Peace and Conflict in the UK? The Youth Perspective

The UK finds itself at a complex juncture, with a global economic crisis putting a strain on social relations within British localities, an increasingly diverse population attempting to find common ground in difference and widespread disengagement from mainstream political forums. Underlying the difficulties faced in a time of crisis are longer-term, structural changes, with gradual detachment from traditional political forums and socio-economic marginalisation being exacerbated and brought to the fore by shocks such as economic crisis. The interaction between mounting pressures and recent shocks is testing communities’ resilience. It is at a time of crisis, when frustrations and resentments rise, that outlets for voice are most important.

A particular constituency is emblematic of these trends. Young people are being especially affected by economic downturn, with youth unemployment at unprecedented highs and intergenerational fairness rapidly declining. Across classes, like their contemporaries in the Global South, they are experiencing what Alcinda Honwana has termed “waithood”, a period of “suspension between childhood and adulthood”, where markers of transitions such as employment and financial independence are being postponed[1]. Despite being worst affected, young people have often struggled to find voice within traditional forums. The issues they face could be voiced positively through civic mobilisation, but the frustrations of social and economic exclusion may also manifest themselves through violent channels.

Unemployment has been growing fastest for 18-24 year olds and work is increasingly hard to find even for the most skilled. The impact of unemployment is especially challenging given its social consequences, and in particular the impact it can have on individuals’ self-esteem. A recent study of the English Defence League[2], for example, describes how structural factors can interact with the psychology of individual conduct in the construction of masculinities premised on violence as a response to feelings of humiliation and injustice. This is especially the case in the context of a society that increasingly attaches citizens’ value to work, thus firmly attaching it to individuals’ sense of self-worth, while in practice many continue to be denied participation.

Young people have also been widely depicted as criminals or “feral”. This has often prevented a more nuanced understanding of the processes leading to young people’s involvement in violent crime. The rising importance of territoriality in determining the contours of gang violence within deprived areas of the UK, for example, raises the very important issue of recognition. Protecting one’s area can generate respect as well as well-delineated identities allowing a strong sense of belonging. Violence, then, can serve the purpose of overcoming social exclusion through the creation of parallel hierarchies. Faced with lowered aspirations created by economic deprivation (often persisting over generations), young people try to refashion their world to create an opportunity for recognition. The role of respect highlights the importance for young people to take control of their own lives in circumstances that may feel inescapable as well as the need for recognition that is often denied by traditional channels.

Young people’s apparent disengagement from traditional politics has been well documented. Only 44% of young people voted in the 2010 elections as opposed to the 65% overall turnout[3]. While some have interpreted this as a sign of a disinterested generation, delving deeper into young people’s politicisation in the UK reveals firstly a sense of disempowerment in the context of traditional politics and secondly the emergence of a new form of politics contrasting notions of youth as apolitical. Viewing the current system as old and non-responsive to their demands, young people increasingly engage in alternative forms of creative political activism. The announcement of cuts to higher education and rise in tuition fees, for example, sparked protests that engaged thousands of students across the country through new internet-based platforms. The emergence of protest groups such as UK Uncut or Occupy, led predominantly by young people, have also offered a fundamental critique to the way politics is done. These groups, responding to economic crisis, austerity and a common sense of injustice, have developed new forms of democratic organisation to consensus-based decision-making.

While protest politics and new forms of political engagement may provide a platform to vent frustrations and express dissatisfaction, the question remains as to who in fact takes part in this form of politics. Although there is little data available on the demographics of protest, there is an emerging criticism that the more marginalised and less well-educated struggle to indentify with protest movements. The risk then is that a voiceless majority persists, trapped between a mainstream politics that is not youth friendly and a protest politics that tends to be elitist.

Voicelessness and lack of platforms for recognition can give rise to conflictual externalisations of anger and frustration, especially as young people face increasing socio-economic pressures and exclusion. We have already noted how social exclusion can play a part in the decision to join gangs as a means of reasserting oneself. The riots that erupted on the streets of Tottenham in 2011 were a vivid confirmation of these processes. Counter to attempts to dub the riots as pure criminality, accounts are emerging that point to simmering frustrations that had gone unheard.

Anger at police tactics perceived to be discriminatory, exclusion, criminalisation and frustration at worsening economic opportunities emerged as key issues in discussions with young people aimed at analysing the root causes of the riots. A feeling of excitement is also often highlighted, as for the first time rioters felt that the tables were turned and they were in control. Perhaps the most publicly condemned aspect of the riots was the widespread looting that took place. Few attempts, however, have been made to analyse what the looting may be symptomatic of. Opportunism rarely happens in a vacuum, it can reveal pressures that young people feel as their status is increasingly premised on ownership of material goods, while being effectively barred from these patterns of consumption.

There is of course a danger in rationalising youth violence, and especially in asserting too strong a link between deprivation, voicelessness and violence. Without justifying criminality, the scope remains for reflecting on the potential risks of exclusion from both material opportunities and avenues for expression and recognition.

Supporting young people’s voices need not be limited to improving their access to political institutions or forms of mobilisation. As we have seen, marginalised young people can often lack the space and confidence to articulate their experiences and concerns.  Crucial spaces can be created informally and yet can provide a guarantee for young people that they are being listened to, an opportunity to achieve respect and recognition without having to resort to violence or parallel hierarchies. Opportunities ought to be created for these spaces to generate a sense that change is possible, and that young people themselves can be agents of that change, something that is lacking in a situation where aspirations are lowered across groups of youth. These opportunities can be viewed as conflict prevention, yet they also ought to be viewed as a fundamental right to voice for marginalised citizens.