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
by Nina Power
The Guardian/UK: November 11, 2010
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.
© 2010 Guardian News and Media Limited
Nina Power is a senior lecturer in philosophy at Roehampton University and
the author of One-Dimensional Woman (Zer0 Books)
Photos:
http://pueblossinfronteras.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Rad-Green mailing list
Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu
***
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/06/opinion/06herbert.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211
Tone-Deaf in D.C.
Bob Herbert
NY Times Op-Ed: November 6, 2010
It would be easy to misread the results of Tuesday's elections, and it looks
as if the leaders of both parties are doing exactly that.
Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are offering voters the kind of
change that they seem so desperately to want. We're getting mind-numbing
chatter about balanced budgets and smaller government and whether Mitch
McConnell and his gang can chase President Obama out of the White House in
2012.
What voters want is leadership that will help them through an economic
nightmare and fix a country that has been pitched into a state of sharp
decline. They long for leaders with a clear and compelling vision of a
better America and a road map for getting there. That leadership has long
been AWOL. The hope in the tumultuous elections of 2008 was that it would
come from Mr. Obama and the Democrats, but that hope, after just two years,
is on life support.
Tuesday's outcome was the result of voters, still hungry for change, who
either switched in anger from the Democrats to the Republicans or, out of a
deep sense of disappointment, stayed home.
It was hardly a mandate for the G.O.P.'s way of doing things. Nearly 15
million Americans are out of work. The public does not want the next two
years to be a bitter period of endless Congressional investigations of the
Obama administration; more tax cuts and other giveaways to the very wealthy;
and attacks on programs like Social Security, Medicare and unemployment
insurance that offer at least a measure of economic security for ordinary
people.
It would also be a mistake for the Democrats, a terminally timid party, to
cave in to their opponents and start embracing a G.O.P. agenda that would
only worsen the prospects of ordinary working Americans and the poor.
The Democrats are in disarray because it's a party that lacks a spine. The
Republicans, conversely, fight like wild people whether they're in the
majority or not. What neither party is doing is offering a bold, coherent
plan to get the nation's economy in good shape and create jobs, to bring our
young men and women home from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, to rebuild
the education system in a way that will prepare the next generation for the
great challenges of the 21st century, and to reinvigorate the can-do spirit
of America in a way that makes people believe that they are working together
toward grand and constructive goals.
Great challenges demand great leaders. Marian Anderson once said,
"Leadership should be born out of the understanding of the needs of those
who would be affected by it."
Americans right now are riddled with fears and anxieties of many kinds. They
are worried about the economic well-being of their families, the cost of
securing a decent education for their children, their prospects for a
comfortable retirement, the continuing threat of terrorism, and the
debilitating effects of endless warfare. They worry that America's best days
may be in the past.
Neither party talked about the wars during the campaign because neither
party has anything satisfactory to say about them. And there was hardly any
talk about education. We know that a quality education is more important now
than ever, but we are firing teachers by the scores of thousands, not
because they are incompetent, but because state and local budgets have
hemorrhaged.
Our leaders in Washington seem entirely out of touch with the needs, the
hopes, the fears and the anxieties of the millions of Americans who are out
of work, who are struggling with their mortgages or home foreclosures, who
are skimping on needed medication in order to keep food on the table, and
who lie awake at night worrying about what the morning will bring. No one
even dares mention the poor.
What this election tells me is that real leadership will have to come from
elsewhere, from outside of Washington, perhaps from elected officials in
statehouses or municipal buildings that are closer to the people, from
foundations and grass-roots organizations, from the labor movement and
houses of worship and community centers.
The civil rights pioneers did not wait for presidential or Congressional
leadership, nor did the leaders of the women's movement. They plunged ahead
with their crucial work against the longest odds and in the face of
seemingly implacable hostility. Leaders of the labor movement braved guns,
bombs, imprisonment and heaven knows what else to bring fair wages and
dignity to working people.
America's can-do spirit can be revived, and with it a brighter vision of a
fairer, more inclusive, and more humane society. But not if we wait on
Washington to do it. The loudest message from Tuesday's election is that the
people themselves need to do much more.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment