How do you view May Day, and the ‘protests’ that come with it?
I went out on the critical mass bike ride last year, I’ll probably do the same again this year as I believe it to be a worthwhile protest… Bike users aren’t nearly respected as much as they should be, and any opportunity for 1500+ bikes to clog up central london has to be taken.
yeah i saw you lot going past, not sure where we were at the time (we didn’t get caught in the big square yay! but the year before we did get caught in a riot :-/)
i think the may day protests are totally legitimate, there are a small minority who tend to cause trouble, but that doesn’t mean that the protests are not valid. and really, is spraypainting a statue such a heinous crime? the media have made such a big thing out of the events of previous years that it has become a mecca for people who would like to cause trouble, which is not the fault of the protesters themselves.
I think it’s a shame that so many different groups of protesters get lumped together in one big protest.
This causes confusion as to what the aims and objectives of the protest are.
Inevitably, there will always be violent extremists, but often they have nothing to contribute ideologically.
Is that necessarily so?
Consider how many protests happen every week with ten times the number that attended the MayDay ‘riots’ last year, and think how much coverage they get.
If limited violence against property will result in a better society, should that rule out the people who have resorted that in ideological terms? Its alright to sit in an armchair talking about how violence acheives nothing, but these people would argue that they are pragmatists. Small scale protests which get no media coverage and that are ignored by the political establishment achieve nothing.
Redjames forgets that most violence at the May Day protests is caused by aggressive mugs who want any excuse to wreak havoc and have nothing to add to the cause. Is a violent football hooligan celebrated as one of a club’s most devoted fans? No, he is more likely to be banned from attending the club’s games because his behaviour is more destructive than anything else. Similarly, some of the most violent people at the May Day protests are only there for a bit of a perverse laugh, and therefore detract from the ideological legitimacy of the protest (so are responsible for the defamatory but justifiable dubbing of these genuine protests as riots ). The idea of using thuggery as some sort of PR stunt is not only morally dubious, but its adoption would represent the protesters shooting themselves in their one big collectivist foot.
Legions of docile tabloid readers see sensational banners splashed across the pages of their daily rag (especially in that Tome of Insight, the Daily Mail) condemning acts of violence on such revered institutions as McDonalds, and hence creating a (false) link in their collective consciousness between wanton violence and socialism/communism.
Is this what the many legitimate, intelligent protesters who could argue coherently for their beliefs want?
Consider the ‘protesters’ who broke into the McDonalds near Marble Arch 2 years ago. Not only did they trash the place, but they stole and ate every McBurger in sight. What sort of ideological statement is this, if not a resounding endorsement of the quality of product produced by that epitomy of capitalism and globalisation, the multinational corp!?
Redjames, you are right to say that violent protests receive more media coverage than none-violent ones, but I think that the resulting coverage is generally so negative that it is more harmful than helpful to what is a legitimate cause, and is therefore probably best avoided.
I couldn’t agree more with everything that Jawaad has said. In the poll that macca sent I answered by saying both of the above. Of course there are people there with genuine political stances that they wish to express. Like redjames I can understand why they would use violence to further their cause by grabbing media attention.
However the majority of the violent protestors haven’t got a clue. Anecdote time: I remember reading a story about a May Day Protestor who joined in on the attack on the LIFFE market in the City and when questioned what it was, he replied by saying that it was a banana market.
eating all the burgers at the mcdonalds? not from what i’ve herd from people who were there and they say that the place was trashed and thats it. anyway there were people giving away free burgers on the streets (not mcdog burgers) but proper ones.
as for violence, while i don’t agree with killing police men as the vast marjority are just doing their jobs, they too have a minority that are what i term “trigger happy” and are just looking for excuse to crack a few skulls or crack open the tear gas. sure some people go just for a fight, but alot of those people are also ideological, they believe in anarchy and are just doing what to them is right.
I got a free bean burger for my part in the cycling protest. Thank god for hippie vegitarians…
Basically you are saying that individuals ought to have sovereignty over their own actions, so should be allowed to protest however they please (“just doing what to them is right”). Do you mean that the true anarchists have a right to protest in a violent manner in order to make their point? Is that not tantamount to ideological fundamentalism and therefore the moral equivalent to, say, someone who lives in Britain but believes in the Sharia law so attacks and cuts off the hand of some bloke who ripped off his business!? after all he is just doing what to him is right… Ok so that’s a big crazy leap to make, but the point is that you can’t run around taking things into your own hands and acting as judge, jury and executioner just because you think that you are right. Violence at the May Day protests is unacceptable and pointless, whoever the perpetrators.
As for the psychotic policemen you suggest may exist, you could be right. It just goes to show why democracy’s way of delegating authority is a pile of wank and impinges on the individual’s right to self-government (see the democracy thread). But reacting on their level just creates bad press and undoes anything the protests may achieve. So be good on May Day.
woah woah, where did i say they could cut peoples hands off? what i said was it is right to them, and as with most things it takes violence for something good to come about in the end.
er…please name an event where total good has come out of violence?
Does this mean that us capitalist get to bludgeon you commie bastards to death for the sake of something good coming about in the end?
I don’t think you’ve thought this through. The atomic bombs may have stopped the second world war, but at what cost?
Of course I wasn’t advocating violence against the Police there, which is unnacceptable, but surely destroying a McDonalds is a small enough ‘sacrifice’ if it means the demonstration is given any kind of coverage.
As for the argument that it gives a bad image, thats understandable but flawed. There will always be SOMEBODY that the Red Tops/ establishment orientated papers will jump on to demonise the protesters, and if there isn’t then there will almost certainly be a few MI5 officers or special branch to “save the queen” bu acting as agent provoceteurs…
…as always the political left is forced into dirty tactics to get any kind of influence. So far no other way has been suggested otherwise, unless we can bring it down from within…
You could be right, maybe the establishment would try to smear even a peaceful protest. Even so, I cannot understand the logic behind your desperation for “any kind of coverage.” Your line of argument seems to be “…they’ll make us look bad whatever…so fuck it, why don’t we make ourselves look even worse by acting like inane hooligans! That’ll show 'em, the bastards!” You need to look at the situation with a little more emotional detachment. Let’s face it, trashing one Mickey D’s is hardly hitting them where it hurts (there are over 1000 branches in the UK), not even in its symbolic value. It is an emblem of US globalization. What do you expect Blair, serial US president arse-licker, to do about that?
Look, I find myself sympathising with the left more and more every day; I was quite stirred by the Communist Manifesto (apart from maybe the bit about family). I am not some government capitalist spy, honest! I just disagree with the assertion that “the political left is forced into dirty tactics.” No one is forcing anyone. Perhaps you are justified in fearing secret service ‘agent provocateurs.’ But surely, if you are right, you would do better by saving the effort you would have wasted by playing into their hands - trashing an insignificant fast food joint and giving capitalists everywhere a field day - and using that effort to operate some sort of coordinated exposee of the government’s dirty tricks campaign. That would show people quite clearly that our much feted “liberal democracy” is not all it is made out to be, and place the (peaceful) demonstrators in moral/political ascendency.
Or more realistically you could use your political conviction to do a George Monbiot (he wrote “Captive State,” which demonstrates convincingly how the current Labour government has become a slave to corporate power). I picked up Marx and Engels because I was so disturbed by what Monbiot was writing (he also writes in the Guardian), "not because I heard about some Eton chump trashing a McDonalds.
Adding to an intellectual struggle which could quite conceivably be won by the left is far more likely to allow inroads to be made into a society which is quite happy to continue as it is, blissfully unaware of the corruption and exploitation at its heart. Convincing the general populous that they are being wronged and more importantly, that they can and ought to do something about it, is the key to gaining political influence, and this cannot be achieved by vandalism. In fact, when people see policemen fighting back the protesters, it adds to their belief that the democratic state is there to protect ‘the people.’ How can you say that this gives the political left “any kind of influence”?
I would be interested to know why this argument is “understandable but flawed.” Also you said that “no other way has been suggested” for the left to gain influence. I have just suggested one: the route of intellectual struggle. Do you think that this would prove less effective than rioting? (and please don’t answer by saying that most people are too stupid to understand intellectual arguments - that would be a tad…capitalist).
Intellectual struggle is fine, as far as it goes. But the sheer scale of the establishment and force that the left has to fight means that simply arguing with people isn’t going to ever be on a large enough scale to mobilise popular opinion.
Maybe if in a practical way the left could mobilise the media against the establishment, some progress could be made, but the fact that from birth everyone is conditioned into a particular mindset of capitalist thinking means that it will be an almighty struggle, which ultimately leads to the ultimate division in the left- whether a minority revolution is justified.
I don’t have the answers, I just think that if the process of smashing up Macdonalds is possibly the only way smalltime leftists even get a chance to air their views in the mainstream, then it is something which has to be regretfully done.
Macca- what exactly is your problem with McDonalds?
me? i haven’t said anything about mcdonalds for ages. why do i hate it? have you ever worked there? it’s fucking shit, the pay is awful, the staff are treated like shit, you see what actually happens to the food, you see the quality of the food. other than that the whole idea of bying fast food disgusts me, it’s utterly vile, i like to know what is in my food, and i like it to be real not just a bunch of chemicals or road kill and preservatives.
NB - i haven;t worked at mcdonalds, but i have had more than enough experiance of working for other ‘service industry’ establishments/rivals of mcdonalds to know what it is like - it’s shit.
on the note of smashing a mcdonalds up - omg what a man you’ve broken a window, have a medal. while i don’t like mcdonalds people could be violent to much more receptive things, e.g. the american embassy, now thats a place i’d like to trash, or microsoft’s HQ.
as for it being the only way the left will be herd, sort of, the protests get limites coverage otherwise, but when there is violence all news sources jump on the evil anti-capitalist band wagon and then ignore the contorary evidence that come out in the offical inquirery and the arrest of several police officers and suspension of the head of police, e.g. genoa.
you’d like to trash the microsoft HQ? my bet is you’re currently using a good few microsoft products. unless you’re going to turn around and tell me you’re a mac user, which doesn’t make you much of an anarchist anyway
that part of my evil anti-capitlaist plan, mwhahahah… er no, i am using microsoft stuff but that doesn’t mean i’m not allowed to want to smash my mircosoft hq