Anarchy, hockey and the Vancouver riots

When all else fails, change the subject...

Caveat three: Offering a sociological perspective is not a way of excusing those men who were rioting. They need to be held accountable for their actions. What I'm suggesting is that, in addition to accountability, social pressures on boys and men to be tough and aggressive are also a factor. For instance, consider the power of insults that are slung at boys and men who do not live up to social expectations of masculinity: "pussy," "fag" and "queer" are entirely predictable verbal responses. They are homophobic in nature and endemic in schools, media and broader society.

Some leftist ideologues have asserted that the riot was the result of alcohol, that the youth were simply middle-class kids acting out, while others have described it as being comprised of predominantly young white males. These allegations are used to show that the riot was without political consciousness or rationale, that it “wasn't political.” This is similar to the uptight citizen's dismissal of the rioters as not being genuine members of the body politic. It also appears to be predominantly voiced by those who weren't present in the zone of conflict, and whose perception of it is warped by corporate media coverage.

The composition and sheer size of the crowds involved in rioting were in fact highly political. The vast majority of youth I observed in the rioting were from the most oppressed socio-economic classes, with large numbers of people of colour participating, including Asian, East Indian, Native, and black. This ethnic mix is in fact very indicative of Greater Vancouver in general, representing also the most economically depressed elements of the population overall.

Middle class kids? It's difficult to assess the actual economic status of these youth, but most weren't wearing $200 Canucks jerseys. Looking at the countless photos and video footage, my estimation is that the rioters were predominantly working class kids.

Most of those in the streets were definitely enjoying the euphoria of liberation they were experiencing, and most were clearly hostile to police (the most common chant being “Fuck the Police”). These experiences have political ramifications, as the authorities well know. While there were those who could be described as anti-social elements (i.e., the brawls and fist fights between fans), there were also those participating who clearly saw it as a form of rebellion.

Certainly the extent of looting, far more than in 1994, has political meaning. The desire to accumulate material possessions may very well have been a motivating factor in looting, considering the scale of advertising. But what really stands out is the sheer disregard for established authority and the mass violation of one of Western society's most sacred institutions: property rights. Nor was it simply illegal consumerism gone wild; many looters were throwing merchandise out windows for those on the street to gather (re-distributing or destroying wealth, the anti-thesis of consumerism). These youth did not give a fuck about law and order, and there are indeed profound political implications in this as well, one that greatly disturbs the capitalist ruling class (proof of which can be seen in their hysterical responses to the riot).

Certainly the extent of looting, far more than in 1994, has political meaning. The desire to accumulate material possessions may very well have been a motivating factor in looting, considering the scale of advertising. But what really stands out is the sheer disregard for established authority and the mass violation of one of Western society's most sacred institutions: property rights.....These youth did not give a fuck about law and order, and there are indeed profound political implications in this as well, one that greatly disturbs the capitalist ruling class (proof of which can be seen in their hysterical responses to the riot).

I went to that link and that quoted text isn't there.  Did you intend to link to a different site?