1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ban 'kettling'

Discussion in 'protest, direct action and demos' started by londheart, Dec 26, 2010.

  1. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    I'm saying that if your intention is to bring about the end to what you see as a corrupt and unfair system, breaking the shop windows of fellow proles seems an inefficient way to go about it.
  2. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    the proles who own windows of oxford street shops?
  3. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    Is the point eluding you?
  4. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    you have a point?
  5. flash

    flash I am simply not there....

    but don't you see this is how they are striking back - get the system off guard by forcing them to kettle the masses in Parliament Square, whilst the elite go and put bricks through the windows of the flagship store owned by one of Britain's most efficient tax planning families. Of course there will be some minor fallout due to shrapnel damage but these things happen.
  6. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Guess who both times?
  7. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Need a bit of prole solidarity for the oxford street victims..anyone?
  8. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    Oh boy: another 'content free' day from butchersapron.
  9. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    probably all sloaneys or tourists anyway.
  10. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    I just don't see how going out and breaking things, will somehow bring about social change.
  11. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    You used to be like a little lenny henry - what went wrong? All these shit posts.
  12. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    The point was your ignorance of the targets chosen - never mind the reasons.
  13. flash

    flash I am simply not there....

    Neither do I - sorry I was being sarcastic.
  14. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    They're prepared for the people who break things. The people who break things end up criminalized, marginalized, euthanized.

    I look back at the decisions taken in the Civil Rights movement in the early sixties. A decision was made to forego violence, and to hit where it hurt, but to do it nonviolently. That is why things like the Montgomery Bus Boycott, or the Students Strike, were ultimately effective. They hit in unexpected places, in ways for which the system wasn't prepared. In one, it hit the pocketbook of the racist City Council; in the other, it created the image of thousands of elementary and high school children being carted off to prison. These things worked, and they worked without violence.
  15. shagnasty

    shagnasty two legs bad four legs good

    Probably the only independent traders down oxford street operates out of a suitcase with a look out for the police !!del boy style!!:D
  16. southside

    southside Banned

    TiT?
  17. shaman75

    shaman75 Well-Known Member

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/4

  18. two sheds

    two sheds not as daft as i look

    Yes i agree with that.

    I do however totally understand why there was the .... i was going to say violence but most of the violence actually seemed to come from the police ... window breaking etc. I think it is a matter of proportionality - which is the larger crime?
  19. IC3D

    IC3D Post Mid Arc

    I don't think the debate about the type of protest is so much the issue as much as the need for momentum, its a battle for minds and if it ends in violence or not is superfluous. If the police are in the way than thats their problem.
  20. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    the civil rights movement, another sacred cow of the pacifists. About as true as ghandi's non violence I.e not so absolute and effective as preached by people who want to follow the simple line of violence= bad.
  21. flash

    flash I am simply not there....

    What destruction of property or stopping the people that are trying to destroy the property (as that's your job) by any means as they significantly outnumber you?? Just trying to understand the logic......
  22. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    I think it's about a cause, and the best way to achieve your ends. And sometimes, self-discipline is required.
  23. two sheds

    two sheds not as daft as i look

    Destruction of the property was a lesser offence than (a) the bankers stealing billions of pounds that has justified the class war that has been declared with all these cuts and (b) the mps who were given free education and now in the main are very comfortably off thank you very much voting to stop poor kids having free education. Also a lesser crime than the violence given out by the police when they were not being threatened - against that bloke in the wheelchair for example, and the woman who said that they had beaten her senseless.

    The logic ...

    My dad was a house painter. In the 60s he used to go to local council meetings and protest that council members used to award contracts to builders who had taken them out for slap up meals and given them veh nice presents on festive occasions. The builders used to put in painting quotes for a primer, couple of undercoats and a top coat. When they got given the job they ordered my dad and the other painters to just slap on a single coat and pocketed the difference.

    Nobody listened to my dad so he wrote to the local and national papers. Nobody listened then, either, so he went down the local council offices and threw a brick through the window. He got charged with damaging council property and fought the case himself. He pleaded that if there was a fire in a building it would be perfectly in order for someone to throw a brick through a window to draw attention to the fire, and that was what he was doing. He got found not guilty.

    I see the student protests in the same light tbh. They are bringing peoples' attention to a larger crime. Counter productive unfortunately because of the press we have in this country. The overwhelming majority of the protest was peaceful, those few incidents get blown up out of proportion so that people don't have to address the real issues.
  24. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Untermensch, and proud!

    An utter twat, perchance?
  25. flash

    flash I am simply not there....

    Thanks for sharing your logic. I do genuinely appreciate your point's but I just don't think I will ever totally agree with your point of view. Either way I'm giving up as this is getting a bit off-topic and I'm going to bed as this board is doing my head in.
  26. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    And did council members stop accepting bribes, and builders stop pocketing unearned profits as a result?
  27. two sheds

    two sheds not as daft as i look

    No, funnily enough they didn't. So what would you have done to stop it?

    Stood for parliament and swept all before you in a popular uprising that made you prime minister so you could legislate that everything worked properly afterwards and nobody was unhappy ever again?

    tosser
  28. Johnny Canuck3

    Johnny Canuck3 Well-Known Member

    Then I'm not understanding your logic. You say he wrote letters to the paper etc, with no effect. Then he threw a brick through a window, and was able to use the corruption as an explanation, preventing a conviction. But the corruption continued.

    So in other words, his act of violence did nothing to advance the cause of ending corruption, and he was lucky enough, this time, to dodge the bullet of a convction, criminal record, etc.

    I don't see how this somehow endorses violence as an effective means of bringing about social change.
  29. two sheds

    two sheds not as daft as i look

    Answer my question first - what would you have done to stop the corruption?
  30. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist virtue without terror is impotent.

    theres a point in 'Pacifism as Pathology' that deals with exactly the sort of 'non violence=good violence= bad' simplicity approach. Pg 8 iirc.

Share This Page