Why do left activists keep pushing for confrontations with the police?


7:26 pm - January 16th 2011

by Guest    


      Share on Tumblr

contribution by Jacob Bard-Rosenberg

We already know the story too well: mass protests in Parliament Square inevitably end up with everyone being kettled until 11pm, violent confrontations with the police in which activists get beaten up or more seriously hurt, and plenty of arrests to boot.

Every indication in the press has been that the reaction from the police and the state towards future student protests will be stronger and more violent than it has been. The left are not to blame for the brutal police tactics, they are not guilty of kettling anyone, and they are not responsible for arrests.

Nonetheless they are responsible for unnecessarily putting people in situations where these things inevitably happen.

The Government has escalated its legal reaction to protest. At the first demonstrations arrests were made for anti-social behaviour. By November 30th over 150 students (mainly FE students) were arrested for breach of the peace in Trafalgar Square.

By December 10th, the charges being handed out were violent disorder (a serious offence with a maximum jail term of 5 years.) This is the offence that many young people were prosecuted for in January 2009 during the protests around the war on Gaza. Some are still in prison.

Detective Chief Superintendent Matthew Horne, heading the Operation Malone (student protests) team, said on Thursday,”We saw, this week, a young man with no criminal history sentenced to a substantial term of imprisonment for throwing a fire extinguisher off the roof of Millbank Tower. … I would urge those intent on committing violence and damage to reflect upon this.”

The organized left have a role to play in protecting activists from these heightened state offensives. Unfortunately this role is not yet being taken seriously enough. In the coming weeks there are three demonstrations called: two to try to save the Educational Maintenance Allowance (19th and 26th of January) and one around university fees and cuts (29th January.) All of them hope to end up in Parliament Square. Almost all of the factions are complicit: SWP, Counterfire, AWL, Workers Power, Revolution, and the Socialist Party.

If anything threatens to blot out our political message, it’s the continual violent confrontations with the police. These are, of course, inevitable, but we can attempt to minimize them. The police are in many cases a legitimate target, not least when they are containing protesters or lashing out violently, but by protesting in Parliament Square we make these confrontations inevitable.

Some people in the movement are saying that we really need a “good symbolic endpoint” for a demonstration. As if a demonstration not at Parliament wouldn’t get our message across. They apparently believe that this need is strong enough to justify losing the political message, losing support, and getting protesters injured, and arrested.

The area from Trafalgar Square to Parliament Square was designed to control mass protests, and we should not become complicit with this architecture. We must protest elsewhere.

The really sad thing, though, is that these people push forward these decisions on the routes of marches are rarely the ones who get arrested and beaten up. Somehow the self-proclaimed student leaders seem to always end up in the pub before the final kettle.

Those who get arrested are more often than not working-class FE students who need more, not less, protection from the state than experienced activists. If the organized left are going to drag young people into these dangerous situations the very least they should be doing is sticking around to help them out, to stay within the kettle to provide support and advice gained over years of protest.

Some activists are already doing this in the form of the Green and Black Cross but the organized left are yet to start participating, rather they are happier to provide an army of stewards who send people back into dangerous situations (something that resulted in 150 arrests on November 30) without dealing with the consequences.


Update: the article has been edited to include the full version, unedited version. A cut-down version was posted here earlier.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
This is a guest post.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Fight the cuts

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


It’s probably something to do with Marxist and anarchist analyses of the police being the tools of the ruling class and the state or something along those lines.

Yes and I am old enough to remember the idiotic tory trolls on here before the last election who went on and on about freedom to protest, and how wrong the last govt was, and turning us into a police state. Now they have their hand on the power leavers, the only sound we hear is crickets…..crickets…crickets…

Typical tories, now they have power they want nothing but obedience. Be interesting to see what the fuel protestors are going to do if petrol keeps going up. They want to protest, but it is their darling tories who are running the country , so they will be very reluctant to blockade our motorways again. Decisions , decisions. Can’t wait for the millionaire tory farmers in their £250 thousand pound tractors to take to the streets to plead poverty.

