Youth Violence Is Not a Black Problem
Are We Framing the "Knife Crime Problem" Incorrectly?
- By Jide Ehizele
From the London assembly to conversations across social media, knife crime being associated as a “black problem” is not a new thing. Whether it is through the lens of postcode wars or county lines, the racial element is something that tends to be highlighted. Knife crime or broader youth violence is certainly a matter that disproportionately affects black people and stating such is simply a fact. It is not something that should be shied away from if we intend on saving lives. However, some of the ongoing conversations have presented a narrative which by logic infers that violent behaviour (which is behind the use of a weapon) is somewhat inherent to those who are black.
A main problem with firstly associating social behaviours i.e. violence with race is that race is a socially constructed concept based on physically observable characteristics. Race is not a scientifically valid way to categorise humans in terms of behaviour, intelligence, or abilities. Human genetic diversity is complex, and the concept of race does not correspond to distinct biological differences that could dictate behaviour. Black is simply a term for those who have dark skin and typical features from sub-Sahara Africa. It carries not real meaning beyond physical description nor was the social classification designed to do so.
Even if you think that violence is specific to “black culture” rather than a fixed or determined biological trait then one must be able to firstly define the ‘black values’ that create this culture. Black British is an umbrella term for a range of black ethnicities (Jamaican, Yoruba, Wolof, Somali, Zulu etc). It is a racial identity rather than an ethnic one. It groups individuals based on shared experiences related to race and societal perceptions rather than specific cultural practices. What might appear as "racial" differences in behaviour are mostly responses to environmental conditions, including socioeconomic status, education, and historical experiences.
The city of Glasgow endured a knife epidemic at the turn of the 21st century which even earned itself the infamous moniker of the murder capital of western Europe. Glasgow’s demographic makeup was over 90% “white” at that time, implying that there is likely more to violent behaviour than race of perpetrators. Thus, it may not be a surprise to find out that Glasgow and London share some similarities in the causes of high violence across their respective areas. Both were marked by a socioeconomic deprivation where pockets of severe poverty can be found which has contributed to feelings of disenfranchisement - particularly among young people. This has invoked a sense of hopelessness and social exclusion that can lead to an increased likelihood of engaging in crime due to a lack of opportunities. In addition, both cities have also suffered from legacy of gang activity that has created a culture which normalises violent behaviour in certain communities. Gang culture has been a significant factor in youth violence, with territorial disputes and gang rivalries fuelling conflict. Substance-abuse and weakened social structures have also played a role in the higher violent crime.
As one can see, both Glasgow and London share many root causes of violent crime. However, this is not to ignore that there are indeed differences. A major difference is the historical and structural context of the cities. Glasgow is a city known for its post-industrial decline. The collapse of heavy industries, such as shipbuilding and manufacturing led to widespread unemployment and poverty. London on the other hand is a thriving global city. A melting pot of cultures and a hub for arts and entertainment, with world-class museums, theatres, galleries, and music venues. As a result, it is much easier to directly attribute higher crime rates to socioeconomic issues in Glasgow. Poverty certainly does exist in pockets across the London but its proximity to wealth creates a complex relationship. For e.g. it is widely accepted that social mobility in the London is far greater than other parts of the UK due to the spillover effects of the city’s wealth. However, it’s not as straightforward as that. Cultural exclusion is a real phenomenon. It is one thing being fortunate to be raised in a council estate within a short bus ride to central London. It is another thing to be raised in a household that is aware of opportunities such as free museum entries to the Tate Modern or Natural History Museum.
The racial and ethnic composition of London cannot be ignored either and has certainly influenced violent crime patterns. Disparities in education and employment contribute to social stratification. For e.g. Black Caribbean boys have historically faced higher exclusion rates from schools, leading to lower educational attainment and reduced job prospects, which can increase vulnerability to criminal involvement. For many people of ethnic minority backgrounds, there is also an ongoing battle regarding sense of belonging and identity in the country. The struggle to reconcile their ancestral heritage with their British identity, particularly in a context of discrimination and exclusion. An understanding that they will always be an “other” in both London and their ancestral homeland. This sentiment has contributed to the formation of alternative identities, sometimes through gang affiliation or participation in subcultures like drill. Drill music lyrics often depict the realities of life in deprived neighbourhoods, including crime and gang culture. Whilst it can indeed be viewed as a form of cultural expression - a shared story that many of the urban lower classes do relate to. One also cannot deny that it glamourises violence and exacerbates tensions. The historical legacy of racial conflicts in London over the last 70 years (Notting Hill and Brixton riots, New Cross fire) also adds to the mistrust and sense of alienation within black communities. Then there is the matter of absent fathers which has been blamed for gang culture in black communities.
Overall, social behaviour is complex and multifaceted, influenced by a combination of cultural, family dynamics, personal agency, socioeconomic and environmental. In the case of “black” gang culture in London, it is not accurate to simply attribute violent behaviour to innate faculty or the importation of an ethnic culture. The roots of gang culture in London, including among black communities, are often tied to factors such as family background, social inequality, cultural exclusion, and historical experiences of discrimination and marginalisation. These conditions make the black racial group more susceptible to youth violence compared to others. Drill subculture arose within this inner London context (where these factors exist) not a foreign one. Sure, different ethnic cultures have varying norms and values regarding violence. However, London, Glasgow, Liverpool and other cities across the UK display and experience similar patterns in relation to gang violence in despite of their different demographic make-up.
