This is a common explanation that is resorted to, which at least acknowledges that there IS something very wrong, but requires an abstract type of mysticism to explain it. It is interesting to think through - my rebuttal would be:

- Why is the exact same process happening in Ireland? They were also a British colony. Torching refugee accommodation and skirmishes with the police.

- Sweden can now be considered a dangerous country, compared to only 20 years ago. Sweden had an empire but it didn't extend beyond Scandinavia, so how is there karma in people whose origins lie far beyond trashing the place?

- A lot of the turmoil in Leeds was, apparently, caused by Roma Gypsies. When did the British Empire involve Romania?

- If the karmaic perspective applies, when will German children be subjected to barbaric revenge at the hands of those populations harmed during the two world wars?

- On the British Empire, it typically replaced other empires. For instance, India was run by the Mughal Empire, and it would be laughable to suggest that they were a more benign regime. Practices such as burning the wives of dead men alive or boiling people to death in cauldrons - outlawed. With human history, we have to accept it will be horrible to some extent but consider which were the least-worst outcomes. Would the world be better off today if there hadn't been the British Empire?

I think it would be a very tall order to convincingly make this case. There would have been other, less enlightened empires instead and had the British just focused on their own island, they would have come under domination from other peoples who did pursue empires. Britain has been colonised numerous times by foreign powers. Also, the British basically spent their empire on fighting in the two world wars - would it have been better for the likes of Germany or Russia, or Turkey, to have greater sway in the world? The final answer is that you either have an empire or are in somebody else's; better to have the most benign amd civilising option available.

- A further point is that the British Empire didn't seek to ethnically transform the nations it colonised. India was still a country for Indians, Nigeria for Nigerians, etc. This is visibly obvious today. What is going on in Europe seems to be a bit different. There will still be India and Nigeria for their peoples, but not so for the Europeans if the current, extreme demographic processes continue. This is just a side point I'd need to give further thought to.

- Finally, when neighbourhoods are turned into dangerous hell holes full of people who don't care about the place they are in, and are an almost entirely negative presence, this is bad for all of the people in that area, including people who have immigrated and who want to integrate and get on in life. Why should they be negatively affected by karma?

I conclude that karma is not a factor in this process.

Given the Leeds rioting seems to have been triggered by something to do with a "child protection issue", I'm surprised the forum's hardcore right-wingers aren't a little more sympathetic: in the USA, child-protection is a hot-button issue for the libertarian right... it's considered a prime example of government interference in family life... it's parents know best what's good for their children, not the government etc etc. (Homeschooling seems to be a particular flashpoint there).

Unless the grubby politics, cynical greedy corporations, left wing ideologues, etc are a physical manifestation of the karma process? :) Carriers if you will.

There could be cycles at work and there is a certain mystery about this process. Not as poetic as the karma idea, more economic. As people become very affluent, more remote from hardship and everyday struggle against nature, have loads of time on their hands, and never have to worry about going hungry - they develop all sorts of neuroses and stupid, self defeating ideas. Some of which help to progress what might be an inevitable decline, or change anyway, into a different phase of the cycles. The richer people become, the more detached from reality and unhinged they are. It's just very weird for those of us with our common sense intact to watch it happening and find that it would be better for us to do otherwise but also find that it is seemingly impossible to control.

Well... I for one do not care to see the state interfering in family life as a basic principle. That said, the state has actively engaged, through its subsidies, in the creation of dysfunctional families, some of which pose a danger to the safety of the resulting children. And we have regulatory framework and expectations which mean that if social services do not act, and a child is killed, people who were not even involved in the killing could face prison sentences for failing in their "safeguarding" duties.

So the cat is already out of the bag on that one and it isn't the fault of conservative people. To suggest that we should sympathise with the rioters because of it is a stretch to say the least.

We seem to be gaining a reputation that anyone can come here by forcing their way in, they can do what they like, they don't need to integrate, and that the full range of benefits are available. There is no other country in the world as welcoming and hospitable as the UK. But, the number of abusers seems to be growing exponentially. Project forward a generation or two and this will be a third world country.