Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Walmart Workers Walk Off Job in First Wave of 1000 Protests
- I’m Black and I Want More “Stuff” and “Things”: An Open Letter to Bill O’Reilly
- How Germany Is Getting to 100 Percent Renewable Energy
- Already? Obama Tells Supporters to Expect 'Bitter Pills'
- Bailout 'Of the People, By the People' Exposes Bankers' Greed
- How Germany Is Getting to 100 Percent Renewable Energy
- I’m Black and I Want More “Stuff” and “Things”: An Open Letter to Bill O’Reilly
- FBI's Abuse of the Surveillance State is the Real Scandal Needing Investigation
- Walmart Workers Walk Off Job in First Wave of 1000 Protests
- Human Intelligence Peaked Thousands of Years Ago: Study
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Power of Fighting Back: Student Protests in London
The occupation of Conservative party HQ is about so much more than fees. At last the country is beginning to fight back
Wednesday's protest against the education cuts was uplifting: students, staff and others from all over the country gathered in their thousands to walk the route between Embankment and Tate Britain, pausing to boo at Downing Street. The weather was bright and clear, and the mood decidedly upbeat. Staff, students and others marched together under banners from colleges all over the country, while drums and chants protesting at the fees rang out for miles. There were a sizable number of Lib Dems protesting against their own party's U-turn on fees, and a sit-in outside parliament - the peace protesters who reside there were happy to give the students a quick lesson in the true meaning of anarchy.
Numbers were massive too, with around 52,000 turning out - more than double the NUS's original estimate. Police helicopters circled above the crowds, as protesters carried giant vultures, carrots, coffins and effigies of Tory politicians. But media reports will inevitably focus on one thing, namely the spontaneous occupation of and protest in Tory HQ at 30 Millbank Tower. Aaron Porter, the NUS president, was quick to condemn the breakaway protesters, describing their actions as "despicable".
As I write, about 200 people have occupied the building, and bonfires burn outside. Some arrests have been made and eight people - protesters and police officers - have been injured. Protesters have broken windows and made their way on to the roof. Twitter reports indicate that some have taken a sofa from inside Millbank and put it outside, with the quite reasonable argument that "if we're going to be kettled we may as well be comfy".
Direct action this most certainly was, the kind writers such as John Pilger have recently been calling for. It is hard to see the violence as simply the wilfulness of a small minority - it is a genuine expression of frustration against the few who seem determined to make the future a miserable, small-minded and debt-filled place for the many.
The protest as a whole was extremely important, not just because of the large numbers it attracted, and shouldn't be understood simply in economic terms as a complaint against fees. It also represented the serious anger many feel about cuts to universities as they currently stand, and the ideological devastation of the education system if the coalition gets its way. It was a protest against the narrowing of horizons; a protest against Lib Dem hypocrisy; a protest against the increasingly utilitarian approach to human life that sees degrees as nothing but "investments" by individuals, and denies any link between education and the broader social good.
The protesters - students and others - who occupied Tory HQ will no doubt continue to be condemned in the days to come. But their anger is justified: the coalition government is ruining Britain for reasons of ideological perversity. The protests in France and Greece and the student occupations here, such as the recent takeover of Deptford Town Hall by Goldsmiths students on the day cuts were announced, are indicators of a new militancy. At this point, what have we got to lose?
The best moments on any protests are when there is a real feeling of common purpose and a recognition that we are all on the same side. This is the true meaning of "big society" - the very thing that the coalition seems set on destroying, despite its rhetoric. This protest - in both its peaceful and more violent dimensions - is a sign of a country unafraid to fight back, for the first time in a long time.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
113 Comments so far
Show All"Spare me. Economics repeatedly tries to portray itself as a "hard" science, using lots of calculus to give the false impression of rigour, "
Please give me the name of even one economist who portrays economics this way. I have never heard of a single one. Anyone else want to help rfloh?
Sorry, but rfloh is correct. Calculus is de rigeur for an economist. Why it is mathematics legitimizes a discipline, though, I do not understand. Everything expressed in mathematics can be expressed in language, it is just that mathematics is devised as a special mechanism for precision. Facilitating this is a more simplified symbolism than that possessed by language. If you question this, just ask yourself how mathematics is taught. It is by an instructor speaking in language. Language can be as precise as mathematics, but seems awkward when so employed. This is because the purpose of language is to provide a more general depiction, something mathematics does awkwardly. There ain't any perfect representational system.
" Calculus is de rigeur for an economist. "
Yes I know, to develop models, etc. But they can't experiment.
"Why it is mathematics legitimizes a discipline, though, I do not understand."
Agreed.
Au contraire
Reasonable people are angry when confronted with the type of and levels of abuses committed by gov and big business.
And it is NOT violence. They are not "violating" anyone's boundaries.
Standing ones ground and using physical force to defend one's own boundaries is not violence.
Attacking living standards is violence. Impoverishing people is violence. War is violence.
Defence against oppression is not violence.
From The Independent in the UK: "Terrified Tory staff barricaded themselves...as demonstrators roamed the building." (Conservative Party HQ)!!!
Only a Tea Party drunkard would utter such rubbish. At least Europe is facing reality and fighting to improve it. What the hell are Republicans and Tea Baggers fighting for anyway? They're not fighting for improving the economic conditions of the younger generations. Oh sure, a few young conservatives may have sprung up but only because they have special connections. Just what are the Republicans and Tea Partiers planning on doing? Repeal Obamacare? Stop Big Telco/Cable/Satellite from ripping off customers? Reverse the ongoing crippling of Social Security ever since Greenspan in 1983? Bring all our troops and contractors home? I'll take those European young ones over the Tea Party clowns any day !
Indeed.
If you were being robbed, you'd turn violent if that was the only means of self-defense left you after all the other "legal" means of protest failed or were mocked, ignored, dismissed, met with unresponsive contempt, etc, etc, etc.....especially if the robbers were institutions characterized by the legal system as "persons' with greater protections, rights, remedies, relief, and privileges than mere flesh-and-blood sentient persons!
On the contrary.
The FACTS speak for themselves. The growth in wealth of the worlds already wealthy has been astronomical over the past decades. There is PLENTY of "wealth" to be able to help a society pay for the education of its students.
The students are doing EXACTLY as they should to protest these inequities as the Government is responsible to the PEOPLE and not to the BANKS.
It is the Financial system of bankers that are demanding that THEY be paid and have wealth transferred to them and that this wealth come from the working class.
And your solution is "just accept it"?
The austerity laws "passed" in France but the voters of France are NOT as conditioned as they are in the USA to just vote in the same parties in the next election. They do have parties on the left and they do still have tue Socialist parties. Italy and France all had a history of voting for Marxist Parties. In France at least viable third can run and have a significant impact on Policies.
The law in France will IMHO not long outlast the next election. The people who protested by the tens and thousands WILL vote.
GW, the next elections in France will be interesting.
Do you mean the French protests that led to the overthrow of the French monarchy in 1799?
Or are you talking about the protests last month?
Please clarify, as your portrayal of history is very confusing to me... of course, that is assuming that you have any understanding of history, or of the power of the people when they unite for social change. You must be American.
The demonstrations in Europe are the direct effect of and in response to deteriorating conditions. The rulers have vowed that they will continue the "austerity measures" that are certain to cause conditions to continue to deteriorate. Resistance is certain to continue, to grow, and to spread.
"Reasonable people" by your definition will never be persuaded, because they are opposed to the aspirations of the working class. That does not matter, as convincing them of anything is not needed. You are standing with the powerful and the propertied. That is not a "philosophy" or an "ideology," it is a side you are taking in a life and death struggle over power and resources.
London calling, to the faraway towns
their own crimes against other people never did anything to awaken them.
when it was their turn to be the victims of the same crimes, they finally woke up.
we in the US will have our turn soon.
In France, UK, and US, the protests will fail. The best we can hope for is that they will radicalize a layer of society that has previously been held down. Why do I know this? Because there is no viable communist political leadership in any of those locations. Without the professional leadership of a Leninist party, supported and elected by a massive base of militant workers, there is no possibility of creating a workers government capable of bringing universal peaces, sustainability, equality and affluence. This is not based upon a crystal ball, but rather an examination of the events leading up to, and following the Russian October Revolution.
In a single word, I can guide the youth of today more correctly than the entire collection of CommonDreams essays: Trotsky.
both Europe and the US are far from hitting the bottom. the real change will be imposed on them from outside, because the population on both sides of atlantic will not wake up soon enough to take the necessary corrective action.
Deteriorating conditions for the working class is inevitable. That is the nature of Capitalism. Deteriorating conditions will inevitably lead to resistance.
"Wake up" and "hitting the bottom" and "soon enough" and "necessary corrective action" and "change imposed on them from outside" are part of a reactionary and bourgeoisie narrative that denies the forces at work, the historical context of class struggle, the events that are unfolding.
What is "the bottom?" What does "wake up" mean? "Soon enough" for what? What does "corrective action" have to do with what is happening?
Working class people are not your toy soldiers and are not the problem.
What planet are you on?
The conditions of the working class in the UK has never really been that good, even during the height of the British Empire.
And they have been fighting every step of the way, every step. For hundreds of years.
"A hundred years, a thousand years, we're marching on the road
The going isn't easy yet, we've got a heavy load, oh we've got a heavy load
The way is blind with blood and sweat, and death sings in our ears
But time is marching on our side, we will defeat the years, oh we will defeat the years
We men of bone of shrunken shank, our only treasure doth,
Women who carry at their breast heirs to the hungry earth, oh heirs to the hungry earth
Speak with one voice, we march, we rest, and march again upon the years
Sons of our sons are listening to hear the Chartist cheers
Oh, to hear the Chartists cheers "
yup, i bet they have been fighting for raises of their own wages, but not for the freedom of their colonial subjects.
they kept tony blair in power while his snake oil lasted, and replaced him with their real massers: financial and corporate elites, hoping the global thieving murders might be able to keep up their imperialist way of life.
UK and US have always been on the exact same global fascist path.
Steve , You would totally lose that bet
Your arguments are totally all over the place.
You consistently conflate the actions of the people with the actions of government.
STOP IT.
why, government is the problem, now? you sound like a tea partier.
government is only the reflection of the people, the expression of the people's will, especially in a formal democracy like the UK and the US.
Steve , I need another coffee before I tackle the Augean Stables that are your posts.
Pour me a cup, too. I will grab some shovels. This exchange has been a jaw dropper. Glad it happened though, for the sake of clarity.
What causes this is the disconnection, seen more with educated Americans than anywhere (or anywhen) else, between individual consciousness and objective reality. The demonstrations are in resistance to actual deteriorating conditions, not a matter of personal expression of belief systems. Those who do see politics as being an expression of beliefs, who see reality as a product of consciousness, will reject all who are not "like minded" and insist that changing social conditions will only follow some radical remaking of human nature or consciousness. But the fundamental underpinning of any and all leftist thought is that politics is about conditions and about class struggle, not about the intellectual musings of the educated elite. We are now seeing the strange phenomenon of people mouthing left wing politics while speaking from an aristocratic and gentrified point of view. It is probably a good sign that this is emerging. I first starting seeing it here about a month ago, and it caught me off guard, It has been 40 years since I had run into that - radicals who promoted moderation, leftists who blamed and attacked the working class people, Socialists who argued against social change (until and unless it met their high and lofty standards for what it should all look like, for what the correct beliefs were shared by all.)
By the way, I have appreciated your posts and not had an opportunity to say so. Thanks.
Steve: That simply is not true, especially when you have the kind of representative democracy we have in both the US and the UK. In both places we have what is a defacto 2-party system with, at least since Clinton and Blair, very little difference between them. Until we get proportional representation nothing of any value will be done in either country.
if people want something different, they should start or join something different. but they haven't. why?
They have and they do.
STOP LYING
don't get psychotic on me. pop a pill will ya?
personal abuse now Steve
That's not very nice.
Well, what should we expect from an apologist of a system that kills.
Gee, let me guess.
Because they are not as smart as you are?
A formal democracy, you say? Is the military elected? The civil service?
Ah, finally we can get a clear picture. There is no sort of left wing politics of any kind that would lead one to blaming the working class people for what the ruling class does. Yet here you are, doing just that.
So, the ruling class, and its actions, is merely a reflection, an expression of the working class people? There is no position you could possibly take that is more oppositional and antagonistic to the Left.
Joe Strummer would be smiling.
He would. :~D
What happens when the protests peter out or their energy diverted? I remember massive protests against the Iraq invasion, but once the war started they got smaller and smaller. How can the momentum that leads to the original protests be sustained?
It's a process and protests are a part of that process. People are still learning.
There is a fundamental difference between the two types of protest. One form of protest is based on beliefs and opinions, the other on conditions. The first will always be limited and temporary, the second will always grow and gain power.
The protests sweeping across Europe - millions in the streets, poorly reported and understated here - are in response to the all out assault by the ruling class on the working class people. That assault will only continue and escalate, conditions will worsen, and the response - resistance and defiance - will grow.
For American political activists, who see protest as self-expression, who take a subservient and pleading stance with the powerful with whom they strongly identify, who insist on working within the system, who blame the everyday working class people for the problems, who are largely alienated from the harsh realities and see politics as a matter of individual consciousness and personal belief, what is happening in Europe may not be comprehensible. That will slow things down here - the fact that educated people and intellectuals are almost completely co-opted by the wealthy and powerful and do their bidding - but it won't stop or prevent resistance from forming here.
Well said Two Americas.
One thing, resistance in the US may appear more quickly than you predict. The 20 somethings are a very disaffected generation and the economic conditions facing young people may fan rebellion.
The Left must take up the banner of rebellion against the Austerity, the Wars and the Government. The conditions are there to foster a new youth rebellion.
Like the 60's but with less hope...
Yes, resistance could erupt at any moment. But it will not come from the progressive and liberal activist community. Many in the progressive and liberal activist community will not recognize it, and many will actively oppose it. Things are moving quickly now.
When this sort of thing happens in the UK, we know things are getting bad. This is not France.
When conditions worsen, which is guaranteed, perhaps students, workers, unions (what's left of them after Maggie) unemployed, and poor folks get together and realize that we are all in crosshairs of the neo-liberal kleptocrats. Then with massive collective action and civil disobedience, we can exercise some power.
Until then, we must sit idly by and watch the destruction of the rest of public infrastructure and theft of public finances.
Love ya, socialist, but I'm sorry... we must "sit idly by" ... ???
That is not very socialist.
We must RISE UP AND RESIST in SOLIDARITY with our brothers and sisters in the UK. You know what??.. as a matter of fact, FUCK THAT!!
Where are American students?!?!? We are getting royally screwed, and we barely even make a whimper...
Down with the debt, accessible education for all ... in the US, the UK and around the world.
I am not quite sure exaclty what you are advocating. I agree that massive collective action and civil disobedience is necessary. The only caveat is that is has to be collective and massive. Not JUST students in the UK.
Since the global neo-liberal capitalists are acting in sync, just think of what would happen if folks in the EU, USA, and every other place around the world went on a general strike and protests. That just might be on the horizon as things get worse and worse...
Americans will sit idly by and watch until conditions worsen for that critical mass of people to spur them into action.
People are more dispersed and alienated here, and we have been subjected to intense suppression of the political Left. The general public here is not "sitting idly by" - I don't think that is the problem.
The global neo-liberal capitalists are acting in sync, things will things get worse and worse, and folks in the EU, USA, and every other place around the world will be going on general strikes and staging massive protests, and engaging in resistance. It is quickly coming up over the horizon as we speak.
Conditions already have dramatically worsened for a critical mass of people. This is the lull before the storm.
I realize we largely agree and now I am splitting hairs, but conditions are continuing to worsen and will do so for some time.
I realize that we are geographically isolated and propagandized but the obstacles during the 30s were even larger in many ways at least and still there were violent strikes and much upheaval. Things are going to get a lot worse, and even many mainstream economists don't disagree with that.
Oh, I agree completely with everything you say here.
Yes, conditions will continue to deteriorate. Yes, others have face greater obstacles.
At least Europeans are fighting back. Here in America, the only people willing to fight are the defenders of oppression.
