Bush protest banned by Fuzz

[Das Uberdog]

winjer - just because banning a demonstration may be against the law doesn't mean the law ain't gonna do it.

CyberRose - I make my assertions based upon high levels of activity and interaction with the public, on a regular basis. I doubt you can claim any such activity. Pensions are something people gripe about, but wouldn't get up off their arse about to change. Infact, most of the people who'll suffer the most know and care about it the least. The war is a different kettle o' fish.

 

[belboid]

yeah, cos people are really gonna spend a long time griping about their pensions to an 18 year old.

 

[winjer]

winjer - just because banning a demonstration may be against the law doesn't mean the law ain't gonna do it.

Ah, so you agree there isn't a ban then? Great.

 

[CyberRose]

but what DU expresses badly is still true. You cannot simply call a demo on a subject - even one about which people do care a lot - and get 50,000 people there just by working very hard (tho you do generally have to do that as well). The defeat of the anti-war campaign, despite having organised the biggest demonstrations in british history, has, imo, put shitloads of people off demonstrating for anything, other than maybe the very local and specific. It isn't seen as achieving much. And, just to take your example of pensions, there are questions of exactly what demands should be placed - full final salary pensions? Average salary pensions? Maximum salary pensions? Wholly state funded pensions? The return of the index linked pension, with the link backdated to....? And upon whom is the demand placed? The companies? The state?

Now, I have my opinions on them, I'm sure you do too. As does every other poster on here. And with each decisions made, someone else decides it is no longer the demo for them, and it gets smaller and smaller, and has ever less and less chance of having any effect whatsoever.

In which case, you don't ignore the issue, but make your protests in a different way, as plenty, hundreds of thousands, of people have done over the last couple of years.

Like I said above, just forget marches or demos or other physical protests for the time being because when you say it isn't "seen as achieving much" you're wrong - they don't achieve anything

What I should have said in my first post, was why don't Respect or SWP or whoever, put as much effort into campaigning for issues that working class people either care about or are dramatically affected by, as much as they put into anti war marches? As far as I can see, and I guess as far as the average guy on the street can see, is that the left wing groups do not campaign for the British working class and place a higher priority on Iraqis (which is completely bizarre when you think about it!)

I think there are a few possible reasons: either the left groups simply cannot fathom what working class people care about/are affected by because they are not working class themselves; or they're too incompetent/inefficient to be able to achieve success on real issues.

Constantly harping on about something you know you will never change is easy. Takes no effort. Because you've always got the war to protest about and everything else can wait til the main campaign is finished.

But this country is heading towards crisis and the people that are gonna take the brunt of it are the working classes. The country will react by voting in the Tories which will mean the working class will be 10x more fucked than they're going to be. And who are they gonna turn to in their hour of need? Are they gonna turn to Respect who have shown no interest in them unless they happen to be Muslim? Or are they gonna turn to the BNP who have spent the last 5 years campaigning, albeit with a disgusting agenda, on issues the working class are strongly affected by?

Face facts, Labour are more of a representative of the traditional working classes than Respect or the SWP will ever be as long as all they care about is going on anti-war marches and placing the rights and needs of Iraqis above those of the people they claim to represent

 

[CyberRose]

CyberRose - I make my assertions based upon high levels of activity and interaction with the public, on a regular basis. I doubt you can claim any such activity. Pensions are something people gripe about, but wouldn't get up off their arse about to change. Infact, most of the people who'll suffer the most know and care about it the least. The war is a different kettle o' fish.

I have no doubt you do more activity than me! More than "none" isn't hard!

But I'm not trying to have a "my dick is bigger than yours" argument...

I'm just saying that there are issues for the British working class that simply dwarf the importance of whether we're at war in Iraq or not. We're heading into a crisis and the working classes will get fucked over. Yet for this not to be a concern of the left wing groups is, in my opinion, why nobody in this country will support them

(btw, in your experience, how many anti-war marches would you say were actually working class, rather than Guardian type middle classes?)

 

[bouncer_the_dog]

When is he visiting?

 

[Udo Erasmus]

Or are you claiming that Ian Blair has made an order under Section 13 of the Public Order Act 1986 banning all processions in the area?

Out of interest people who arrived at the recent March against the UK Military Academy being built in Wales were served with a section 13 notice under the public order act on the day, and banned from marching into the city centre. Organisers were threatened with arrest and prosecution if any demonstrators broke the order. This despite a route having been agreed with the authorities weeks in advance. Police travelled all the way from London to heavilly film demonstrators - but their are big corporate, military & political interests involved.

I believe that you are incorrect, as I understand it specific legislation was introduced regarding demonstrations in the vicinity of parliament (partly to target Brian Haw) and justified as an anti-terorist measure.

As I understand it the policelocal authorities do have the legal right to deny/ban marches.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

When is he visiting?

On Sunday, lunch at Windsor Palace at 3 pm, then snacks with Brown at downing street at 5 pm.