Glasgow eventually achieved a dramatic reduction in gang violence through a public health approach spearheaded by the Violence Reduction Unit (VRU), which was formed in 2005. Violence was viewed as not just a crime problem but a public health epidemic. It focused on prevention by addressing the root causes of violence, such as poverty, education, and social exclusion. Initiatives like Street & Arrow, which provided mentorship and employment to former offenders, were central to the strategy. On the other side of the globe, Rwanda was once home to some of the most brutal violence that the world has ever witnessed. The perpetrators largely young men who were actively recruited into the Interahamwe militia. Today, it is generally considered safer with crime rates comparable to many European countries. This has been attributed to a combination of national reconciliation efforts, community-based initiatives, and socio-economic reforms.
All this once again highlights that socialisation processes, environmental influences and situational factors are the major variables. By learning from Glasgow’s success and tailoring these strategies to London’s specific social and cultural context, the city could take a more effective and sustainable approach to reducing youth violence where black kids are disproportionately affected the most.
Jide is a Christian thinker, born and bred in Lewisham. He has a fervent passion for socioeconomic issues and seeks social justice based on gospel ethics.
🚨Event Announcement
The countdown to the Battle of Ideas festival has begun!
On Saturday October 19, and Sunday October 20, Church House in Westminster will become the epicentre of thought-provoking discussions on the most pressing issues of our time.
The Equiano Project is proud to be hosting a panel discussion on Islam, Islamism, and Islamophobia. In an era where the line between legitimate critique and bigotry often blurs, this conversation couldn’t be more timely. How do we effectively combat anti-Muslim hatred while preserving the crucial right to discuss and critique all religions openly and fairly?
Our distinguished panel will tackle this vital question and more, examining key events such as the Salman Rushdie affair and other recent controversies to shed light on how to approach discussions about Islam and Islamism critically in the UK.
Join the Battle of Ideas festival for an unmissable weekend of debate and discussion on the most critical political, economic, scientific, and cultural issues of our time.
Find out more and book your tickets, here or follow the link below:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/battle-of-ideas-festival-2024-tickets-807629249827?
here in Seattle, Washington and the environs troubled male youth are almost exclusively, coming from families with a shortage of adults, i.e. one parent. I’m very sympathetic to looking at root causes, but if we don’t look at family culture, and work to repair that, I don’t see an end site, I resist the connection between poverty and bad parenting
That was an incredibly long way to say "Yes, but..."
Yes, but there are multiple "Black" ethnicities involved and "Race is a Construct". So? "Blacks" aren't genetically any more predisposed towards crime than "Whites". Ok, sure. I'm not seeing any claim contrary to that coming from any mainstream source. I'm also not seeing any particular "Black" associated ethnicity singled out here as not having a youth crime problem, so the more common allegation that there is a pervasive "Black Culture" problem still has basis in observation. I would have expected that there has to be at least one "Black" subgroup you could hold up as a positive example against the stereotyping, but the fact that you didn't mention them suggest there isn't. Conflation of "race", "ethnicity", and "nation of origin" may frustrate scholars, but that which makes no difference effectively IS no different. You didn't have any problem describing the people of Glasgow as "White" without breaking down their various ethnic groups that fall under that umbrella.
Yes, but there's overlap in violent criminality and poverty. So? Poverty and criminality tend to be mutually reinforcing. Nonetheless, there ARE poor communities in this world that are law abiding. Jews and Asians likewise have histories of arriving poor and being discriminated against and marginalized, yet they often end up outperforming the native population in both being law-abiding and economic success. Culture MATTERS as an input, not just as an output. Likewise, commiting crimes is a fast track to finding yourself in poverty even if that's not where you started. You can't just handwave crime away by saying "socioeconomic" and acting like criminal activity is just something people "fall into" as if it were a ditch by the side of the road anyone might accidentally find themselves in. Criminal activity is a choice people make, not a disease they unwittingly catch or spot of bad weather their area is prone to have occasionally.
Yes, but the subculture glorifying violence and criminality is homegrown, not an import direct from other countries. Even if true, So? When young black men are glorifying gangs, violence, and crime in their music and art, is it really supposed to make that any better to say something like "They didn't learn that from Africa!". I'm thrilled to hear criminality is down over there in some places, truly, but that doesn't really invalidate criticism of the gang culture in your own country, now does it?
It would be something if you just said "Yes, but I recommend the following solutions that have worked elsewhere to reduce youth criminality", but you've instead twisted yourself into a rhetorical pretzel trying to deny that the problem really is inextricably tied up with culture and then dance around the obvious fact that changing that culture will need to be part of any solution. Sorry, but no possible amount of throwing money, jobs, and therapy at the problem is going to accomplish much without first acknowledging their current behavior needs to be condemned and laws need to be enforced until those criminal behaviors are no longer glorified by them. The first step to recovery is necessarily admitting there is a problem and desiring to change.