Let's not lose our head over this English mob
There we go again. Riots and mayhem in London. The mob takes to the streets, breaks and burns and then retreats. The press magnify it. Our discernment wanes. Perspective is non-existent. A poll says that a large majority of the gentlemanly British with their deep attachment to law, due process and human rights think live bullets should have been used against the rioters.
Are we mentally back in the times of the Peterloo Massacre when in 1819 the cavalry with drawn swords charged on demonstrators demanding reform in parliamentary representation? Judging from the outcry, one may be excused if for a moment one thinks so. The press overdid it. But, certainly, for 24 hours the mob had seemed out of control and the police inept. But it wasn't as socially polarising as the Notting Hill riots of 1958, or the Brixton riots of 1981 and 1985. Most of the mayhem was pretty low-level. Compared with the Los Angeles riots of 1992, when 53 people died, it was small beer.
We should go back to the 18th century to gain some perspective. London was a teeming rabbit warren of a city - narrow streets replete with filthy, smelling tenements with whole families in a single room. For want of elbow room, people poured onto the overcrowded streets to socialise, to drink, to rob and sometimes to protest.
The 'mob' could coalesce in a minute over some slight or a wrong. Rioting was a regular event. Much of the time, there was a remarkable degree of toleration of public disorder by the authorities.
In the 1770s, the propensity to take to the streets began to decline. But when riots did happen, they came with a bang - as with the Gordon Riots of 1780. It began peacefully with a march by Protestants on the House of Commons to present their petition against the Catholic Relief Act. Stirred up by an incendiary speech by Lord George Gordon, Catholic chapels were attacked. Many liberal observers blamed the severe economic climate for the riots. The rioters shook the city to its core. The army was called in and 285 people were shot dead.
Riots may have been less frequent but those that did occur became more violent. The police became tougher. As a result, radical reformist leaders turned their energies to the voluntary society and public meetings. The workers started to form incipient trade unions. Policing was gradually professionalised. A new fabric of social stability was woven. By the end of the century, the age of the mob was over.
Is rioting in the British blood? Not at all. As rioting in the 18th century was diminished, so can that of the present day be. Some stick, some carrot - and a better perspective, especially by the press.
Jonathan Power is a London-based journalist
