Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Look what happened when the police weren't there to stop you (Millbank).
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    The funny thing is, I bet most of the people commenting werent even there. None of you heard some of the things the police were saying to student protestors, and none of you know how the police were acting other than how you saw it on your tv. I'm not saying it was entirely the polices fault, but they arent completely blameless.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    This is rather surprising coming from you. D:

    What if the Government is endorsed by heaven? :holmes:
    If the government is not endorsed by the people it cannot be endorsed by heaven, that is, assuming people believe in a heavenly deity.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diaz89)
    If the government is not endorsed by the people it cannot be endorsed by heaven, that is, assuming people believe in a heavenly deity.

    Surely truth is not subject to majority opinion in Islam. I know it certainly isn't in any of the other monotheistic faiths.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rooster523)
    Separating the majority from the violent is a touch difficult don't you think? Seeing as the two groups were so integrated it would've taken a monumental effort to root out every single violent one and separate them.

    More police? They've just raised tuition fees by 300%, where on earth are they going to get the money for all these extra police officers?

    It's not a case of resorting to kettling, it's an effective tactic that stops a lot of police officers getting hurt. 12 were injured today. If you'd dispersed those 12 officers in amongst the crowd you can be sure as hell they'd've been killed.
    (Original post by Rooster523)
    Separating the majority from the violent is a touch difficult don't you think? Seeing as the two groups were so integrated it would've taken a monumental effort to root out every single violent one and separate them.

    More police? They've just raised tuition fees by 300%, where on earth are they going to get the money for all these extra police officers?

    It's not a case of resorting to kettling, it's an effective tactic that stops a lot of police officers getting hurt. 12 were injured today. If you'd dispersed those 12 officers in amongst the crowd you can be sure as hell they'd've been killed.
    Do you actually believe this or have you not been paying attention over the last 3 marches? To stop the violence the first thing you would need to do is stop police activist attacking their own police comrades. Another thing that might help is not allowing members of the royal family to appear in the middle of a crowd in a brand new Bentley with wound down windows which obviously assists the BBC and people like yourself to happily vent indignation which I have a feeling was already in place long before the march begun.

    Some eagle eyed journalist are aware of police incitement strategies and on the radio they have been referred to as "manipulative forces" at work. If we stretch this outside the student protesters you will see that the examples given above have always been an establish way for surveillance and covert elements of the police to destroy descent and use those who attend to deflect away from core issues such as the intentional running down of the education system, not just for students but right across the board.



    http://www.fitwatch.org.uk/2010/12/1...-student-demo/


    Many years ago during the miners strike the BBC reversed video footage to show miners attacking police when in fact it was indeed the police attacking the miners. What also came to light was that the police were not poliecman but the army dressed up as policeman. Today, sadly the lie machine has gone into overdrive and it looks like it will get a lot worse as they tear down website and remove evidence countering misleading or carefully selected news reports

    So can you tell me your opinion after you have read this or will you still condemn students?

    If any age needs to aquire a good education it is this one because the chasm that will exist between pure knowledge and ignorance in the future will take Britain back into the dark ages or much worse if this trend is not reversed immediately.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    Surely truth is not subject to majority opinion in Islam. I know it certainly isn't in any of the other monotheistic faiths.
    I know opinion regarding a certain thing is of the majority, but the truth? I don't know
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    Damn it. Some of the responses in this thread (and others like these) really piss me off. State endorsed violence is fine: violence in self-defence of state endorsed violence is almost always terrorism. This circular logic even applies to utterly absurd levels: the OP "got himself mixed in with violent anarchist terrorist fascists" and therefore deserved to be beaten to a pulp (despite no clarification of being involved with such groups). I mean, really, the utterly ludicrousy amazes me. The Rupert Murdoch owned Sky News are up in arms about protester violence and how the police are helpless victims of ruthless anarchists: they rarely ever mention how police often beat totally innocent protesters into comas. Need I cite the reference to the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests last year?



    Many of the police tactics are totally wrong on so many levels. I honestly can't believe they do it accidentally: no, it is a deliberate strategy employed by the state to incite violence and make the protesters look bad.