 

[belboid]

What I should have said in my first post, was why don't Respect or SWP or whoever, put as much effort into campaigning for issues that working class people either care about or are dramatically affected by, as much as they put into anti war marches?

well, i agree that the SWP spend too much time on the war comparatively (tho it still is a very important issue to a hell of a lot of people - what with their sons, brothers, friends dying over there) but in terms of the wider left, and the SWP to a lesser extent, you'll find that they have spent a hell of a lot of time campaigning around pensions - the PCS strikes being one notable example. And that was somewhere where they really could make a difference - and did (tho nothing like as much of one as we'd like).

If we could push the union leadership to make it more of a campaign - as opposed to a couple of one off strikes - then that could lead into a wider pension campaign where a mass demo, which would certainly include demanding the restoration of the link between pensions and earnings, would be highly plausible and practicable.

 

[CyberRose]

Ok well pensions was just one example given by someone. No doubt many people have been involved in a great many issues affecting the working class, but nowhere near to the extent of protesting against the war. Something else I've noticed through people's replies is that on these particular issues, it isn't actually Respect etc taking the lead, but rather, merely taking part in trade union organised events. Like I said, it just gives everyone the impression that these so called defenders of the working class couldn't give two shits about the working class...

 

[poster342002]

You don't 'organise' 50,000 people to march for anything, the mood needs to be there. For the war, there is that mood (contrary to your assertion, people do care) - for pensions, tbh, it's quite simply not.

There's a "mood" against the soaring cost of living, yet protests organised by the left are conspicous by their absense. Such protests are only considered "acceptable" if they're happening in countries outside of Britain, it seems.

 

[treelover]

exactly, they could 'popularise the idea' you know do what the left uses to do in the far away past, as C/Rose say, why not lead on the basic issues, after all you claim to be the the 'vanguard'


'Should this not be something the left groups should be taking a lead on? Why can't they try and drum up support for a campaign that will have direct benefits for the people they claim to represent (clue: the working class)'

 

[treelover]

I went on the TUC minimum wage march in i think 96 in Newcastle, there were twenty thousand then, there would be a hell of alot more now if it was built properly, 'fuck the 'anti-war marches'

 

[belboid]

but they frequently do. They are far too small tho for most people to hear them most of the time. The fact that you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. CR knew nothing (apparently) about the pensions protests, but they have been a large part of any lefty groups agenda for the last couple of years.

Rather than whinging about the 'left' it would be more useful to try and get, say, disability groups to take up the issue of welfare reform - because they generally support Browns agenda. until they have their minds changed, feck all is likely to make a difference to Browns plans

 

[belboid]

I went on the TUC minimum wage march in i think 96 in Newcastle, there were twenty thousand then, there would be a hell of alot more now if it was built properly, 'fuck the 'anti-war marches'

there was no minimum wage then you daft fuck, that might just make a difference.

Fuck you and your worthless whinging.

 

[treelover]

bloody excellent posts Cyber Rose,

btw, I think it is 'displacement activity' big marches makes them feel they are doing something, when in reality, with some exceptions like the SP, most of them are not,


'Constantly harping on about something you know you will never change is easy. Takes no effort. Because you've always got the war to protest about and everything else can wait til the main campaign is finished.'

 

[winjer]

On Sunday, lunch at Windsor Palace at 3 pm, then snacks with Brown at downing street at 5 pm.

That's the protest timings. He's currently scheduled for 7:30 at downing street, possibly meeting Blair in between.

 

[CyberRose]

but they frequently do. They are far too small tho for most people to hear them most of the time. The fact that you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. CR knew nothing (apparently) about the pensions protests, but they have been a large part of any lefty groups agenda for the last couple of years.

Rather than whinging about the 'left' it would be more useful to try and get, say, disability groups to take up the issue of welfare reform - because they generally support Browns agenda. until they have their minds changed, feck all is likely to make a difference to Browns plans
Reply With Quote

I know that Respect/SWP take part in these events, but I'm talking about actually organising them off their own back (which is what I would expect working class parties to do)

And what areas does Respect target? I know I've made comments about them being a single issue anti-war party, only targeting Muslim areas and ignoring genuine working class concerns - but do they actually target the neighbourhoods that have been left in absolute neglect and decline? The areas that are targeted by the BNP and what contain Labour's core support?

 

[winjer]

Ok well pensions was just one example given by someone. No doubt many people have been involved in a great many issues affecting the working class, but nowhere near to the extent of protesting against the war.

Isn't a very large part of that down to the war being a much more black&white issue, at least from the organising broad campaigns standpoint?

(as belboid already pointed out, and you ignored)

 

[belboid]

Well, I have no great interest in defending the farce that was Respect. But even then to say they were solely about the war (which was and remains a very important issue for their constituency) is a bit wide of the mark. Locally, housing was the other big issue they pushed on, and damned right too. Fair play to 'em on that score, I wish they'd been more succesful.

