Are we all Riotous?

actually that is basically what i said - while these people were aware of right and wrong their ability to decipher it in the context they were in was not there so they simply reverted to instinctual or learned behaviour.

i think where people differ in this thread is the threshold.

actually that is basically what i said - while these people were aware of right and wrong their ability to decipher it in the context they were in was not there so they simply reverted to instinctual or learned behaviour.

No, I personally was not there, but I've been in similar situations and never did it cross my mind to do these types of things.

Our society is finding far to many excuses for destructive behaviour. Voicing an opinion is, IMO, what we should be doing. Otherwise we are no better than the onlookers who were at the riot, and we are, like them, part of the problem and not part of the solution. And this problem definitely requires a solution as it's happened twice and is happening at other events around the continent.

gotta break some eggs to make an omelet.

No, I personally was not there, but I've been in similar situations and never did it cross my mind to do these types of things.

Our society is finding far to many excuses for destructive behaviour. Voicing an opinion is, IMO, what we should be doing. Otherwise we are no better than the onlookers who were at the riot, and we are, like them, part of the problem and not part of the solution. And this problem definitely requires a solution as it's happened twice and is happening at other events around the continent.

ok - that's you. but what explanation do you use for even the onlookers?

i'm saying that in that type of situation, many people lose the ability to think rationally. it's like staring at a car wreck as you drive by it on the highway. you know you shouldn't be gawking and instead focusing on your driving, yet so many people are sucked in by fascination and stare.

wow that Mishtar sure posts alot

It is a weird glich, the Admins said they could fix it but they said it is not a big deal. :/

This is my first post (and the first time I've read the NSMB.com forums) in several years, but hopefully I can contribute something.

Cam, awesome OP, lots of thought provoking ideas and lots of good replies as well.

It's surprising that in all the comments, nobody has made mention of the most notorious instance of herd mentality from the 20th century, that of Nazi coercion of ordinary people to do horrible things to other human beings. Granted, there could be nasty physical consequences if you didn't do what they wanted, but none the less, a pragmatic modern society somehow allowed persecution of citizenry to run rampant, with very little resistance.
Then take the Milgram experiments - on the basis of the fake experimenter's assumed authority, a lay-person can be persuaded to zap a (fake) victim with electric shocks. Not everyone goes to the peak voltage, but the fraction of ordinary common-sense people who do is significant.
Then take the the Standford Prison experiments - fake prisoners and fake guards go bananas on each other with little provokation other than a license to act.
I'm sure we can all think of instances in our lives, as Cam suggested, where we do things that aren't quite angelic in nature but we justify it in many ways. Hopefully these acts don't involve inflicting direct suffering on others, but clearly that's not so unlikely either.

So what? The point is that, if not all of us, then a huge (majority) fraction of our populace can, will and do behave badly, even brutally given the right conditions. An enormous mob of 100,000 and a handful of cops essentially turns the tables on authority and creates a new social norm of breaking windows (snitching on your neighbour to the SS), looting London Drugs (delivering electric shocks) and stealing mannequins (stripping a fake prisoner and leaving them shivering in a cold cell overnight). Am I (or is Cam) saying that this is a legit excuse and that makes it OK? Nope - clearly there is responsibility and will, in particular with the instigators and provocateurs; I'd also suggest that age and experience can cushion us from social pressures and firm up our internal convictions regarding right and wrong (hence the rioters were mostly young, dumb and full of PnV). But we have to acknowledge that ALL humans (yes, even me, even you) have enormous capacity for good and ill under good and ill circumstances. I share the opinion that a hockey riot is hardly a life and death situation that places such duress on individuals. However the sometime ephemeral nature of our moral compasses is very real, which accounts for why that theme is so prevalent our history, literature and philosophy.

Quote time:
"the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. Even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil."

Points to who can name the author!

Riots are strange things, In the 90's in Huntington Beach, near where I was staying, me and my buddy both 18 years of age out went out for a look.
Basically Police came out of no where and started charging at a group that were not rioting we had no choice only to run. It was,….. I have to say a lot of fun, getting chased by cops, people falling and running over cars was crazy. So I agree with the points set out in the original post.If you are male, young and enjoy adrenaline that part is fun, the damaging peoples property part I dont really understand I think it depends on your personality. At no point did I want to damage peoples stuff, or cars. I was kinda angry at the police so I guess I can understand that part of an angry mob.

Good thoughts Cam, but you can use that argument for all crime, we are all human and that makes us all a mere hairs breadth away from from saying and doing regrettable and possibly criminal things. The point is that we do not all do these things. And that is a distinction that must never be overlooked. Civil Society takes work on all parts and if we excuse this type of behavior by saying that it was a moment of weakness and could happen to anyone the whole thing comes tumbling down. The good and the bad involved in these riots should and will pay their due. The good ones will pick up, dust off, learn from that mistake and hit the trail a better rider.

It's been only, what, three months since the horrible natural disaster that struck Japan.

What did we see in Japan? Rioters? Looters? Criminals? No.

What we saw were people helping others in need. New saw people waiting in lines for hours for drinking water, and when there was no water left, we saw the people turn around and quietly go home.

We didn't see any lemmings in Japan. We saw civilized, educated, respectful citizens making the best of a situation.

Many posts on this riot only enforce the reason for the riot; there is no accountability, and when someone is caught red handed, the response is that they are only human and unable to control themselves in the situation. Unfortunately, this was proven wrong by many people who were downtown that night, and the lemming mentality was proven wrong by a nation of honourable and responsible Japanese.

It's time to stop being a society looking for excuses and avoiding personal responsibility.

It's been only, what, three months since the horrible natural disaster that struck Japan.

What did we see in Japan? Rioters? Looters? Criminals? No.

Someone told me a story about a journalist (presumeably Western) who went around the stricken area desperately looking for signs of looting. In all his searching, he finally found ONE instance. Someone/persons had smashed the window of a bicycle shop and taken bicycles. He smugly noted this down and went back sometime later to interview the owner. When he arrived, the bicycles were back in the shop. Talking to the owner, he found out that a search [HTML_REMOVED] rescue party had broken into the shop and borrowed the bicycles to get around. When they had finished they returned them.

Do the Japanese have more civil "instincts" and are they more "rational" than everyone else, or is this really a cultural issue? You decide. BTW Nobody is saying they are any better or worse than us (talk to someone who fought them, experienced occupation or held prisoner by them during WWII for clarification).

Someone told me a story about a journalist (presumeably Western) who went around the stricken area desperately looking for signs of looting. In all his searching, he finally found ONE instance. Someone/persons had smashed the window of a bicycle shop and taken bicycles. He smugly noted this down and went back sometime later to interview the owner. When he arrived, the bicycles were back in the shop. Talking to the owner, he found out that a search [HTML_REMOVED] rescue party had broken into the shop and borrowed the bicycles to get around. When they had finished they returned them.

Do the Japanese have more civil "instincts" and are they more "rational" than everyone else, or is this really a cultural issue? You decide.

I am not too sure you can compare Japan with what happened here. I doubt the Japanese would have a riot like we did, but on the other hand we have had many examples of people helping people in disasters. I still believe that our society would come together in such a horrible disaster and any looting would be minimal.

[…]But if we explain all of this by calling all of those involved idiots, vandals and morons who have nothing in common with the rest of humanity, we risk having this scenario repeated again and again – as it has been throughout history.

Again, on the whole there is little to argue with.

I think the biggest problem I have with your message is your use of the term, "We". I contend that your "We" is vastly different than my "We". Especially when used in constructing a strawman that states, "we [all] explain this by calling all of those involved idiots, vandals and morons who have nothing in common with the rest of humanity."

Yes, some have. However, some haven't. In my experience people who operate in black and white have opinions that are rarely worth the sound waves which they travel upon.

I think there are plenty of smart people that can explain what happened far better than I have and I believe some of those people are in a position where they can help ensure this doesn't happen again. Furthermore, I believe our justice system already has the mechanisms and laws in place to differentiate between the slack-jawed gawkers standing in the back and those breaking windows, lighting fires, flipping trucks and slandering innocent people on various blogs and forums.

I still believe that our society would come together in such a horrible disaster and any looting would be minimal.

I am not so sure … what about New Orleans? They don't even loot during Mardi Gras.

I think there are plenty of smart people that can explain what happened far better than I have and I believe some of those people are in a position where they can help ensure this doesn't happen again.

Funny … the smart people made suggestions after the same thing happened in 1994.

This is my first post (and the first time I've read the NSMB.com forums) in several years, but hopefully I can contribute something.

Cam, awesome OP, lots of thought provoking ideas and lots of good replies as well.

It's surprising that in all the comments, nobody has made mention of the most notorious instance of herd mentality from the 20th century, that of Nazi coercion of ordinary people to do horrible things to other human beings. Granted, there could be nasty physical consequences if you didn't do what they wanted, but none the less, a pragmatic modern society somehow allowed persecution of citizenry to run rampant, with very little resistance.
Then take the Milgram experiments - on the basis of the fake experimenter's assumed authority, a lay-person can be persuaded to zap a (fake) victim with electric shocks. Not everyone goes to the peak voltage, but the fraction of ordinary common-sense people who do is significant.
Then take the the Standford Prison experiments - fake prisoners and fake guards go bananas on each other with little provokation other than a license to act.
I'm sure we can all think of instances in our lives, as Cam suggested, where we do things that aren't quite angelic in nature but we justify it in many ways. Hopefully these acts don't involve inflicting direct suffering on others, but clearly that's not so unlikely either.

So what? The point is that, if not all of us, then a huge (majority) fraction of our populace can, will and do behave badly, even brutally given the right conditions. An enormous mob of 100,000 and a handful of cops essentially turns the tables on authority and creates a new social norm of breaking windows (snitching on your neighbour to the SS), looting London Drugs (delivering electric shocks) and stealing mannequins (stripping a fake prisoner and leaving them shivering in a cold cell overnight). Am I (or is Cam) saying that this is a legit excuse and that makes it OK? Nope - clearly there is responsibility and will, in particular with the instigators and provocateurs; I'd also suggest that age and experience can cushion us from social pressures and firm up our internal convictions regarding right and wrong (hence the rioters were mostly young, dumb and full of PnV). But we have to acknowledge that ALL humans (yes, even me, even you) have enormous capacity for good and ill under good and ill circumstances. I share the opinion that a hockey riot is hardly a life and death situation that places such duress on individuals. However the sometime ephemeral nature of our moral compasses is very real, which accounts for why that theme is so prevalent our history, literature and philosophy.

Quote time:
"the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. Even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil."

Points to who can name the author!

Excellent post. Thanks for sharing that with us. I had to google the author so I won't blow it for someone who can identify it from memory.

Good thoughts Cam, but you can use that argument for all crime, we are all human and that makes us all a mere hairs breadth away from from saying and doing regrettable and possibly criminal things. The point is that we do not all do these things. And that is a distinction that must never be overlooked. Civil Society takes work on all parts and if we excuse this type of behavior by saying that it was a moment of weakness and could happen to anyone the whole thing comes tumbling down. The good and the bad involved in these riots should and will pay their due. The good ones will pick up, dust off, learn from that mistake and hit the trail a better rider.

I agree completely.

I'm thankful this discussion has become more civil and thoughtful so we might actually learn something from it. Vengeance is never instructive.