Don’t disparage direct action: it works

by Conrad Landin

It’s always a shame to see people on the left talking down our achievements just so they can prove their point. But this was exactly how I felt reading Dan Hodges’ argument that the rally last Saturday was “ruined” by the direct action taken against businesses in the West End.

Seeing smashed windows and paint-splattered police helmets weren’t my only memories of Saturday. And nor were these the only aspects picked up on by the media. The night before, for instance, saw the BBC talking to rather unorthodox protesters in the home counties, while live coverage during the day included the memorable aerial footage of the sheer scale of the crowds. Sky News’s subtitles – at least for some time – bore the simple words “250,000 on protest march”, or something to that effect.

In an age of sensationalised media, where it seems that, in the rather unfortunate words of Ken Livingstone’s reference to knife crime, “if it bleeds, it leads”, such attention for a peaceful protest isn’t bad going.

We must also remember that the target of these protests is ultimately the government, and not simply public opinion. The fact that Cameron and Clegg are getting a scare from a renaissance of window smashing on Oxford Street doesn’t discount the scare they’ll get from a quarter to half a million people marching on the streets.

And the public know as much as everyone that when you have cuts on such a brutal scale, it’s inevitable for people to react in different ways. Just because you disagree with the tactics of some, that’s not to say that you’ll be convinced the cuts are for the public good.

There will always be some who believe that direct action is not the best means of articulating voices of protest. But, like many before him, Hodges has fallen into the trap of suggesting, through a series of rather patronising metaphors, that this means that those concerned are a bunch of mindless idiots with no political motivations at all.

I find this argument particularly bizarre when it comes to UK Uncut. This group has taken on one of the toughest jobs of all: attempting to educate a largely unknowing public about the not-exactly-fashionable issue of tax avoidance – as well as directly targeting its perpetrators’ profits. It is, indeed, important to question MPs’ support of any extra-parliamentary force, but in this case isn’t the answer most obvious of all?

If the Labour opposition was championing the cause of a crackdown on tax avoidance, or, dare I say it, if we’d been brave enough to do it when in government, there would be little reason for Labour MPs to sign an early day motion in support of a direct action group. But, contrary to Hodges’ assertion that the activists are only in it for a laugh and the post-protest piss-up, the group offers the best opportunity for pressure to be put on tax-avoiding businesses and for media attention to be attracted to the issue.

Disparaging peoples’ commitment to their cause is a tactic that has been used a great deal of late – certainly not confined to the largely peaceful tactics of UK Uncut. I’m not saying we can’t disagree about which tactics to employ in fighting the cuts, or indeed the end result they desire, in the case of anarchist groups present on Saturday. But we should respect the fact that they too are fighting a political cause.

And if, as in the case of UK Uncut, this is an admirable cause which is being articulated no better elsewhere, Labour MPs should not be afraid to associate with it.

But most importantly, whatever one thinks Labour’s position should be, whether the group concerned is the Socialist Workers’ party, UK Uncut or the black bloc anarchists, let’s not brand them as nutters, but remember for a moment that they have as much right to voice their protests as trade unions and Labour party branches.

Conrad Landin is an A level student.


Tags: , , , ,


9 Responses to “Don’t disparage direct action: it works”

  1. doreen ogden says:

    I totally agree. I am an OAP – proud to belong to the labour party and equally proud to support and encourage UKuncut.

  2. Peckhampulse says:

    One of the best responses to the varied protests on the 26th. Better than the hysterical denunciations from not only the Labour Right but sadly many on the Left

  3. iain ker says:

    when you have cuts on such a brutal scale,

    ********************************************

    Dear me, Conrad, 3% real coots by 2014/15. ‘Brutal’?

    You’re not doing an A Level in Economics are you. Somehow I can tell.

    Grow up.

  4. AmberStar says:

    YouGov polling showed a lot of support for the March & that the message was getting across to the public.

    The Tories had a bounce due to Libya & the budget; they had drawn level with Labour in some polls!

    After the March, Labour went into a 10 point lead over the Tories. Dan is welcome to his opinion; but those of us who disagree with him have polling data on our side.
    😎

  5. Julie says:

    They may have the same right to protest as everyone else, but that does not mean they’re not nutters.

  6. theProle says:

    Read Peter Watt’s feature on the dangers of group-think.

    You may have though it was a good idea for a whole load of people to go round smashing bits of London up – but almost certainly, most people in the UK didn’t.

    Making yourself feel good, while almost everyone else in the country points, laughs and goes “what a bunch of retards” is highly unlikely to be of any use winning elections, and that is what actually counts.

    The other thing is that labour was in power until a year ago, why didn’t they try and do anything about tax avoidance then? The answer should be obvious – there is little point stinging multinationals for more tax – enough of them will move abroad that you end up with a net loss of revenue, to say nothing of all the jobs etc that go with them… better to take what is on offer, than to send the golden geese elsewhere…

  7. AnneJGP says:

    Conrad, there are points in your article I could take you up on, but I’m afraid the “direct action” in Northern Ireland has left me too sick at heart to engage with you.

  8. Thanks for comments.

    Iain – you’re right in one sense. I’m not doing A-level economics. But I’m not blind either. University fees have been tripled as a direct result of course funding being slashed. EMA has been scrapped and replaced with lip-service to the cause of supporting disadvantaged young people. Local authority budgets are being cut by 25% in some cases – my local library is under threat of closure, as are services which ensure elderly people have social interaction and don’t just sit at home alone all day. Benefits – slashed. Arts funding – slashed. That’s pretty brutal as far as I’m concerned.

  9. iain ker says:

    EMA has been scrapped and replaced with lip-service to the cause of supporting disadvantaged young people. Local authority budgets are being cut by 25% in some cases – my local library is under threat of closure, as are services which ensure elderly people have social interaction and don’t just sit at home alone all day. Benefits – slashed. Arts funding – slashed. That’s pretty brutal as far as I’m concerned.

    ********************************************************

    Ah, I see, it’s not the scale of the coots that you’re concerned about, (I mean why would you be at 3% real by 2014/2015) – it’s their distribution.

    Rather than write a yob-piece effectively condoning thuggery, vandalism, and the YOOOHOO EVERYONE IT’S ME, ME, ME !!!!! activities of UKuncut… perhaps you could have written a piece on how you believe the (rather necessary) coots should be ‘distributed’.

    No fun in that though – you’d have to do some like … research.

Leave a Reply