What, me worry?

Most of us have at some point or another encountered individuals who blithely dismiss the need for concern – or even discussion – about acts of serious malfeasance or general moral breakdown on the grounds that similar miscreant behaviours have occurred throughout history. This argumentative equivalent of a Gallic shrug, typically delivered in a didactic, Father Christmas tone, is essentially an ad hominem accusation that anyone who takes an interest in, or expresses concern about, recent events and trends has lost his sense of perspective due to a putative failure to realize that there is, in fact, nothing new under the sun.
In a Telegraph column titled “Why we need a ‘moral panic’ over last week’s riots”, Ed West takes exception to this form of indifference that masquerades as wisdom. Responding to one particular proponent of the tiresome “it’s happened throughout history, so chill out” meme, he coins a keeper of a phrase:

The Economist’s Bagehot suggests that we shouldn’t get our knickers in a twist about the riots, quoting previous examples of moral panic about social disorder, crime and youth culture to show that last week’s events are nothing new. He cites articles about “young delinquents’ in 1913, 1956 headlines about ‘rock’n’roll babies’ and even reports from 1815, and compares them with recent newspaper articles. His conclusion: we should avoid “moral panic” and a rush to “historically-illiterate judgment”.

I’ve heard this fallacy so many times that I think it really needs a name – perhaps the “moral panic fallacy“. It holds that because people in the past have expressed concern and alarm about crime and social decline, therefore such concern today must be mistaken. (emph. mine)

The data West provides suggest that modern-day concerns about crime and social decline are neither mistaken nor the result of “historically-illiterate judgement”:

In 1955…there were 500,000 crimes recorded in England and Wales; in 1992 there were 5.1 million, after which the crime statistics system was changed. Even in the 1930s indictable offences were a tenth what they are today – despite large numbers of people living in grinding poverty (actual poverty, not “BlackBerrys and £100 trainers poverty”).

Seems there is something new under the sun.

Between 1901 and 1941 there were never more than 400 recorded robberies in the whole of England each year. But in 2001/2 there were 6,500 in the borough of Lambeth alone…

Purveyors of the moral panic fallacy should try to gain a little ‘perspective’ in lieu of advising others to do so.

28 Replies to “What, me worry?”

  1. Right, and that is WITH the direction form the Home Office to not criminally prosecute first time offenders for a large variety of offences.
    So the statistic quoted is under representing the true situation.
    Much like the mainland EU-wide self imposed imbecility of not reporting rape statistics that identify the perpetraters by country (or religion…) of origin.
    God forbid the sheeple would be aroused from their slumber in front of the tellie.
    Untill their domicile burns down fo course. But then, hey, it is good tv for someone else.

  2. What should also be noted is that each of these crimes has a victim (or victims). To suspend all sympathy for them, simply because crime happened in the past, is cold and cruel.
    The wealthy may recover from robberies, but the poor, who are far more likely to be victimized, don’t have that cushion. The law doesn’t punish the poor, it protects them.

  3. The difference is that those other cited past events involved a civilization that had a more or less homogenous culture and values which weathered the challenge of being slightly off balance.
    Today there is no homogenous culture or values, no remembrance of where the balance point itself is to aim for a return to equilibrium.
    Our civilization is a holed ship, captained by scoundrels and cowards, adrift on a Sea of Chaos with no solid land in sight, the waters uncharted, the darkness descending, the storm approaches, there is no safe port or direction.

  4. Too many social workers and too few parents that still remember how to raise children without reading a book on it. Too much nanny intervention and too many parental restrictions on common sense. Most important, too many traditional values trampled in the name of political correctness by social activists.

  5. They are obviously learning this behavior from news coverage of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, gun-toting Texas cowboys, an invasion of Jewish produced and written Hollywood films, and American black Hip Hop music.
    The guns came mostly from unregulated gun shows in Tennessee which were shipped to Wales in Liberian-flagged Chinese cargo vessels in containers marked “Hello Kitty Plush Toys.”
    I knew it was all Bush’s fault.

  6. Having spent some of my early years growing up in one of the most poverty stricken areas of rural Canada, it was notable in those days that
    politeness and good manners were the expected norm for all children and adults no matter what cards fate had dealt them. No doubt the local
    priest deserved some credit for making sure the standards from the past were kept up. Many homes were left vacant for months at a time as
    families temporarily moved to seek work elsewhere and nothing was ever touched. The only government cheques seen in the entire community
    were those of the two school teachers plus the few old age pensioners over 80.
    .

