kidwithknife
Posts: 193
Joined: 9/9/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan It wasn't the violence that brought about that change, but the sheer volume of prostestors. The anti nuclear protests had a similar number of protestors. They neither got rid of nuclear weapons nor brought down a government. I think we're possibly at an impasse however. The specifics of what causes changes in policy are obviously complicated and imopssible to categorically prove. So, to a large extent, I think we're both seeing events like the Poll Tax riots through the prism of our personal beliefs. Which is unavoidable, it's human nature to do so. quote:
It suggests no such thing, other than as a tactic to gain more media attention - do you seriously think that couldn't be achievable using other methods? Honestly, I don't. Bitter experience has shown me that the media is simply less interested in demonstrations that remain peaceful. That doesn't necessarily mean that non-peaceful demonstrations are the way foward. But I think the role of the media in promoting the violent option needs to be recognised. quote:
Who will initiate a violent response? It won't be the protestors unless as an act of self defence, and what will be reported if the police began mistreating the protestors who offered no resistance other than to remain seated? Let's go back to the days of the poll tax riots. a well organised campaign of UK citizens opposed including a date set for thousands of people to again converge for a mass sit down protest coupled with refusal to pay their taxes - where would the hardship be given that many of those protesting would already be in financial difficulty and unable to pay - and what happened to putting pressure on local MPs, people in crisis tend to forget that they have an MP to represent them to the govt.. Sometimes it takes a bit more hardship in the short-term to bring about a positive change in the long-term. Local govts would not be able to cope with such a huge deluge of admin work to process all non paying householders, then there's the prosecution/incarceration of the many thousands. It's all about mathematics. You're far more optimistic about the media then I am. For example, it's my honest view that the poll tax riot started after an attack by the police on the kind of sit down protest you mention. But that opinion is never reported in the mainstream media. I'd agree with you on the effectiveness of the non-payment campaign however. I think that was basically what killed the poll tax. I just see the riot as the final nail in the coffin. The poll tax campaign also has a crucial difference with this one. It was largely made up of 'ordinary' people, whereas this is very much the preserve of activists. Unless it can break out of that, it's dead in the water. quote:
Edited to add I have stood for my principles regardless of the threat to my own personal liberty. As have I. And, believe it or not, I understand completely where you're coming from. I used to be a pacifist. To clarify something however, I think the tack I've taken in this thread has probably skewed my views somewhat. While I'm not ideologically opposed to violence per se, there are currently very few situations where I see it as a sensible tactic, this included. The current situation for me at the moment is this. The British working class was defeated by Thatcher and is currently largely disenfrachised, both politically and economically. And that's what radicals need to address. Considering that, it's my view that the "Outgunned and outnumbered? Chargeeeeeeeeeeeee!" approach favoured by the likes of Class War is entirely futile.
_____________________________
We went to see the fall of Rome - I thought it would please us To watch how the mighty go in a blaze of hubris But I just stood there hypnotised by all the beautiful madness (New Model Army, Into the Wind)
|