Sussex University campus has come to life the past day or two with a variety of events that prove to show this toothless giant still has some bite left in it. A few weeks ago Sussex SU released a statement about the imprisonment of a 2nd year student Zenon Mitchell-Kotsakis who has been sentenced to 15 months for violent disorder during the original 2010 student demonstration in London. This statement came from left field as up until now there had been no word from the union on Zenon’s case and the statement was released 4 days after he was sentenced.

Opinion: I have to confess am a little unsure if I like this whole debate that has been forced on us by the Lib Dems, and I know how that sounds but this is more a matter of principle with me. Does the UK need a more fairer voting system, is it unfair as it is, or should we keep the status quo?

One thing that has come out of this more so than anything else has been questions and few people really seem to know what they should do or where they actually stand on the issue. Round in Brighton there has been zero evidence of a Yes campaign yet two very scary leaflets from the NO Campaign paint a horrible and frightening reality…just how true this all is is anyones guess.

The Coalition government is at risk of a serious split on this issue though in the defence of the Conservatives they never wanted it to begin with. Having coalition governments is, I would say on paper, one of the safest ways of ensuring that there is greater debate and transparency from the parties in power than what we have now. It would also create less of a political block with either one of the other major party in power for 15 years or more.

The AV system would make politics more accessible and make politicians more accountable to the voter. Over this issue things have been said and accusations have been rife but at the end of the day this is a chance for a real shake up of the political system in the UK. There is not likely going to be another chance for this for some time to come and if this does fail what is the political future of the Lib Dem Leader Nick Clegg?

The New Current SUPPORTS the YES Campaign.

Anarchists used an intrinsically chaotic system to stay one step ahead of the police. But they picked a poor day to do it.

By Ian Dunt

Maybe I’m getting old.

I used to enjoy a good riot. Once upon a time the police used to pick on peaceful demonstrators and the media’s response was always fawning and uncritical. It was easy to take an indignant approach to these things. The reality and the media narrative were so far apart, and the actions of the police so needlessly mean-spirited, that it was easy to know where you stood. The G20 riots, when Iain Tomlinson was killed, marked a turning point. We’ve seen genuine improvements in police behaviour since then.

Miraculously, I type this from a cafe just off Piccadilly which has stayed open. They’re plainly suicidal. Outside the window, police and protestors are having pitched battles in the streets. I was out there a moment ago, and in a moment I’ll be there again. It’s tremendously unappetising.

Try as I might I can’t really fault what police have done today. They invited Liberty to watch over their command and street-level operation. They have used, from what I’ve seen, a minimum of force. They’ve protected property, but not lashed out. They did, however, kettle protestors. I’m a priori opposed to kettling. I’m opposed to it regardless of circumstance. It exacerbates rather than calms, it infringes human rights and it’s one of those tools you can’t trust the police to use responsibly. But today of all days its use was most justified. Not to say I agree with it – just that this was not knee-jerk use, in my opinion.

When I eventually found the black bloc in Oxford Street it was probably the biggest mass of them I’ve seen since the big anti-globalisation protests in the late 90s. September 11th somewhat took the wind from the sails of that movement, but the new politics of austerity has injected it with a renewed focus. Black bloc is a tactic, not an organisation. It is the loosely-knit groups of black-clad men and women with bandanas and ski masks over their face. They work according to operational anarchist principles, splitting off from other groups at the drop of a hat and reforming elsewhere. Their red and black anarcho-communist flags act in the same manner as a tour guide’s stick, signalling to other groups to follow them.

The police were completely unable to deal with them today. For two hours, they ruled Soho and its beautiful, decrepit alleyways. Any corporate shop was ruined – even, absurdly, Ann Summers. Police would stand helpless, outnumbered, as they smashed windows and billboards. They nearly had them outside the HSBC in Cambridge Circus, as they threw rocks through its windows. But before the police could get reinforcements in, they had already split into three groups: one trashing a police van and setting off smoke bombs, another heading off back towards Tottenham Court Road and a third pushing down towards Piccadilly. On the pavement, a group of Chinese tourists gazed in amazement while a gaggle of young girls with ‘hen night’ written on their shirts in lipstick looked appalled.

As I followed one gang around the West End – constantly worried that they’d mistake me for an undercover policeman and set on me – one phrase came from them more than any other: ‘black bloc keep moving’. The way they spoke to the group as an individual reminded me of the hive mind, and Hegel, and the way that belonging can provide its own momentum.

The anarchy of a leaderless movement is simply impossible for the police to control. Grip one area and it all comes squeezing out in another. But the drawback, of course, is that you rarely have enough people for each action. So they were reduced to doing minimal damage and moving on.

It wasn’t until the occupation of Fortnum and Masons in the late afternoon that enough people congregated to turn it into something approaching a traditional riot. A steady stream of nimble protestors had managed to climb its (horrible gaudy) lamplights and onto the roof. Others broke through the front and soon enough it was under anarchist control. A few of the people on the roof, lost in the moment, were foolish enough to prance around without masks. They’ll regret that when police start reviewing the CCTV footage next week. Fortnums is a big enough prize that it became the centre of gravity, with hundreds, probably thousands, congregating outside. Eventually they started pushing against the police line.

As the fighting broke out, there was scattered debate among the protestors. One girl shouted at another for throwing beer at the police, who were by now being pelted with anything that was to hand. “They’re just like us, they have families and they’re being screwed by the government too.” Most of her fellow demonstrators sneered at her. “They’re the class enemy,” said one man, who looked like he’d been at way too many protests for too many decades.

I can honestly say I felt about as sorry for the police as I ever have. They didn’t look happy about being reduced to defending a posh and overpriced sandwich shop. They remained startling good-humoured, even while waves of people crammed against them and there was comparatively little violence. It’s easy to be nice when you’re outnumbered and scared of course, but this was still significantly better behaviour from the police than we ever saw before the Tomlinson nightmare. There was something in the way that many protestors talked about them – that angry, group-mentality abuse – that showed how the distance between ‘protest’ and ‘mob’ grows smaller.

There are people who believe that once a window is smashed no genuine political point can emerge from its remains. I don’t agree with that. But today’s action was problematic, to say the least. The campaign against spending cuts needed to symbolise its mass support. It needed images of families marching together. This was the day for that. The effect of the violence will be to discourage others from protesting, if they think anything like this can happen near their kids.

The media debate over cuts is at the point where broadcasters and broadsheets were prepared to give today over to the TUC rally. Previously, they would have ignored the march unless there was violence. My hunch is that today’s march would have got solid coverage because of the numbers and the state of the narrative. Smashed windows just ruined that.

People are angry because they understand the fundamental injustice of the coalition’s programme. They understand that the private sector is not the panacea, either economically or politically, that the government pretends it is. Nothing that happened today makes that case any stronger.

Ian Dunt is the editor of politics.co.uk. This article was 1st published on politics.co.uk on 26/03/11 and is used with permission.

The protests went as anticipated. The majority of people, many of whom will be redundant in 4 days, marched calmly through London surrounded by Union Officials, Police Officers and press.

The BBC has been quite good at maintaining the “majority were peaceful” line.

However, inevitably, the [violence] [anarchistic] [scuffles] [turmoil] or [tempest] as various journalists have referred to the less peaceful marches, have stolen many headlines.

I watched with discerning horror as various shots on BBC News depicted fights, broken windows, paint bombs, fireworks and other antisocial ranging through to criminal behaviour took place.

The Hype

Aggrandized social networking had set the scene for a modern Punch and Judy, it was just ascertaining who would appropriate which role. In the previous protests, students have been quick to cry foul over Police Brutality, accuse and actively engage violent behaviour. Yet yesterday there was very litte evidence of Judy with her rolling pin. No police had riot shields, no weapons, and their regimentary lines to calm rampant protestors were standard calming proceedure.

In direct contrast, Punch had armed himself with a selection of premeditated weapons. Rather than the spade seen in student protests in September (who carries a spade with them on the off chance?!), protestors, menacing in black with balaclavas, were armed with lightbulbs full of amonia, spray cans, and anything else they saw fit to collect on their way.

With the twitterverse pounding with hashtags like #march26 #tarhirsq #trafalgursq #ukuncut #march26march et al, the drums were beating for drama.

And Twas Ever Thus

While Milliband egotistically compared himself to Martin Luther King (there’s a whole other blog post in this!), the BBC cameras panned to the menacing thugs attacking Topshop and swifting moving to Fortnum & Mason.

With bits of fence going through windows of banks, police officers being set on fire, the trite anarchy symbol being sprayed every where and continous soundbites from Labour, I was watching at home, glad I didnt attend. Much criticism was put about Laurie Penny, the Independent writer, who felt the need to castigate the police and continue to encourage illegal and demonstrative violence through social media channels. A badly written (oh the irony) puts is quite well;

“For too long now she has been allowed to spread her vile and one side biased views of the protest and the whole events around them…[to satisfy] her own feeling of self importance” (The New Current)

But even without poisonous journalists encouraging violence to their own gains, the collective attacks on buildings which, to protestors, symbolised the extremeties of social divide were escalating.

Risks of Anonimoty

Good old UK Uncut, whom I think of as a modern day, twitter charged Robin Hood gang, have taken great risks by maintaining an air of mysteriousness.

While they decided to occupy Fortnum and Mason, who are charged with legal but ammoral tax avoidance by the young gangs, others descended on the store outside. There is still dispute as to whether these youths, carrying Anarchy flags and wearing balaclavas, were in fact members of #UKUncut or not.

They adorned the outside of the building with UK Uncut slogans, claimed to be part of the (and I am loathe to call them but) movement, threw fireworks and flares at the police and actively prevented police from stopping other protestors from joining in, no doubt contributing to those injured, police and protestors alike.

I commented that I went to make a cup of tea and when I returned, UK Uncut had lost all of their credibility. Others have stated that it was not UK Uncut outside.

But that is the risk the UK Uncut take with their anonymity.

If they are serious about challenging society’s norms and social divide, hiding behind badly written yet powerful articles simply gives others the opportunity to discredit them.

However, if the gang of trouble makers were not legitimate representatives of UK Uncut, then comments like this do not help to dispell the myth;

“Civil disobedience has a long tradition of driving forward progressive change and we are here to send a powerful message”

Disobedience is an interesting word.

–noun
“lack of obedience or refusal to comply; disregard or transgression”

There is something of an irony in this.

UK Uncut are demanding that the Government comply with them by changing tax legislation to more fairly redistribute wealth around the country.

To apply this lobby, they are the epitome of civil obedience, calming registering protests with the police, quietly occupying and proclaiming allegiance with Che Guevara and Ghandi. Neither of whom were demonstrative violent protestors.

Further illogical interpretation then, and I will refrain from comments on education necessary to enter university. So if UK Uncut proclaim necessary civil disobedience, and deny active violence, how can one know what they stand for or who they are?

Trafalgur Square

Representative of political and social freedom, Trafalgar Square was the coda of the day, filled with what some referred to as a party.

Some party if it resulted in kettling.

Further damage and devestation was had, as young people failed yet again to get their message accross.

And the point of it all

Well, the meaning behind the violence is somehow lost in translation.

Protesting against cuts was the aim in the TUC march. This was a peaceful demonstration even if the leader of the Labour party felt he was a hero.

But what exactly was the aim in the UK Uncut and associated violences?

Rather like Punch and Judy, it seems it was just a sensationalised and futile exercise in entertainment.

By Kelly-Marie Blundell

The original article was posted on March 27th and TNC has been given permission by the author to reproduce it here. For more information on Kelly-Marie and her work you can go to her sites HERE