Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Police Preparations For G20 Summit

I am going to make a positive contribution which will probably be ignored. With the police all at the excel centre they will not be as many in westminister as it is a question of resources. Persoanlly i think at the last minute you should all occupy government offices in white hall of better still the homes of CEOS etc . As it is some of you are going along and the police are waiting. You have made it easy for the police to police these events. You should imo change tactics to stretch police resources not make it this easy for them and reduce your demo to a confinment issue
 
Voting has little effect in the absence of a choice of alternative policies by the separate but not different parties.

There's no barriers against setting up a new political party with totally bampot policies - all it needs is support.

Unfortunately the kind of nutters who eschew chucking bottles at the police as a form of political "action" have no support so I presume this their only route to infamy - but never power or influence.
 
How about putting a petition up on the No. 10 website and seeing how many/few people also support the same dissenting position?

Even if the world and his mum signs a government petition there's still nothing to stop them ignoring it. The same goes for writing to MPs etc. As for voting, show me a candidate/party who supports the dismantling of centralised government and the creation of a sustainable, egalitarian economy based on the satisfaction of needs rather than manufactured desires and I'll be first in line at the polling booth, but voting for any of the people currently on offer would amount to advocating the continuation of a system I despise. I refuse to vote for either the devil or the deep blue sea thank you very much.
 
Simple test I often try if I get talking to someone when travelling by train. If you ask them, 'would you vote for a party that was willing to renationalise the railways?' a significant majority of them will say yes, almost anyone you talk to will if the train is fucked up for whatever reason, which they too often are. Significant opposition to the privatisation of our collective assets is there among the general public, with regard to transport, education, health and so on, I've no idea how much but it's clearly non-trivial. Neither electable party is going to do anything but carry on privatising though, so they have no realistic option for expressing this view democratically.

I'd be quite suprised under the conditions that have prevailed since the late 70's if any party who had a policy of rolling back privatisation or any of the other neo-liberal policies could get a fair shake from the media or the funding required to precisely target the few thousand swing voters in key marginals whose votes actually decide elections. So while those continue to be the conditions, we simply get to vote for two slightly different versions of neo-liberal capitalism and increasingly, people don't see any point in voting as a result.

Of couse, those conditions *could* change, but meanwhile, the G20 are meeting and are likely to exclude the interests of the general public in favour of elites when forming policy, until the general public gives them some compelling reason to listen.
 
Even if the world and his mum signs a government petition there's still nothing to stop them ignoring it. The same goes for writing to MPs etc. As for voting, show me a candidate/party who supports the dismantling of centralised government and the creation of a sustainable, egalitarian economy based on the satisfaction of needs rather than manufactured desires and I'll be first in line at the polling booth, but voting for any of the people currently on offer would amount to advocating the continuation of a system I despise. I refuse to vote for either the devil or the deep blue sea thank you very much.

Which means that as you haven't got enough support to set up a political party that would need to hire anything other than a Fiat 500 for its annual meeting, the only way forward is the imposition of a dictatorship.

Who do you prefer, Pol Pot or Mussolini?
 
Significant opposition to the privatisation of our collective assets is there among the general public, with regard to transport, education, health and so on,

Is that on the basis of asking people on trains if they'd vote for a party willing to renationalise the railways? - is this test always conducted (a) at the buffet bar, (b) in cattle class or (c) in first class?

I'm sure responses would vary, just as they would if you asked the same question on a BA/BMI/Sleazyjet regional flight.

This clearly explains why NuLabour's so buggered up - they clearly carry out all of their statistical analysis on policy acceptance by asking Mp to have a chat with a couple of folk next to them in first class/business.........
 
Sure the rail thing is anecdotal, but polling data tends to confirm significant public opposition to privatisation.

Given that there are no electable parties opposed to privatisation, that means there are no realistic electoral options for them to express this view. So the public needs to find other ways to get this and similar messages across loudly enough for politicians to actually start paying attention to them and acting on their wishes. Hence demonstrations.