“Other possibilities for protest” – Yes, but which are best

Email petitions and their like are too easy, and too easily ignored, to be worthwhile

I suggest postcard bombardment: postcards to MPs, government ministers, etc: they require more commitment than email, are harder to ignore, and avoid truncheons.

Any better suggestions?

Jacob;

You said on twitter a moment ago:

“The trots might murder me but it’s an argument we need to be making. See my new piece over at LibCon”

It’s not the Trots who are being directly slurred in this article; it’s who you’ve designated as “the organised left” who you’ve levelled an unsubstantiable claim against, and stewards with whom you’ve done the same.

Possibly to add any decency to this article you’d be so kind as to elaborate on what those other possibilities for protest are, otherwise you risk sounding like those MPs who want to destroy our right to protest.

Carl, in answer the original piece was suggesting that we should choose other targets in London that are less easily kettled, and architecturally lead less easily to head on violent conflicts with the police (was sadly edited out but nevermind.) I am by no means saying we should get off the streets – in fact I think we should be on the streets more, but we must be more imaginative about locations.

As for the organised left, I’m referring to those factions named who vote, basically en bloc, for going to Trafalgar Square-Parliament Square at the London Student Assembly meetings where these things are decided.

The first draft of this I saw (on facebook) actually had some detail on what kind of alternative tactics could be used and how the specific plans for these demonstrations would lead to violence and arrests.

I don’t know whether Jacob removed those references or an editor did but I think without them it gives the impression that you think protests / demonstrations are the wrong way to go when I know that you think that we need to be more inventive / creative when making plans for routes etc to ensure we don’t end up with thousands of school kids kettled again.

7. Dick the Prick

Fair points all. I guess a lot of it’s to do with a political feeling of imasculation – that the avenues the left enjoyed whilst they had a Labour government are closed to them now. I’m not so sure, never having attended a Labour caucus or a TUC meeting. That, I guess, is a wider problem with how does the left represent itself.

As a collection of voluntary organisations they are significantly more popular than right wing clubs. A weak characterisation of right wingers in general would be selfish, stingy and unwilling to join things, whereas the left has always had more participatory youth movements. They have so much energy and are often to be found in protest movements. One would suspect greater analysis of the Countryside Alliance would be a good essay in that it’s quite a relatively atypical mass participation huddle which later reverted to violence.

One would have suspected that there would have been greater fragmentation in the British constitution that there has been; the 3 main parties don’t look like they’re going anywhere yet the BNP, UKIP, Respect, SWP, Greens, Independents, EDL etc have all had plenty of cash, relatively reasonable levels of support yet none have really broken through in any significant way at all. It could therefore be consequential that most people are pretty happy with the political parties they have. It’s looking like the AV+ is gonna fall, it’s looking like Scotland, Walse & NI are gonna get greater devolution, it’s looking like local government will get some responsibility for the £80 billion NHS reforms.

I don’t think it’s necessarily the left or the police courting confrontation, I think it’s more like a job interview – they’re both just in the same place at the same time, going through the motions. To think of the police as an homogenized group and miss the issue at hand then I think that’s going a bit too far. The police have governement issues too and are fighting their own corner from within. Students are fighting it from without. The spat bewteen Sir Sherad Cowper Coles & Sir Dicky Dannatt opened up a window into how the military operates and the MoD and it just seems all organisations have pressures.

Students going without supper & the occassional wanker lobbing fire extinguishers helps everyone. Coppers get overtime, kids have fun, parents get to complain, politicians get camera time to talk bollox and degrees get their value raised again. Just a thought.

Ah – Jacob’s just answered my question. Can I ask that those items be editted back into the piece please as currently the article gives a false impression of Jacob’s views on this.

Why does Sunny always edit the important bits out of articles that give them the context they require?

The guilty party, apart from the police, is not the left, whether organised or otherwise. I have been there, shoulder to shoulder with everyone else, at Millbank and in Parliament Sq, and on local protests on 24 and 30 Nov. No, the guilty party are the right, and the hyphenated left, those who harrumph about violent protests, who pick and choose which tactics they support and which protests they attend (*cough* Aaron Porter *cough*).

