Kelly McParland: Two centuries of social reform go up in flames in London

When Britain’s Parliament was debating a bill slightly extending the franchise to a few more voters in 1831, a mob enraged at the determined blocking tactics of the Duke of Wellington converged on his home and smashed the windows, even as the body of his recently-deceased wife lay inside.

The “Iron Duke,”, Napoleon’s conqueror, had iron shutters installed to keep them at bay.  The Reform Bill eventually passed despite his misgivings, setting off almost two centuries of steady liberalization that — just as Wellington had feared — robbed the upper classes of many of their privileges and  shamelessly spread around rights and equality among the common folk.

Yet still the mob continues to riot. In Toronto last summer hooded youths in their black outfits torched cars and smashed windows for no coherent reason that has ever been made public. In Vancouver in June they looted and burned because their team lost a hockey game, while thousands of normally responsible citizens stood and watched, or egged them on. In London they’ve spent four nights torching their own neighbourhoods after a man was shot by police, though few seem to think that explanation really has much to do with it.

The real cause, supposedly, is that they’re angry and resentful. British newspapers say 1.5 million people have never done a day’s work. Some 600,000 Britons under 25 have never held a job. According to the Daily Mail, “the UK has more young people without work or education than even Romania and Bulgaria.”

There is even a bureaucratic acronym, of course, so they can be counted and classified: NEETs, or ‘not in employment, education or training’. Britain is a NEET leader within Europe, surpassed only by Italy, Portugal and Spain. But if NEETs have a goal, they’re not much at articulating it. The vandalism and destruction carried out in Toronto, Vancouver and London had no apparent benefit in mind, beyond destruction itself. Young men and women trashed entire city blocks for the sake of a looted sweater, or a piece of luggage they didn’t need. Sometimes they’d just steal it and throw it away.

In that they differ from previous generations, which actually had a reason for their actions.  In 1832 they wanted the vote and equal rights with property owners. Women suffragettes wanted equality with men. Black peace marchers wanted equality with whites. Labour unions wanted better conditions and fair pay. 60s radicals wanted to end a war, eliminate a draft and shock the older generation into a more tolerant attitude.

All those goals were achieved — maybe not perfectly, but to a large degree, and most are now bedrock goals of western government and society. Especially since the end of the Second World War, social programs in abundance have been put in place to protect the poor, support the unemployed, guarantee health care, provide housing and equalize educational opportunity across the spectrum. So extensive is the safety net that governments today struggle to bear the cost. The current budget crisis in Washington centres largely on the government’s determination to protect social programs despite having to borrow heavily to do so. The system is hardly perfect, but no one can say western governments, or society, ignore their duty to provide opportunity for those able to take advantage, or care for those who can’t.  Protecting and expanding rights, and furthering prosperity are the underlying themes of almost every election held in countries where elections are allowed.

So today’s anarchists, what do they want that they can’t have? They have the same angry outlook of alienated youth from generations past, but without the same legitimacy of complaint. There are schools for them. There are opportunities, if they look. They can be clothed, housed and fed at no cost to themselves. You wouldn’t have 1.5 million people who have never worked if it wasn’t fairly easy to survive without working. There are jobs available — perhaps they’re not the best jobs, there for the taking, but is it harder today than it was for previous generations? Rare is it any more that success relates to birth, family or privilege. The ranks of the West’s most successful are fat with self-made people who built empires by exploiting opportunities available to anyone.

Yet still we have sizeable communities of young men and women who denounce all that’s been achieved in the name of liberalism and progress, and turn to smashing windows and burning cars.  And social theorists still find explanations and excuses for their actions. More of something is needed. Society has failed in some way. Government should do more.

The idea behind all the social programs was that equality would lead to a more contented and peaceful population. It doesn’t seem to have achieved that.  If you can be given so much, and still want to destroy things, the fault doesn’t lie anywhere but within.

National Post