Voters want the renationalisation of the privatised utilities, including the gas, electricity and water companies, <snip>

The survey also shows that the overwhelming majority of people believe – by 87% to 9% – it is more important to protect jobs than bail out the banks, and believe politicians of all parties are out of touch. <snip>

Some 31% strongly supported the renationalisation of electricity, gas, water, the railways and telecommunications industry – while another 36% slightly supported renationalisation. But the over-35s were much more likely to support renationationalisation. Just 12% of 16-24 year-olds strongly supported the idea, whereas 41% of 55-64 year-olds were in favour.

Source

A public opinion poll shows today (Monday) that the vast majority of the public do not want the government to privatise part of Royal Mail.

In a phone poll of people across the UK 75 per cent of those questioned disagreed with privatisation, 33 per cent strongly disagreeing, and this rose to 89 per cent when foreign ownership was mentioned, with 58 per cent strongly disagreeing. Only 6 per cent of those polled were in favour of privatisation and this halved to 3 per cent when sale to a foreign company was mentioned.
source
 
Which means that as you haven't got enough support to set up a political party that would need to hire anything other than a Fiat 500 for its annual meeting, the only way forward is the imposition of a dictatorship.

Who do you prefer, Pol Pot or Mussolini?

might as well not do anything then

*stabs self in heart*
 
There's always voting - oh, no, i guess that means having to register and possibly even ending up having to pay Council Tax.....


Surely there's loads of ways of "communicating" dissent that don't involve vandalism or random violence?

How about putting a petition up on the No. 10 website and seeing how many/few people also support the same dissenting position?

that'll help :D
 
Sure the rail thing is anecdotal, but polling data tends to confirm significant public opposition to privatisation.

Given that there are no electable parties opposed to privatisation, that means there are no realistic electoral options for them to express this view. So the public needs to find other ways to get this and similar messages across loudly enough for politicians to actually start paying attention to them and acting on their wishes. Hence demonstrations.



Source

source

I must say that out of everyone ever, I've never met a real person who supports privatisation of utilities. From the old-school Tories to the baby-eaters, everyone hates it.

In fact it's quite a good topic of conversation to put forward if you're having lunch with some relatives who you know you'll end up arguing with and spilling the gravy if they start on about benefits or something.
 
I must say that out of everyone ever, I've never met a real person who supports privatisation of utilities. From the old-school Tories to the baby-eaters, everyone hates it.<snip>

Sure, which is why it's rather interesting in this context that we have no realistic electoral options for voting against it.
 
Should we say a quick hello to any of Her Majs' employees who are paid to read boards like this?

Hi guys!! :)

Just remember your taxes are going into the black hole too, your kids will be on the databases and their planet trashed. And your pensions will probably be next to worthless. Just a thought. Back to work now.
 
Should we say a quick hello to any of Her Majs' employees who are paid to read boards like this?

Hi guys!! :)

Just remember your taxes are going into the black hole too, your kids will be on the databases and their planet trashed. And your pensions will probably be next to worthless. Just a thought. Back to work now.

you forgot "and some of your days off will be cancelled"
 
Given the way that silly fuckers have behaved at past events i would have thought it better to hold such meeting well out of the way.

Having said that, if I lived in the area I would be well pissed off at those about to rock (or throw rocks, petrol bombs and so on)

I applaud your versatility.

My mistake was to call you a one-trick pony for being boring in your trolling on drugs.

I see you can apply similar techniques to other topics.

Well done you.
 
I must say that out of everyone ever, I've never met a real person who supports privatisation of utilities. From the old-school Tories to the baby-eaters, everyone hates it.In fact it's quite a good topic of conversation to put forward if you're having lunch with some relatives who you know you'll end up arguing with and spilling the gravy if they start on about benefits or something.


Yeah, because they are OURS!

It's like someone coming up to me and saying, hello Chainsaw, can I interest you in buying a tiny share in that rather nice tank top you are wearing?

to which I would naturally respond, Please, someone, desist from the silliness. The tank top is mine already and I own it in its entireity.

Then the someone says ah well, tough shit, I just sold it in millionth shares to some sweaty wheezing public school masturbatory specialists and a bunch of unnerving Russians. And if you even look a bit put out I shall have you cast into a dungeon.


I just can't believe we fell for all that 'if you see Sid....' crap in 1986.
 