If these people held their noses and committed wholeheartedly to these protests, added their feet on the ground, it would be that much more difficult for police to attack the brave youngsters who are there because, unlike some, they realise they have no choice.

If that’s the case Jacob then Sunny (or whoever edited) ought to place the context back in as per the OP.

Not sure how this is taken as an argument that protests in themselves are bad entirely – since it doesn’t say that at all.

I’ve added the line about protesting somewhere other than Parliament Square, if that helps.

. No, the guilty party are the right, and the hyphenated left, those who harrumph about violent protests, who pick and choose which tactics they support and which protests they attend

Oh uh, the protests aren’t working because we don’t embrace the violence!

@13: Sunny, who said they weren’t working?

The left does it for the same reason Martin Luther King did it.

As an alternative proposal, why not Piccadilly circus, Regent Street, Oxford street then finish at speakers corner. It runs along a warren of streets and no-one is going to be kettled there, it’s in public and lots of *other* people will see it. With events like the 29th of Jan it makes no sense going to parliament when it is not sitting that day – it does make a lot of sense for people to go up the busiest shopping streets in the capital on that day, because lots and lots of people will see.

The issue is always going to be what the police and the council are willing to agree to, I think it would be worthwhile them publishing what they would be happy to accept – however, some of the organisations mentioned would probably be critical of a stance which says lets see where they will allow us to march, when the reality is that’s all we are doing anyway…

Two words ‘Mark Stone’

I see where you are going with that Derek, and if these were organised by small committees then I would have to agree, the thing is they aren’t, they are organised by much larger meetings which vote, meaning that the police can’t just come down and put fwd a single idea – they have to argue for it and convince the majority of people. Unless you are suggesting that the groups mentioned above are all actually police fronts…

You reap what you sow.

The Labour government of the last 13 years created the current state of affairs regarding police powers and restriction of protest. And how you all laughed at the pictures from the Countryside Alliance march.

I deplore the inflMmTory tCtics employed by the Met recently (charging horses into crowds of children?!) but the left really need to wake up, grow up, stop blaming Fatcha, and realise where the culture of supressing legitimate protest came from.

Sorry. My crappy typing mangled what should have read “inflammatory tactics”.

21. Dick the Prick

Protests are fine, violence is fine – it’s a sideshow. This should be a patient protest because of the scalp its taken. You mortally damaged the Lib-Dems – I guess we measure success in different ways. Students can duck & dive – there’s 4 years until an election; until cash is handed over, then there’s still time.

@13: Sunny, who said they weren’t working?

There are two points here.

First, the protests worked in the sense that they brought public attention and therefore put the govt on the defensive. But they didn’t work in the sense that the public overwhelmingly thought the violence was counter-productive, and that undermined support activists have. If people want to give the impression that lefties actually care about their welfare, rather than just being layabout anarchists – then violence at these protests doesn’t help.

Second, how many nights have these ‘student leaders’ spent in prison? Are they willing to go to jail for a couple of years for their principles?

23. Dick the Prick

@22 – it didn’t put the govt on defenssive, it put Lib Dems on defensive. If anything, it also galvanised public opinion against students. Everything has to be seen through the prism of older people’s votes; for both Tory & Lib Dem – they’re the only people who vote for them.

Ah, so the organised left are responsible for police violence! And the police are presumably responsible for working class violence? If we don’t walk into the trap, we’ll be peaceful?

I should also be clear that I’m not advocating non-violence, and am certainly not suggesting damage to property is a bad thing. Another sentiment of my text that I’ve just noticed has been edited out is that “The police are in many cases a legitimate target, not least when they are containing protesters or lashing out violently”

I think that constant “citizen’s delegations” organised by TUC , professional organisations, voluntary orgs etc should peacefully hand in petitions daily at 10 Downing Street.

I think many people have, quite frankly, been terrorised by the tories’ use of kettling, batoning and draconian prison sentences.