The other thing to remember tho, is that such far left groups are tiny. to attempt to campaign on all the issues which are, of course, important, would mean that no campaign was done well at all, and we'd be in an even worse state.

I don't pretend that the 'left' gets its priorities right all the time, or maybe even most of the time, but it is not as crude as I think you are portraying it.

 

[newbie]

Do you really think 'the working class' is united about any of these issues? That it even has a common interest?

taking pensions, the divisions are clear and obvious. Believe me, I'm all in favour of students and others their age demanding the right to pay for my pension. Please, get out there and do it. But I'm afraid it's not much of a clarion call for the left, if only because there's an awful lot more of us old 'uns ready to take every pension penny than youngsters queueing up to pay for it.

 

[CyberRose]

Anyway, I'm sorry for completely derailing this thread. It was just a rant I wanted to get off my chest. It's just this country is headed for serious economic problems and it's the working classes that will feel it most. It just gets to me when these groups seems more concerned about the Iraq war than they do about the coming economic crisis...

 

[winjer]

Out of interest people who arrived at the recent March against the UK Military Academy being built in Wales were served with a section 13 notice under the public order act on the day, and banned from marching into the city centre.

No, conditions were imposed under Section 12.

Organisers were threatened with arrest and prosecution if any demonstrators broke the order.

That would have made a very interesting test case.

I believe that you are incorrect, as I understand it specific legislation was introduced regarding demonstrations in the vicinity of parliament (partly to target Brian Haw) and justified as an anti-terorist measure.

I'm not. That legislation is SOCPA, sections 132-136, which I linked to already. It doesn't apply to processions (which includes political marches), which continue to be covered by Sections 11-13 of the Public Order Act.

See here:
http://freeassembly.notlong.com/
and especially:
http://www.stateofemergency.org.uk/files/preservingdisorder.pdf
for more details.

As I understand it the police local authorities do have the legal right to deny/ban marches.

Yes, they have that power, where an order is made under Section 13 and referred to the Home Secretary. This is exceedingly rare though.

 

[winjer]

Anyway, I'm sorry for completely derailing this thread. It was just a rant I wanted to get off my chest. It's just this country is headed for serious economic problems and it's the working classes that will feel it most. It just gets to me when these groups seems more concerned about the Iraq war than they do about the coming economic crisis...

So, stop moaning and DIY.

 

[treelover]

Why should he? he doesn't profess to be the 'leading edge of the working class struggle', the situation faced by those on fixed incomes is frightening, what with rising utility and food prices, this should be a crusade for the left, and its to their external shame, that it isn't.

So, stop moaning and DIY.

 

[winjer]

Why should he?

Enlightened self-interest.

 

[smokedout]

Anyway, I'm sorry for completely derailing this thread. It was just a rant I wanted to get off my chest. It's just this country is headed for serious economic problems and it's the working classes that will feel it most. It just gets to me when these groups seems more concerned about the Iraq war than they do about the coming economic crisis...

possibly because the middle classes who dominate these groups and are the bulk of the crowd at anti-war demos:

either live in a bubble where they think everything in this country is hunky dory

or secretly think if someone's poor it's their own fault

 

[belboid]

Anyway, I'm sorry for completely derailing this thread. It was just a rant I wanted to get off my chest.

quite alright, its interesting to have the argument with someone else for a change

 

[poster342002]

possibly because the middle classes who dominate these groups and are the bulk of the crowd at anti-war demos:

either live in a bubble where they think everything in this country is hunky dory

or secretly think if someone's poor it's their own fault

And also perhaps think; "well, the Daily Mail moans about economic problems, so we have to deny these problesm exist and howl down anyone who says they suffering as being a Daily-Mail whinger"?

 

[Das Uberdog]

belboid, you'd be surpised what people bitch and moan about to 18 yr. olds when said 18 yr. olds are wearing Party rosettes. I get collared for every bloody issue under the sun.

Not to mention the pensions issue is actually something which will be affected my generation more than any of you old gripers.

CyberRose - I think you can take from the fact that treelover thinks you're amazing that you're saying something wrong. Campaigning against the war is partaking in a campaign which 'I know is never gonna get anywhere'? Perhaps you're not aware of my political persuasion:- my goals are alot more ambitious than getting the troops out of Iraq.

I think there are alot of problems with the anti-war movement, alot of mismanagement and alot of mistakes made on many levels - but it's quite frankly an issue with more passion frought through it than anything to do with pensions or declines in wages, etc.

Don't get me wrong: on many levels I'd prefer it if the Great British public were as concerned for their own welfare as any other issue - the left would be in a far better state universally were that the case. But it simply ain't. Pensions aren't like the Poll Tax - most folks are contented to huff and puff and gripe and wheeze about it, you're not gonna get 'em storming town hall with Molotovs and Kalishnikovs. Not that the War has instigated such activity either, but it's a damned sight closer (which doesn't mean 'close').

You go out and try and organise yourself a national demo of 50,000 people in defence of pensions. I'd genuinely like to see you try.