It’s not apocalyptic like in The Hunger Games, nor is it evil as in “Children of the Corn.” Rather, it’s a more sudden type of teen violence, one that sees scores of youth coalescing as one mob.
Chicago, Illinois, presents the quintessential contemporary case study. The city has been engulfed by a “Teen Takeover” that has been fueled by social media. Crowds numbering in the thousands descended upon Millennium Park the weekend of the 15th of April, smashing cars and jumping up on them. 15 were arrested, plenty of property was damaged, and law enforcement was outnumbered. Two teens were wounded by a gunman in the crowd.
The violence prompted a statement by current Chicago mayor Lori Lightfoot (D) and mayor-elect Brandon Johnson, a progressive Democrat, denouncing the incident.
“In no way do I condone the destructive activity we saw in the Loop and lakefront this weekend. It is unacceptable and has no place in our city. However, it is not constructive to demonize youth who have otherwise been starved of opportunities in their own communities,” Johnson said in his statement. “Our city must work together to create spaces for youth to gather safely and responsibly, under adult guidance and supervision, to ensure that every part of our city remains welcome for both residents and visitors.”
This “flash mob” that terrorized Chicago is not an isolated incident. Philadelphia and Compton and Queens are just three other locations that have witnessed this same terrifying trend. Philly has even instituted curfew and adult supervision rules in certain areas to stymie potential attacks.
How do we process this outpouring of youth violence?
The political dimension is one that those on the right always come back to. Especially in Chicago. As they would have it, with the further-left candidate, Johnson, beating his more moderate rival for mayor, the mob is just another example of a city that is run by Democrats who are “soft on crime.” It is true that crime has been a blind spot for the Democratic Party: Lee Zeldin’s stronger-than-expected run for governor here in New York used that issue as its bedrock. The fallacy comes in when pinning all crime on one group. Criticizing their failings across the board runs the risk of merely playing into media-driven perceptions that, like all things, exist on a gradient. Not every Democrat is AOC and not every Democrat is Joe Manchin.
The true aggravating factor of these kinds of incidents is the lack of an attack plan across the board. This argument is perhaps most cogently advanced by Rich Miller of the Chicago-Sun Times, who traces the teen flash mob phenomenon all the way back to 2010. The thrust of his article is that there are tools already available that aren’t being used–such as a law that allows parents or guardians to be sued for the acts of minors–and how there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the city’s young population and what their gatherings mean. That second point is perhaps the most damning for city leaders:
“In 2019, WBEZ actually went out and talked to some of the kids who were causing some of the disruptions. The young people understandably complained that parks and recreational facilities in their own neighborhoods on the South and West sides were decrepit…CBS 2 reported last week that the Chicago Police Department had no clue how the mob violence was organized. And credible reports have emerged since then about police ignoring calls for assistance.”
For Chicago at least, it seems that urban decay and an overconfident police department are to blame. And as Miller points out, these have been issues that are not new, and teen mob violence has been a problem for at least a decade in places like Chicago and Philadelphia.
Can we be in the heads of every teen on social media to understand why they want to gather publicly? No, nor can anyone pin down exactly what may or may not be an agent of radicalization. But it is possible to hold leaders accountable and ensure they have a strong grasp of the local youth. It starts with proper law enforcement, outreach that is focused on listening, and understanding that the internet facilitates a dynamic type of social unrest.