I for one will never forget nor forgive.

PS @ dicktheetc

Please do not see anything through “prisms”- makes you sound like clegg

Layabout anarchists? Thanks a lot!

Ah, so the organised left are responsible for police violence!

given that the article explictly states they’re not, I can only presume some people aren’t interested in or capable of debate and just want the opportunity to screech when confronted with an opinion they don’t like.

30. Dick the Prick

@27 – it’s all prisms, though. Triangulate denbiability. It’s all about the votes. As a Tory i’ve been brought up to believe that Libs were lefties and they’ve folded immediately. All a bit odd.

I guess the question is; why do people give a shit about their local council? Why not have Yorkshire council or Dorste council? I just think it’s too much work but could be wrong.

31. Dick the Prick

If hard work was just an excuse!

I cannot for the life of me see what the author is trying to say here. Should we never protest because, being what they are the Police will attack us? Or protest should be confined to only the places where politicians can’t hear us? A mass picket of Worthing beach may be your idea of effective protest but most would disagree.

The whole history of social justice is inseparable from protest and demonstration, and has always met with State-instigated violence. There is always an attempt to shift the blame for that violence onto the left, usually accompanied by weasel words about the alienation of ‘public support’. Try spinning the Tunisians that line and see the answer you get! The reality is that protest works, and that’s why the State will try and beat it down. Defending oneself against that violence and refusing to be intimidated is no crime, it’s a necessity.

As the late Paul Foot put it, the right to vote wasn’t won by voting for it.

The police are in many cases a legitimate target, not least when they are containing protesters or lashing out violently…

Unless one’s actually trying to overthrow the state – which, considering that most of these protestors seem to demanding more state funding, might not be a factor here – I can think of few more foolish things to do. First as they’d be glad to have an opportunity to legitimise violence and second as it would endanger people around oneself.

As the late Paul Foot put it, the right to vote wasn’t won by voting for it.

Ahaha! Wise words.

@OldTrot I am, and have been, heavily involved in the student movement. I have been on all of the demonstrations, and will continue to go on them. My point is we have a massive city here where we can really disrupt things, make our point both through mass protest and direct action, but these things can’t happen if we keep going to Parliament Square. Think about these other possibilities: The double roundabout at Elephant and Castle taken over would massively disrupt a huge chunk of South London but would very difficult to kettle. The same applies to Euston Road. We could go for the city, where this crisis started and where those individuals and institutions who should be paying work. Or we could march from Trafalgar Square to Bloomsbury occupying universities along the way (King’s, LSE, SOAS, Birkbeck, UCL.) These are just a few thoughts and of course there are loads more possibilities. The point is that Parliament Square is not only a dead-end but it’s endangering lots of protesters, and until the organised left start thinking about it we’re going to be stuck there with a movement whose numbers dwindle because no-one wants to get kettled/beaten-up again.

“I should also be clear that I’m not advocating non-violence, and am certainly not suggesting damage to property is a bad thing. Another sentiment of my text that I’ve just noticed has been edited out is that “The police are in many cases a legitimate target, not least when they are containing protesters or lashing out violently””

Yeah, I can see why Sunny edited that out… sheesh. You’re a bit too extreme even for him. Not advocating non-violence = advocating violence. Not suggesting property damage is a bad thing = property damage is a good thing. The police are a legitimate target = for what, petrol bombs and fire extinguishers?

@1: “It’s probably something to do with Marxist and anarchist analyses of the police being the tools of the ruling class and the state or something along those lines.”

Compare the observation of Sir Robert Mark, a previous Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police: “a good police force is one that catches more crooks than it employs”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/politics-obituaries/8037604/Sir-Robert-Mark.html

He also said: “The police must not even seem, in dealing with industrial disputes or political demonstrations, to reflect the wishes of the government of the day,” he wrote in his memoirs, published in 1978. “Their manifest impartiality is their most priceless asset.”

But as Tony Blair used to often remind us: “You can’t stop modernisation.”

There is always an attempt to shift the blame for that violence onto the left, usually accompanied by weasel words about the alienation of ‘public support’.

Is public support important or not? If it’s not – then forget about winning the battle on whatever you’re trying to push for.

Try spinning the Tunisians that line and see the answer you get!

Yeah, because we’re really living in a dictatorship. Next thing – why protests like these are akin to the Suffragette movement!

39. Dick the Prick

It’s all fun

Doug that was not what I meant at all, the police are going to be on the offensive what ever!

Shocking that this blog is blaming activists not looking at secret state assaults on protest.

I’ve decided I’m distancing myself from this version of the text. Many decent lefties have (quite rightfully) criticised it, and I feel that in the editing process many important points for the argument have been omitted. I would not normally do this, but given that Sunny has decided to use the opportunity to present my views as opposed to the far-left/anarchists, many of whom I frequently organise with on worthwhile activist projects. You can read the full text of the article originally submitted to LibCon here – http://thethirdestate.net/2011/01/the-problems-of-parliament-square/

42. An Duine Gruamach

Hang on, I seem to have missed something. Why does every damn protest have to be in London?

@jacob just because you’re not in Parliament Square doesn’t mean you won’t be kettled anyway, and it’s naive to believe otherwise. I have also seen my share of protest, student or otherwise, and the brutality can be unleashed anywhere

@sunny hundal “Yeah, because we’re really living in a dictatorship”
a ‘democratic’ police boot in the face hurts just as much as anywhere else. The responsibility for the brutality lies with perpetrator, always.

My point about public opinion is that it’s a paper tiger. Public opinion never won or lost a single strike, and never will do. It’s numbers on the ground, organisation and solidarity action that win or lose

@43 To add to that, how much public opinion do you need to stop something anyway? Anyone remember the how effective this popular movement was: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/2765041.stm

The article is utter dreck (and that’s putting it mildly) and assumes that only glow-stick vigils will achieve real change.

Ok,

Marches from A to B on predictable routes don’t achieve anything, they make it easy for police to kettle and contain. We all know this, yet they continue to happen and get voted for by trot groups block voting.

The reason is this: Large numbers of people in one area means you can sell the party newspaper.

“ublic opinion never won or lost a single strike, and never will do. It’s numbers on the ground, organisation and solidarity action that win or lose”

The anti-war movement had all that and still lost.

There is a massive need for a debate about what tactics work in the UK, Because repeating the same tactics as the past is just a recipe for failure. Yet whenever such a debate takes place, it always ends up getting bitter as each person defends their own faction.

Portraying the anti-war marches as a failure is wrong. It’s not reasonable to judge any protest a failure because it didn’t achieve everything it set out to do. For example, the war went ahead because there were greater forces at work. However had the million not bothered to turn up would we even have the debate and inquiry that is still going on? Would MPs have felt empowered to dissent?

You can’t just go on a march and expect to win immediately, political change of this sort is a long struggle with lots of ups and downs. Debate, disagree, do stuff but don’t give up should be the motto.

I understand the unrest in Tunisia was caused by high inflation pay restraint and job losses.

I’m sure we can match that.

Whether we can match the protest is another matter.

I was going to get fairly scathing about this article – however I notice the poster has claimed it’s been edited in such a way that it doesn’t represent his views…

If writers have views LC considers unacceptable (like endorsing retaliatory violence against the police at protests) perhaps they shouldn’t publish articles by these writers at all, rather than subtly changing the meaning of articles to fit the LC line.

(For the record I don’t support retaliatory violence against the police, although I probably take a somewhat more relaxed view on property damage than some – e.g. if property damage is incidental to a peaceful occupation or some similar form of protest I could endorse it. If the main point of the action were smashing things I wouldn’t endorse it, given we live in at least a semi-functioning democracy.)

Jacob @35

The double roundabout at Elephant and Castle taken over would massively disrupt a huge chunk of South London but would very difficult to kettle. The same applies to Euston Road.