Significant opposition to the privatisation of our collective assets is there among the general public ...
How are the railways part of our "collective assets" when they were built by private companies with privately-raised capital? I doubt most people care who owns and runs them so long as they worked properly.

As for the G20 summit, my sympathies are with the police for once. These things are guaranteed to attract "protestors" hell-bent on inflicting disorder, property damage and very possibly violence if they get the chance. The police are caught between a rock and a hard place, and I don't envy them their job. I wonder how many of the "protestors" bother to think about the ordinary lives their actions disrupt. But it's for the greater good, eh!
 
As for the G20 summit, my sympathies are with the police for once. These things are guaranteed to attract "protestors" hell-bent on inflicting disorder, property damage and very possibly violence if they get the chance. The police are caught between a rock and a hard place, and I don't envy them their job. I wonder how many of the "protestors" bother to think about the ordinary lives their actions disrupt. But it's for the greater good, eh!

Yes, it IS for the greater good, IMHO. And what's with putting the word 'protesters' in inverted commas? Are you suggesting that the folk who are putting a great deal of time, effort and energy into organising around the summit are only there for a tear-up, because I can assure you that isn't the case.

Yes, a certain amount of disruption is inevitable, but what about the disruption caused by having the damn thing here in the first place? It'll be as much a case of plod and security bods making demands that will cause just as much disruption as any protest, if not more.

Your post reads like it came straight out of the Daily Heil or the Evening Substandard. Perhaps you need to make more of an effort to try engaging with the protesters and the causes they represent, rather than simply whining about being a bit late home from work.
 
I applaud your versatility.

My mistake was to call you a one-trick pony for being boring in your trolling on drugs.

I see you can apply similar techniques to other topics.

Well done you.

Thank you.
But to call me a troll you would have to redefine the word to mean "someone who doesn't follow the pack like a thick cunt".

Drugs, political violence. Both stupid. :)
 
The point of the nationalisation/privatisation stuff above was to demonstrate that there are majority (according to the polling data I quoted above) views, opposed to key aspects of neo-liberal capitalism, that are simply not being represented by any realistically electable (ie neo-liberal capitalist) party.

In addition, the timescale means that decisions will be made at the G20 with regard to the banking mess which are likely to have significant effects on the lives of ordinary people, with no opportunity for those people to influence their outcome by electoral means and every reason to believe that insofar as these views conflict with neo-liberal capitalist ideology, they'll be ignored unless they are expressed in a way that governments are unable to ignore.

That's why it's important that members of the general public can directly communicate their concerns by showing up en-masse and making them heard and by demonstrating through sheer numbers that a significant proportion of ordinary people don't want more of the same shit that got us into this mess rammed down their throats as a 'solution'.

That's also precisely why the state and the advocates of neo-liberal capitalism are likely to try to represent all protesters as a bunch of violent loonies, and to make every effort to discourage and even intimidate ordinary people into staying away from such demonstrations.
 
Thank you.
But to call me a troll you would have to redefine the word to mean "someone who doesn't follow the pack like a thick cunt".

Drugs, political violence. Both stupid. :)
What is remarkably stupid -- and transparently trollish -- is to attempt to equate beating up people with passing them a spliff.
"Ooops, sorry derf, didn't mean to batter you. Just meant to offer you a spliff. Silly me!"

It's obvious you're getting some perverse kicks here by posing as a divvy, finger-wagging troll.
 
Twats like derf and Azreal would have had a go at the people who tore down the berlin wall for commiting property damage.

Over the past week, people in Pakistan people took to the streets in big angry mobs, fought with the police and casued the government to cave in on its house arrest of oppostion leaders and sacking of top judges -

HOOLIGANS! Think of the disruption and traffic chaos that casued! :mad:
 
Twats like derf and Azreal would have had a go at the people who tore down the berlin wall for commiting property damage.

Over the past week, people in Pakistan people took to the streets in big angry mobs, fought with the police and casued the government to cave in on its house arrest of oppostion leaders and sacking of top judges -

HOOLIGANS! Think of the disruption and traffic chaos that casued! :mad:

I bet the Normandy landings were aggravated trespass as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom