|
geoffrey_prime wrote: What were you actually there for?
You say...
Under the circumstances it seems to me that an attempt to occupy the Bank of Scotland was a legitimate act of protest; very much in the spirit of Paris 68 which 40 years on was the subject of many fond media reminiscences.
Quite frankly, if that's your thinking, then if the fuzz rough you up a bit ...and send you on your way...then the the scales are balanced...
Reviewing this thread with the "Fred the Shred" post...and I am even more sure - for the people causing real vandalism of any kind....I would lock them up.
I was there to support the general cause, as an individual, not part of any group. And also to be an eyewitness to events rather than rely on press reports.
My point was that "violent" protest (by which I mean damage to property rather than neccesarily to people) is often romanticised and seen as legitimate by the establishment years after the event. The Paris 1968 protests, celebrated and commemorated across the media last year, are a prime example. But would they be recalled at all if the protestors had been afraid of breaking a few windows?
Having said that, I do agree that in this case if it wasn't actually a set-up by the police it was certainly consciously provoked.
But assuming these 'criminal actions' are deliberate and even pre-meditated: of course these people shouldn't be above the law, but they take these actions for reasons they believe to be right, expecting that they will probably pay the penalty. Being tolerated by the system is not the objective; you expect to provoke a response. These people are not little children expecting to get away with being naughty. It's a public statement.
I actually think that a certain amount of damage to property can help the cause, because it proves that people are genuinely angry and provokes debate as to the rights and wrongs of the situation. If demonstrations are overly fluffy, peaceful and fun, the demonstrators are patronised and ultimately ignored. The other stock angle, alongside 'vicious anarchist thugs,' is the one that suggests the protestors are really just nice kids having fun and a party and dancing and drumming in the sunshine- cue shots of good-natured police watching on and lines about the good old English tradition of tolerance etc etc and the real issues are glossed over as a result.
I'm not advocating any kind of terrorism but these are desperate times and sometimes that needs to be dramatically expressed.
|
