What? I didn't riot
But poverty can take many forms and it can be relative
Many people perceive their level of success from how they shape up to the people around them. Britain has a psychological phenomena called 'keeping up with the Jones's' where neighbours in streets are trying to keep up with each other in terms of material possessions; for example trying to match the price bracket of each others cars or if one house gets a porch built then they all do etc
This is because in a capitalist society people are conditioned to see the world in a materialistic way and when people perceive others doing better then themselves they develop 'status anxiety'
The truely liberated person is the person who sees that all this is a waste of time and just gets on with doing what they want to do, enjoying life and the world around them etc
So poverty can have a mental element but it is also a physical element
The people who rioted in the UK have genuine greivances such as watching their public services being cut and job opportunities dwindle, whilst politicians are involved in expense scandals and bankers who have crashed the economy get rewarded with massive bonuses from taxpayers money. The rioters also came from areas that suffer a lot of police oppression as the police largely exist to protect the interests of the rich (eg pepper spraying peaceful unarmed protestors including women who are protesting the corruption of the bankers and politicians who support them)
But poverty is much more than just money. Poverty can be about lack of opportunities, lack of hope, lack of health or not being brought up with an enquiring mind. People can have a poverty of freedom if they have been conditioned to never question what they are told.
There are some people who are rich in money but poor in time
There are people who have plenty of money and material things but are completely poor when it comes to love. They are suffering from a poverty of love. They want to be loved but they don't realise that to be loved you first need to have love in your heart.
They develop a hard shell and a 'fuck you' attitude because they have been battling their way through a tough, competitive, materialistic, dog eat dog capitalist world. They develop a hard shell with each round they fight and in the end almost everything becomes a battle.
Carl Jung spoke about the persona or mask that people develop as a front to present to the world; he said its 'a kind of mask, designed on the one hand to make a definite impression upon others, and on the other to conceal the true nature of the individual'.
Developing a flexible persona is an important part of a persons development but sometimes the person can mirror another persona and this can effect development, so poor role models can be a real problem (plenty of those in the capitalist media!). The most danger comes when people identify too much with their persona.
Modern living constantly requires people to present a front to the world, which can be a problem for people especially those in environments where they have to be on their guard a lot (see for example the number of celebs or business people including the head exec of Llyods recently who have breakdowns or stints in rehab)
I think that's what the novel 'American Psycho' was about.
When people identify too much with their persona through excessive concern for what other people think then they develop ''an unreflecting state of mind 'in which people are utterly unconscious of any distinction between themselves and the world in which they live. They have little or no concept of themselves as beings distinct from what society expects of them''' (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persona_(psychology)
A real problem lies in the fact that capitalism holds up certain types of people as role models for example TV shows like 'the apprentice' so that young people latch onto the persona types on show and learn from them. Films also often provide bad role models and economic textbooks created by the real life Gordon Ghekos provide a philosophical justification for the mind wanting to arm itself in the gladiatorial arena of life (unwilling as they are to consider whether the tournament should be fought or not in the first place)
Its important therefore that we don't allow ourselves to become our personas. We are not our personas. We are much more than that if we allow ourselves to be.
We don't need to throw the persona sheild up everytime in life. Sometimes if we want love in we have to let it in but we have to love enough first to let the shield down in the first place
And that means loving rioters left out of the consumerist 'keeping up with the Jones's' game by the austerity measures created by the upwards movement of wealth of neoliberalism or sweatshop workers enslaved by the corrupt dealings of their national leaders
It means having a bit of humanity. And once the flood gates are open it does have a transformative effect on someones life
Some people think they can go through life without doing this. They attempt to buy a poor imitation of love. They have a trophy wife on their arm but the women never loves them she loves their money and her life will be as empty and meaningless as his, unable as they both are to get past the purely material to the real riches beyond
That's why despite the fact he says some good things like wanting to bring the troops home Ron Paul is ulitmately a bad bet because he is still arguing for a competitive system that will only see millions more people churned out who feel they have to spend large parts of their lives wearing masks and being inauthentic and never fully able to let a little love into their hearts.
Emotionally stunted people, embittered by their lack of love and consoling themselves in the misery of less fortunates such as sweatshop workers or rioters, much like a baying mob distracted from their own difficult lives by watching gladiators battling it out in an arena.
Loveless and without purpose; but hey, who needs those things when you've got a porsche....right?