That’s a pretty miserable thing to suggest. Why target ordinary people in their cars and vans and subject them to a really unpleasant situation?
That’s as bad as them annoying Plane Stupid people who like to disrupt airports.

44 – you forget that at the time the polls were showing majority support for military action.

“showing majority support for military action.”

Only after one of the most dishonest propaganda campaigns ever mounted in a democratic country in living memory, and even then support was conditional on a second resolution.

As the late Paul Foot put it, the right to vote wasn’t won by voting for it

but we already have the vote,and I don’t recall the sufraggettes nearly killing people by throwing fire extinuishers off buildings.and law and order wasn’t introduced by anarchists inposing it.

the reason the left do it is the same reason as MLK,
what we didn’t have the race relations act?, similar ot the 64 civil rights act,
IS THERE ALSO THE SAME SEGREGATION In The U.K as there was in America in the 60s?

There’s no need for the police to even be there – protest is a legitimate activity. Without them, I doubt there’d be much trouble at all.

Re: sunny hundal and the suffragettes (and the ditto think from John Reid) – One of the ideas floated by Thatcher at the height of her power was a move to ‘property owning democracy’, where those who had a ‘greater stake’ had more say. Under the current coalition there are proposals to limit the power to depose a sitting Government through votes of no confidence, and a reduction in the amount of representatives – a move being echoed by right-wingers in other countries, interestingly.
Coupled with the coming massive erosion of local democracy, universal suffrage itself, is, I believe, under threat.

@Planeshift – Demonstrations have to follow an agreed route, it’s the Law. Whether they achieve anything is arguable. The Poll Tax demonstrations arguably hastened Thatcher’s removal, but generally they mean little unless they broaden to include more powerful struggles such as strike action.

“The reason is this: Large numbers of people in one area means you can sell the party newspaper.” Now you’re just making it up as you go along.

@John Reid
Point of history -the suffragette movement wasn’t peaceful, and rucks with the Police were common. And their movement was only partially successful – full suffrage for women over 18 didn’t arrive until 1968

On the effectiveness of demos I’d like to add that they have value way beyond the immediate goal.

-They build solidarity. Many people feel isolated in the modern World, a process exacerbated by smaller workplaces, urbanisation and other factors. When people come together to express their points of view it builds confidence in themselves and others to take an active role in changing our World. Networks form, and importantly, so do new ideas, and, indeed, new tactics.

– If the Left really wanted a confrontation with Police, newspapers and balsa would hardly be the weapons of choice. The very idea of the Left sinisterly and deliberately seeking confrontation is incredibly crass and offensive, not least to those recent victims of a level of Met viciousness that frankly shocked even me.

– Anarchists are bloody nuisance

Right,. Why not just not get kettled? We did it one mayday. Everyone split into groups at random and led groups of Police all round the west end. I think someone made a map of locations worth rallying round..

Oh and none of the organisations on the “left” you mention push for protest with the Police. This is beyond them all and they were always at the back giving speeches and clapping each other anyway.

sorry should read “push for conflict with the Police”

Old trot ,men didn’t get teh vote at 18 till 1968, yes teh polce did arrest them,but tehy aminly inflicted violence on themselves, newsppaers and bolsa, what about snooker balls petrol bombs and metal poles

@john reid – “what about snooker balls petrol bombs and metal poles”

And that’s what everyone on the demonstration was armed with was it? Metal bars and molotovs? Get real.

Try this for a more informed view of the Suffragettes

http://not-a-dinner-party.blogspot.com/2010/11/suffragettes-black-friday-and-two-types.html

And please get a spellchecker

@56

Ok so Demos can build social networks. I can think of other ways such networks can be built. But more importantly what are the results of it? The anti-war movement certainly built networks, but – 8 years on – what are the results of these networks?

I could equally argue that once the war finished the networks eroded into the usual in-fighting, sectarianism and apathy…..

Judging by recent revelations, it looks more to me like it’s the police (via ACPO) who have been pushing for confrontation with a new group of protesters, now that the Animal Rights movement is on the wane.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/tom-griffin/mission-creep-how-acpo-empire-hyped-eco-terrorism

Can’t justify a large budget without an enemy!

Ouch.

Looks like ACPO is going to lose control of “protest movement” surveillance…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jan/18/covert-policing-cleanup-acpo


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Simon Mapp

    RT @libcon: Why do left activists keep pushing for confrontations with the police? http://bit.ly/dUs0eG >Gets them out of the house

  2. The Third Estate

    http://bit.ly/eFyx64 The trots might murder me but it's an argument we need to be making. See my new piece over at LibCon #Demo2011

  3. Jacob Bard-Rosenberg

    http://bit.ly/eFyx64 The trots might murder me but it's an argument we need to be making. See my new piece over at LibCon #Demo2011

  4. Naadir Jeewa

    RT @jbardrosenberg: http://bit.ly/eFyx64 The trots might murder me but it's an argument we need to be making. See my new piece over at L …

  5. zohra moosa

    How many of them are Black, eh? RT @libcon: Why do left activists keep pushing for confrontations with the police? http://bit.ly/dUs0eG

  6. Philosoraptor

    Wankery like this is why I don't read Libcon: http://bit.ly/eFyx64

  7. Naadir Jeewa

    Reading: Why do left activists keep pushing for confrontations with the police?: contribution by Jacob Bard-Rose… http://bit.ly/ebg9E3

  8. Stuart White

    Thought-provoking piece on the need to avoid sectarian protest cliches | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/s4M0rOe via @libcon

  9. manishta sunnia

    RT @StuartGWhite: Thought-provoking piece on the need to avoid sectarian protest cliches | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/s4M0rOe via @l …

  10. Stephen Lintott

    RT @StuartGWhite: Thought-provoking piece on the need to avoid sectarian protest cliches | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/s4M0rOe via @l …

  11. sunny hundal

    Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post by @jbardrosenberg

  12. ?ø???? ??

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  13. Rob Clarke

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  14. Tamina Mir

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  15. richdavidson

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  16. Life: Downloaded

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  17. Louisa Loveluck

    'If anything threatens to blot out our political message: it’s continual violent confrontations with police.' http://bit.ly/g9iTlX #demo2010

  18. captntripps

    Why do left activists keep pushing for confrontations with the police? http://t.co/90JMxGi somehow they think it will help people listen

  19. Conor Keegan

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  20. Marta Owczarek

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why are student leaders happy with pushing youths into violent police confrontations? http://bit.ly/eFyx64 good post b …

  21. Angel

    studnts R youth. plice R violent RT @jonathan_m0ses Y R student leaders pushing youth in violent police confrontations http://bit.ly/eFyx64

  22. Youssef

    Reading: Why do left activists keep pushing for confrontations with the police? http://bit.ly/ej0FpL

  23. Where does peaceful protest get us? « Property is Theft!

    […] the battle forward – with co-ordinated strikes if necessary.” Anything else, as a post on Liberal Conspiracy argues, just “threatens to blot out our political message” with “continual […]

  24. Cameron won’t stand still on the NHS, the Lords are up all night, the return of ‘Team Brown’ and Coulson resigns: political blog round up for 15 – 21 January 2011 | British Politics and Policy at LSE

    […] Conspiracy blog on the consequences of confrontational activism as more arrests are made following anti-cuts […]

  25. Why violence plays into the hands of the Government « jonesblog

    […] But there is no denying that provocative behaviour by the police has strengthened the hands of those groups arguing for aggressive confrontation: indeed, as one activist has pointed out, there is clear evidence of this already happening. […]

  26. Why violence plays into the hands of the Government | Left Futures

    […] But there is no denying that provocative behaviour by the police has strengthened the hands of those groups arguing for aggressive confrontation: indeed, as one activist has pointed out, there is clear evidence of this already happening. […]

  27. CLOCKWORK FUTILITY | Deterritorial Support Group

    […] fact that the conversation between these positions revolves around the question “Should we allow violence, and if not, how do we stop it?” reveals a certain attitude amongst the commentators, the planners, the stewards. We, the […]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.