The cuts facing most European countries leave them with much more than Americans ever had and their fighting mad. We react to each new outrage with passive acceptance.
How our forebears must be rolling in their graves.
The Founding Fathers had set up a subtle version of paternalistic governing. Some of them were actually fine with Britain's parliamentary system but were afraid to admit it publicly. Of course, today's parliamentary system in the UK must be looking far more maternal compared to our abusive government here in the USA. Additionally, even conservatives in Europe are very sensitive and know where to draw the line when they sense abuse. Here, most Americans couldn't be bothered to know the real meanings of liberal, conservative, progressive, libertarian, capitalism, socialism, etc... . Instead, the USA is filled with people ala "mightymite" who live in sheer denial and go "faith based" on true reform. I am not counting on this government to ever emerge from its paternal style of governing with abuse and defending its corporate cronies who do the greatest act of corporate rape and abuse.
P.S.: From the independent studies of US history, I would contend that this nation has had a militarist mentality ever since its inception and that keeping good public social programs slit as long as possible was the goal. Even some historians on the American "left" have mistakenly bought into the lie that military spending got this nation out of the Great Depression. I am glad that for this Great Depression, additional military spending and further cuts are proving that notion wrong as this nation keeps sinking further into longer term Depression, denial or otherwise.
The logic behind the "War got out of the great depression crowd" is faulty.
What did the war DO?
It put millions of people to work FOR The GOvernment either in the Military or in Munitions factories to build bombs, ships tanks and planes that were used to kill one another en masse.
So In essence it was a MASSIVE Government spending program funded via taxation.
So why is it that such a spending program can only work and lift an economy out of depression if it based on WAR and destruction and killing other peoples? Why could not such a program work to build OTHER things other then war machinery and to employ people for purposes other then KILLING other people? Would it not seem logical that putting Millions of Americans to work on the taxpayer dollar in areas OTHER then the Military would have the same effect on an economy?
If they are saying that in our economies wealth can only be created by DESTROYING things and KILLING people then they are supporting a totally corrupt and immoral system. If THAT is how our economy works then we better do a massive rethink of that economy .
Germany, The British Empire, Japan, the United STates of America, the USSR, Italy , China and Canada all had economies that seemed able to AFFORD the massive spending that was WW11 yet we are to believe they simply can not create enough wealth to give people Health care, decent educations and old age pensions?
That arguement is NOT credible. Mightymites contention that there just not enough "Money" for all these things is incorrect.
"If they are saying that in our economies wealth can only be created by DESTROYING things and KILLING people then they are supporting a totally corrupt and immoral system."
It's true that the post war US economy boom was largely based on our competitive advantage over all the countrys that suffered loss of population and infrastructure.
>>It's true that the post war US economy boom was largely based on our competitive advantage over all the countrys that suffered loss of population and infrastructure.
It is also true that all economies boomed. At the wars end the United States did not have a stronger economy due to any particular VIRTUE or policy . It was the size it was because it was untouched by the war. This does not translate into "war lifted us out of the depression"
The Depression did not continue on in the rest of the world even those destroyed by war.
It started off in the lead (50 percent of GDP worldwide) and that position eroded as the OTHER economies grew faster.
Again this very important. The world had just suffered the Great Depression YET its economies were able to somehow find what would be TRILLIONS of dollars of wealth to wage war. Where did that wealth come from?
It is not like today where a China loans the US money.Nor do I feel there were individuals with that kind of money to lend a government .
YET the countries of the world were able and willing to run up massive debt to wage war.
And tell us some 60 years later.."We can not afford pensions".
Claiming we can not afford these things is a crock. Heaven forbid should there be another World War, I suggest all of these economies would suddenly find the wealth to "afford it".
"all economies boomed."
They boomed from *zero*, sure, and there was quite a bit of time before they got their infrastructure back.
"At the wars end the United States did not have a stronger economy due to any particular VIRTUE or policy . It was the size it was because it was untouched by the war. This does not translate into "war lifted us out of the depression""
I think we are in agrement here. But as usual in economics, you can't easily control for all factors nor do "they" agree on what all the factors were. I was only trying to make clear what I think was an obvious factor, intact infrastructure vs. destroyed infrastructure.