  7. Finally – many thanks to Ed West who has eloquently articulated what I have tried, unsuccessfully, to communicate to those that accuse me of the “fallacy of the slippery slope” when I emphatically state what I wholeheartedly believe to be the truth – morality is dissipating in every area – increased criminal activity is just one area.
    This is further proof of moral decay:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2026694/French-label-Jours-Apr-s-Lunes-launch-lingerie-girls-young-FOUR.html

  8. Great work as usual from Ed West.
    I hate it when stupid lazy people misunderstand a word or phrase, then use it obsessively (and incorrectly) to the point where everyone is misusing it.
    So I see this has happened with “moral panic” now.
    A moral panic is widespread hysteria over something 95% imaginary: witches in Salem, satanic ritual abuse, comic books are turning children into criminals or something, backmasking heavy metal albums.
    Those riots were not imaginary.
    Sigh. This is why I don’t leave the house. The habitual misuse of words and misinterpretations of history make conversation too exhausting.

  9. Kathy, that was the first time I had heard the term “moral panic” – I had to stop and think about what he meant. I agree that it was a tad confusing – I don’t think we should ascribe the term “moral panic” that has the connotation as you stated with a real issue. I did note sarcasm in his use of the term though – sorta like disarming your enemy of their unloaded weapon and pointing it back at them. That was my take in the end anyway.

  10. Lucky Lori (and maybe Kathy, I’m not sure):
    The operative – and complete – phrase that West coined isn’t “moral panic”, but “moral panic fallacy“, i.e. a *fallacious* belief that any discussion or expressed concern about recent (decadal) crime and social decline is prima facie evidence of “moral panic.”
    He didn’t suggest that the phrase “moral panic” is in widespread (mis)use, or that it is commonly abused by people who misunderstand the meaning of the phrase; he merely used it to coin an apt and useful description of a tiresome, circular, remarkably common, and hitherto unnamed category of argument which can be roughly summarized as “it’s no big deal, because these sorts of behaviours have occurred throughout history.”
    Observing and noting the significance of entirely non-imaginary events isn’t “moral panic”, as Kathy noted. I believe that was West’s point, as evidenced by his use of sarc quotes around the term “moral panic” in the article’s title.

  11. EBD, that’s what I read too. That was the first time I heard the term “moral panic” with or w/o fallacy.

  12. Re: UK rioters and moral panic – reap what ye have sown. The riots were the fruit of decades of progressive lib-left indoctrination in moral relativism, fallacious self-esteem and entitlement dogmas. Behold the product of utopian left indoctrinating – flash mobs guided by situational morality.

  13. Anne Coulter made a -very- cogent observation in that video Kate posted a couple days ago, in between needling Lou Dobbs.
    If you look at all the despotic tyrant states that arose in the 19th and 20th Centuries, they were all preceded by exactly what we see at work in Vancouver and London this year. Orchestrated rioting.
    She tossed that off as a side issue almost, but really its the entire answer to the accusation of “moral panic” coming from Lefty rags like the Economist. Because Ed West has it correctly, Bagehot -is- claiming people objecting to the riots are doing so out of a moral panic. To wit, from The Economist article:
    “Seeking guidance, Bagehot decided to go off-line and read some books. From the shelves of the London Library, a gem: “Hooligan: A History of Respectable Fears” a calm and witty history of moral panics that have gripped England over the ages, published in 1982, and written by a Bradford University academic, Geoffrey Pearson (later at Goldsmiths). The book is out of print, so I trust I will be forgiven (not least by Professor Pearson) for quoting from it at length: it is a brilliant survey.”
    There is an argument to be made that this list of riots from the past, rather than a survey of unjustified fears it actually a survey of failed revolutions and society-wide robberies.
    I remind the Leftist trollocracy at this time that failed revolutions in Western countries result in nothing worse than increased taxes, whereas -successful- revolutions have historically resulted in the deaths of millions. The Fascists alone managed that, they were pikers compared to the Commies.
    I do not think at this point that the rioting is organized by some shadowy group bent on world domination. That would be silly. I think its worse than that. Clearly the rioting in England is ad-hoc and opportunistic, basically the realization in a large number of rather dim minds that the cops can’t control them and nobody else will step up.
    That’s a failure of one of the three basic jobs of government, keeping the peace. If it continues, economic collapse follows because you can’t do business in riot conditions. It happens very fast. What happens next, a Strong Man takes advantage of the chaos, a Savior of the People (like Obama!) who promises to punish the looters and make the trains run on time. It really sells to people when the trains aren’t running at all and they’re aching for some payback.
    The rest, as they say, is history.

  14. Kathy S wrote —
    A moral panic is widespread hysteria over something 95% imaginary: witches in Salem, satanic ritual abuse, comic books are turning children into criminals or something, backmasking heavy metal albums.
    You forgot Dungeons and Dragons! Classic moral panic — although I did know a guy who became obsessed with the game, declared himself an unaligned half-warlock or something, ran away from home, and went to live in the woods in the ravine beside (then named) Toronto International Airport.

  15. “That’s a failure of one of the three basic jobs of government, keeping the peace. If it continues, economic collapse follows because you can’t do business in riot conditions. It happens very fast. What happens next, a Strong Man takes advantage of the chaos, a Savior of the People (like Obama!) who promises to punish the looters and make the trains run on time.” — Phantom (9:39 am)
    That’s one possible peril, I guess, but in the critical short term the far more likely peril – one which we’ve already been witnessing in an inchoate, dishonest, double-speaking form – is that people who are cellularly inclined to rub the “progressive” thought-insignia on their bellies will continue to make increasingly elaborate *excuses* for all manner of cretinous miscreants and violators in the interest of labeling their political opponents’s — let’s call them “conservatives” — heartless, Tea Party-esque lack of empathy as being the root cause of the, erm, misbehaviour.
    IMO, the “social justice” crusaders are far more inclined to feel justified about assuming/manning the “strong man” post — just look at the tactics of the broad left vis-à-vis “conservatives.”

  16. So we reduce our emissions and the observant aliens conclude that our civilization collapsed — and they come to claim the planet.

  17. Yes; why worry about corrupt politicians? They are all corrupt.
    Except that they are not. At the national level, and usually at the
    provincial level, most Canadian politicians have been honest.
    It really annoys me when the public who comment on Globe
    articles refer to the present Government of PMSH as corrupt.
    It is palpably and obviously not so. Just observe what happened
    with Helen Guergis. When credible allegations of maldoing
    surfaced, she was out of Cabinet, out of the Party, and
    under investigation, within one business day.

  18. A shame not to have a look at the article in question
    It’s not about crime rates, it’s about instant media fear-mongering & cockeyed explanations.
    “It is deplorable. It is tribal. And it is from America. It follows rag-time, blues, dixie, jazz, hot cha-cha and the boogie-woogie, which surely originated in the jungle. We sometimes wonder whether this is the negro’s revenge.”
    It’s about the Mad Mel’s through the ages.
    The article ends — // none of this is much comfort if you live in one of the areas of England that has just been looted or burned. None of this takes away from the fact that this country has some serious social problems involving young people and children: Britain tops European league tables for teenage pregnancy, and has dropped down international rankings for educational achievement.
    But for all its wit, “Hooligan”—written at a time of really horrible racial tension in Britain—had a serious purpose: to urge readers in 1982 to avoid moral panic and a rush to historically-illiterate judgement. Its lessons hold just as true today. //
    Crime is bad. So are moral panics.

  19. I let my Economist subscription expire when they touted for Obama. This story validates my decision nicely.

  20. Liberal elites socialist’s experiments combined with them hyjacking education and what we see today is youth consumed with the sense of victimhood, entitlement and barely literate.

  21. you realise only 1% of the population could or would actually read through that, eh
    moral – crime is increasing in Britain and you don’t know what to do about it but sound incredibly more intelliigent than everyone else?
    So, been to “Deadmonton” AB lately?

  22. or Panic, I guess was actually the “thesis”, if I can use that.
    i failed to read the last sentence.
    never recommended on a sinking ship, as all the rich and smart people get trampled upon.
    social engineering 101

  23. Good article. The really sad fact is this IS reversable. We should know better by all the other examples.
    Particlarly Eastern Europe.

  24. The loss of moral compass always precedes the fall of civilizations.
    Deadmonton? Godless Somali drug dealers beyond their demographic. Check the stats.

  25. Absolutely right EBD …. but will they ever change?
    Self appointed elites can never concede the possibility that they are wrong …. any facts that fly in the face of their assumptions are ignored because that is how they protect their ego and the observations of those inconvenient facts by others are attacked as being uninformed.
    This is how they protect their status.
    This applies to doctrinaires of all stripes.
    File this under “Knowing Your Ememy”.

Navigation