This video from London, England says about itself:
Grenfell Tower Residents Speaking about Tragedy
15 June 2017
By Keith Flett in Britain:
The mob: the mother of tyrants or democracy?
Wednesday 23rd August 2017
Equating Grenfell protesters with rioters reveals just how far removed the media is from reality, writes KEITH FLETT
The Sun reportedly sent a reporter to pose as a relative of a victim to gain access to a hospital ward. The Daily Mail, meanwhile, claimed to have identified the man whose fridge it suggested had started the fire.
It wasn’t long, however, before more serious questions arose well beyond yellow journalism.
The march in Kensington in particular attracted media attention. It was reported that protesters had “stormed” Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall with a series of demands that they wanted the local council to respond to.
In reality, as one of the protesters pointed out on social media, the Town Hall is a public building and they had gained entry to it by the usual method of opening the door. No storming had been required.
As the protest continued, media commentary started to focus on whether or not there would be a riot and what a bad idea riots are. Clearly these commentators actually believed the Kaiser Chiefs song that riots can be predicted. They cannot.
What can be predicted is that on most occasions, which appear to those in authority and those not involved as being likely to conclude in a riot, they do not.
This is because while the gathering of people who may potentially riot is mostly spontaneous, on most occasions there is a core of organised political direction present.
The fact that the media often reports riots as being mystifying events simply reflects that they are too far away from reality to understand who and what is behind them.
The classic riot, dating to the pre-democratic period of the 18th century was over the price of basic foodstuffs or their quality.
As the historian and socialist EP Thompson noted, here the strategy was clear. The aim was precisely not to riot but to give the appearance that unless the demands of protesters were met then a riot might occur. It was a very successful way of winning concessions.
Another related question occurs. The protesters who were at Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall were mostly described as just that but several commentators suggested that what was involved was the “mob.”
In Burke’s usage the associations are essentially with criminality and conspiracy. In more recent times that has provoked considerable historical literature.
George Rudé identified the use of “mob” as being reactionary and suggested that a much less loaded word to describe those who engage in protests is “crowd.” His book The Crowd in History details his approach.
Despite being a chronicler of riots EP Thompson was slightly less sure, pointing out that while crowds often gathered for progressive ends, this did not by any means rule out more reactionary gatherings.
That of course is not what is happening after the Grenfell fire and it is important to underline that those who are protesting are not a “mob” but rather they are making a point democratically where democratic processes have fallen short.