
(The photo above is from here. I still haven't been able to get my photos off my phone--argh.)
I was in London last week to give some talks. Fortunately, this gave me the opportunity to join the march on Parliament Square in opposition to the cuts in the EMA and the tuition increase (as well as drop by the library sit-in at Goldsmiths).
A few things stay with me about the protests. The first is that the day started out with a large, upbeat, march. Surrounding the march and blocking the roads, though, were an astounding number of police. None of the marches I've been on in the US matched this one in terms of police response--which also included lots of fencing, barricades, and vans and cars to block roads.
The second aspect of the day that surprised me was how short the march route was--because of shield to shield police barriers. At the protest of Bush's first inauguration, we got closer to the motorcade than the British police let the protestors get to Parliament. It was wonderful, thrilling, and appropriate when a large group of intrepid souls were able to knock down some of the ill-positioned fencing and get in closer.
Third, early in the day, the police lines were about a block from the bulk of the crowd. That is, there were the barricade police, and then other large lines of police a few blocks away. I was near the Westminster tube station where there was a large, fabulous bunch of drummers encircled by the people dancing and jumping around. Slowly it became apparent that the lines of police were inching forward, slowly kettling the crowd. I saw the horses come in--large, imposing. We left around 3:30 or so to return to the symposium.
While we were gone: vote passes, police become more aggressive, charging the crowd with horses and clubs. Best tweet: from the crowd trying to defend itself from police violence: "use the fence as pikes!"
We got back out around 6:00 or 6:30 and headed to the National Gallery to try to join the occupation--too late. But a large crowd was trying to burn down the Christmas tree in front of it. At first it seemed like they were just trying to pull it down--some folks were climbing it. The police were just standing around. Then, after much effort, some folks were able to get a good sized fire started--much to the delight of the cheering crowd, some of whom then started to worry because some kids were still up in the tree. I was worried that the kids would suffocate from smoke inhalation before they could get down. Fortunately, they got down. And, having insured that the fire was going, the police then moved in with extinguishers to put it out. I'm certain they wanted to make sure the photo op of burning tree had been well established.
I've learned to admire and appreciate the anarchists--very brave and courageous. I also like the transmission vectors--crowd anarchy breeds more anarchy as the state responds with helicopters, sirens, and crazy cops driving around cluelessly. After they put out the tree, the crowd surged toward Leicester Square...and then became rather indistinguishable from crowds of tourists. This had advantages and disadvantages--the advantage is rather theoretical as state power is unable to discriminate between what it's protecting and what it's fighting. The disadvantage is the dissipation of energies--but maybe it was okay since by that time the royal car had already been encountered and addressed (I think there must be something deliberate in the police's allowing of Charles and Camilla to go down a route with hundreds of protesters already running all over the place).
The British state is responding with extreme force. It seems clear that it is doing so in order to intimidate people from future protests. It also seems clear that a ground war that combines the swarming advantage of the crowd with more organized tactics will be crucial.The state is defending its territory (many government businesses had armed guards/police in front of them all day--it was like being in an occupied territory in a war zone). What about taking over other parts of the city, liberating them from capital and the state? This would no doubt have high cost in lives.
A further question: what is the goal? Bringing down the coalition? Changing the laws? Building an alternative university? Seizing the state and taking control of the banks and corporations? I don't think the former options are really options without the last one.
And that's also the situation for us/US now that the Obama and the Senate have so clearly joined forces with the very rich--continued tax breaks for the very, very rich is a continued fuck you to the rest of us.
Recent Comments