"Flour Riot of 1837"

Hi my name is Enis Bektesevic, I am a student at LaGuardia Community College. One of the courses I am currently studying is ENN195 or Violence in American Art and Culture. The course involves reading and film of violent rioting that occurred in past America.

The first thought that comes to my mind when reading about violent rioting is whether or not the violence by people is justifiable. Some people can argue that violence is completely unacceptable, and probably should be; however, it's very important to try to understand why someone would resort to violence. Some times becoming violent is the only option in a situation where a solution is absolutely necessary. In the "Flour Riot of 1837," J.T Headley points out "... when they have a large stock of anything on hand, of which there threatens to be a scarcity, to hold on in order to make the scarcity greater- thus forcing higher prices." (99).  The unfair effects of monopoly that the merchants are using as a weapon to make more money than they normally would is viewed as simply being greedy in the minds of New York residents. Residents do have the right to feel rage because merchants are playing around with the survival of other human beings. In this time period, flour was a vital part for food preparation. Instinct also tells the residents that if merchants get away with jacking up flour barrel prices to the point of being unreachable then maybe other merchants will do the same with other types of food ingredients. The reason behind the merchants greedy decision making is simply because they feel they can get away with it, which is most disturbing and deserving of retaliation even if it means violence.