern Ireland have a grand total of SIX .. this being the height of the "marching season", I doubt they're too keen to lend us a couple ..

And even if they did, where would you base them ?

One in London & one in Manchester ? ..

Then it all goes tits-up in Birmingham ..

What's needed is for the politicians to grow some & allow the Police to do their job properly .. and the sooner, the better ..

Leg-iron said...

John P - if they were laughed at, that would scare them more than any legal response.

Capn H - I don't think they get ready for a Saturday night like we (at least I) did. White clothes? White? We were only allowed those on special occasions and they were kept well out of reach in between. Once the white shirt was on, the instruction was Don't Touch A Bloody Thing.

They wear the latest fashions, we wore what didn't stink too much.

We didn't care about 'respect'. That was something older people had, and nothing to do with us. We didn't care about appearances because nobody could tell what we looked like under the grime and the hair.

No, I don't think they are like we were. Especially as none of my friends (of any colour) had Jamacian accents and that funny twitch in the hands when they spoke.

Leg-iron said...

Water cannon only carry enough for about ten minutes' shooting from what I can find. They shoot so much water the Greens will be terrified in case sea levels drop and their whole scam falls apart.

Some have suggested putting the Ferals in the army. What as, sandbags? If you have to rely on those around you in a fight, I wouldn't want that lot around me. I doubt the army would want them.

Maybe the navy could make use of them as barnacle-scrapers or as shark distractions during an evacuation, or the air force could use them as emergency landing padding.

No, they have a long way to go before they are any use to anyone, and until they are they can forget about 'respect'.

Captain Haddock said...

If they want my "respect" they can bloody well earn it, like every other bugger has to ...

Until then, I'll continue to treat them with the utter contempt which they so richly deserve ..

opinions powered by