It's been a month now since native Britons rioted. Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned that there would be consequences, and a judge warned that citizens would be arrested even for casually observing rioting. You didn't have to participate; just looking at it would be a crime.

The Guardian is still stumped as to why Britons rioted. Was it racism? Poverty? Alcoholism? Social media?

We're pretty sure the answer is the stabbing death of three little girls under the age of 10 at a Taylor Swift-themed dance camp.

Tim Newburn seems to know already what the cause of the riots was:

In the weeks since the riots, a number of fairly firm narratives have become established. The first is that misinformation spread on social media was crucial in bringing people out on to the streets. Second, the anti-immigration rhetoric associated with the far right – and the “tough on immigration” messages now popular across the political spectrum – are assumed to have helped foment the violence. In short, the story goes that these were racist, Islamophobic, anti-migrant riots.

That would distinguish them from your usual everyday riot in the U.K., which is led by Islamic migrants.

Apparently, Newburn was responsible for a major research project back in 2011 where he interviewed "hundreds of people, including 270 rioters, more than 100 police officers and dozens of lawyers, community members and victims of the violence and destruction." He then goes on to mention nothing about racism, poverty, alcohol, and social media. "It's complex" is the best we get.

Maybe unfettered immigration from Muslim countries by people who have no intention of assimilating and tend to be a bit stabby stokes the flames, and the straw that broke the camel's back was the murder of three little girls. Even native Britons have a breaking point.