Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparkle
.
.
.
.
I think overall, I do agree with the spirit of your point of view. And in an ideal world I'd agree 100%. However, given the futility I've witnessed in demonstrations in recent years - I think there is a case that can be made in FAVOUR of some violence. 10 years ago I'd never have imagined that one day I'd take such a stance. I don't expect many (if anyone) here to agree with such an extreme view, but I'm happy to discuss.
However, the Charlie Gilmour chap swinging from the cenotaph in the same photo frame as "Our Glorious Dead" was not on, that stupid child. Same goes for urinating on the Churchill monument. It was a PR disaster, and we all know the Daily Mail just soils itself in excitement over such things.
"One of the greatest sins of age is to forget the trials of youth."
We've all done stupid things in our adolescence that we wish we hadn't and I think those kids just got caught up in the moment. Though that does not excuse their actions. On the other hand, swinging from the cenotaph certainly takes the biscuit in the list of stupid things one just might later regret.
You'll recall the anti-war demonstration in London, when over a million marched. Now I'll ask you this. What if we could go back in time and change it it to 750,000 peaceful protestors, and say 250,000 anarchists ?
After the fires had been put out, and the cost of the devastation had been counted, could you imagine the government having the metal to still go ahead with that war ?
I could be wrong here, but I think maybe the government would be so afraid of what might happen if then went along with that war, that they would see little other option than to say to the Americans "Sorry guys, Her Majesty's gov would really like to help you, but we've got serious civil unrest, we hope you understand."
An old adage springs to mind: A government that fears its people is a good government.
Unfortunately for us, our government lost that fear a very long time ago.
.
.
.
|
I actually agree with what you are saying here. I think for too long peaceful protests go unheard and the student demonstrations we have seen would not have got the same coverage if they were just marches.
I have often wondered why protestors in the UK have shown so miuch restraint whilst those in charge continuously do things against the views a large perecentage of the public.
I don't agree with the approach the goverment has taken regarding university fees and I do think that if the marches hadn't been as violent as they are, we would not have heard much about student fees (the finer detail) as much as we've heard now.
---------- Post added at 12:58 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparkle
I haven't read much of his blogs, its been on my "to do" list for a little while. I'll go have a read soon to find out what the fuss is about.
martyh, do you think that any number of peaceful protests by the students and activists, would have any real hope of stopping the tuition fees rise?
I'm not being farcical, I'm genuinely asking.
|
To be honest though I don't think any number of violent problems will stop tuition fees rising. Some might then ask whats the point of a violent prtest, but in my opinion that does show how angry people actually are.
I also do not agree with the media and govt saying that a lot of these marches have been hijacked by non students. I think that a lot of the violent protestors are genuine students.