    For instance, kettling. The sheer ludicrousy of this tactic astounds me. Basic psychology states that when people have their personal space invaded they become intimidated and (when it is a crowd of people fighting for a common cause) angry. I rememer Ian Hislop on have I Got News For You taking the mick of the police strategy: "What tends to happen, just like with kettles, is you boil up and get very hot and angry!"

    The method has been criticised for years by various psychologists but it continues to be used by police (idiots). They should actually keep the protesters apart, so they have personal space and seperate particularly violent ones so they cannot cause trouble or influence the crowd. Clearly pushing them together like that is not going to make them very happy bunnies at all.

    I am surprised no-one has any sympathy for the OP (who has explicitly stated that he and his friends were out to cause no violence whatsoever). You have all clearly been deluded and brain washed by the state owned media.
    This. Good one.

    We travelled all the way down to London, and none of me or my mates had any intention of acting violent or causing any type of damage.
    But when you're in a crowd, that's tightly packed - you really have no choice in whats happening.

    And the police were completely out of control. Yes, they were beating innocent students - they couldn't get at many of the more violent ones, because they were fighting back. But the ones who were peaceful are naturally easy targets.
    I agree, if you haven't been in that situation then don't go defending the police. They're just as bad as the violent protesters, even worse as they do provoke people into fights.

    Using the kettle tactic was un-necessary and caused more problems, as suddenly the number of angry, violent people multiplied exponentially.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hollyone)
    Do you actually believe this or have you not been paying attention over the last 3 marches? To stop the violence the first thing you would need to do is stop police activist attacking their own police comrades. Another thing that might help is not allowing members of the royal family to appear in the middle of a crowd in a brand new Bentley with wound down windows which obviously assists the BBC and people like yourself to happily vent indignation which I have a feeling was already in place long before the march begun.

    Some eagle eyed journalist are aware of police incitement strategies and on the radio they have been referred to as "manipulative forces" at work. If we stretch this outside the student protesters you will see that the examples given above have always been an establish way for surveillance and covert elements of the police to destroy descent and use those who attend to deflect away from core issues such as the intentional running down of the education system, not just for students but right across the board.



    http://www.fitwatch.org.uk/2010/12/1...-student-demo/


    Many years ago during the miners strike the BBC reversed video footage to show miners attacking police when in fact it was indeed the police attacking the miners. What also came to light was that the police were not poliecman but the army dressed up as policeman. Today, sadly the lie machine has gone into overdrive and it looks like it will get a lot worse as they tear down website and remove evidence countering misleading or carefully selected news reports

    So can you tell me your opinion after you have read this or will you still condemn students?

    If any age needs to aquire a good education it is this one because the chasm that will exist between pure knowledge and ignorance in the future will take Britain back into the dark ages or much worse if this trend is not reversed immediately.
    The first march set the tone for the rest, the police were quite weak with their tactics and the students rang riot. The police had no other option but to be heavy handed.

    You hear loads of students saying the marches were peaceful until the police got involved; the police had snooker balls thrown at them; what sort of peaceful protestor brings snooker balls along? The sort that goes out looking for trouble.

    The police policing the protests is no excuse for defacing the statue of Winston Churchill, for climbing on the cenotaph or for attacking the Royal family.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lewroll)
    The funny thing is, I bet most of the people commenting werent even there. None of you heard some of the things the police were saying to student protestors, and none of you know how the police were acting other than how you saw it on your tv. I'm not saying it was entirely the polices fault, but they arent completely blameless.
    Completely agree.

    During Millbank, my mate got arrested and they have confiscated his phone and camera because he had picture and video evidence of how the police treat protesters. He had to wait for a good while before they gave him his camera back, and all the footage has been deleted. And he still hasn't been given his phone back.

    We have a few videos off peoples phones, and it's absolutley disgusting how you're treated by the police.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I agree. I'm sure that there were plenty of people who bought snooker balls because they fancied a game, and flares because they reckoned it might be too dark. Considerate.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rooster523)
    The first march set the tone for the rest, the police were quite weak with their tactics and the students rang riot. The police had no other option but to be heavy handed.

    You hear loads of students saying the marches were peaceful until the police got involved; the police had snooker balls thrown at them; what sort of peaceful protestor brings snooker balls along? The sort that goes out looking for trouble.

    The police policing the protests is no excuse for defacing the statue of Winston Churchill, for climbing on the cenotaph or for attacking the Royal family.
    The marches were completely peaceful.

    Sure, there are extremists who obviously came on intent of violence, but you shouldn't generalise all students because of them. I wonder why they were angry enough to throw them? Could it be kettling? Cavalry charges, á la Peterloo Massacre? People tend to generalise and blow everything (pardon the pun) out of proportion.

    For Churchill, not many excuses. Royal Family? This is the 21st Century.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Not going to lie, but people need to stop being such dicks to the protestors if you weren't even there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I seriously don't care about the violence caused by the protesters. The majority of them were under 18 and don't even have a right to vote, and they've just had 40 grand of their parents debt heaped on their shoulders. That coupled with being forced into a tight space for hours at a time, with no recourse to leave, would make me get pretty violent to be honest. I don't see how anyone can feel sorry for the police, they gained money for their work yesterday, and the 30,000 protesters lost a combined £810 million. The cries of the police of 'just doing their job' are totally lost on me... The state can't just pay people to stand in protesters way day in day out, and expect them to have some sort of higher protection because they are 'innocent' in all of this.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Anarchy, a lack of governemnt.

    Depending on the brand of anarchy you would then go on to privatise traditionally national services, such as the police and health services. Then often go on to form small communes, self regulating communities.

    You anarchists consider the very mechanism of state and government unessecary, even undesirable. You would say authority is unsecassary.

    Although, of course, as with all politicl ideologies here are many differing brands of Anarchism, a few less ridiculous than the others, but all somewhat lacking in sense.
    Wrong.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diaz89)
    I know opinion regarding a certain thing is of the majority, but the truth? I don't know
    To be honest I personally think truth is something of a metaphysical illusion. (Though I stole that term from Nietszche)

    I'm just surprised is all. This is quite the departure from the admittedly hardline position you held last time I came across one of your posts. :confused:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I seriously don't care about the violence caused by the protesters. The majority of them were under 18 and don't even have a right to vote, and they've just had 40 grand of their parents debt heaped on their shoulders. That coupled with being forced into a tight space for hours at a time, with no recourse to leave, would make me get pretty violent to be honest. I don't see how anyone can feel sorry for the police, they gained money for their work yesterday, and the 30,000 protesters lost a combined £810 million. The cries of the police of 'just doing their job' are totally lost on me... The state can't just pay people to stand in protesters way day in day out, and expect them to have some sort of higher protection because they are 'innocent' in all of this.
    Agree completely.......which is weird.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    3. It is only at these middle-class relatively laid back protests that they use kettling. In other situations in the past where there really have been extremely hardcore and violent, racist skinheads they have definitely not resorted to kettling. I think this in itself goes to show that the only reason they use kettling is to make the protestors look bad (by invoking violence), which in turn helps the state to justify its actions raising tuition fees and what not.
    The EDL get kettled all the time.

    Basically, just stop whining. Police are just human, they can't tell you all apart, and they respond to violence with violence. It's just the way it works.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    Wrong.
    Well, that depends entirely on your branch of Anarchism. I summed up the main tenants lower down my post. The form I described is he form I'm most familiar with.

    If you want to talk Individualism or Mutualism exactly, then please specify.

    Otherwise, please, try not make silly statements like the one above. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Well, that depends entirely on your branch of Anarchism. I summed up the main tenants lower down my post. The form I described is he form I'm most familiar with.

    If you want to talk Individualism or Mutualism exactly, then please specify.

    Otherwise, please, try not make silly statements like the one above. :rolleyes:
    No - Why would leftists be interested in privatising corporations? You began to describe anarcho-capitalism (which is not a legitimate form of anarchism) and then went into a weird amalgamation of some sort of anarcho-capitalism controlled by communes. In any case, because I am kind I will provide you with a definition (that is based upon actual literature!):

    Anarchism is a definite intellectual current of social thought, whose adherents advocate the abolition of economic monopolies and of all political and social coercive institutions within society. In place of the capitalist economic order, Anarchists would have a free association of all productive forces based upon cooperative labour, which would have for its sole purpose the satisfying of the necessary requirements of every member of society. In place of the present national states with their lifeless machinery of political and bureaucratic institutions, Anarchists desire a federation of free communities which shall be bound to one another by their common economic and social interests and arrange their affairs by mutual agreement and free contract.
    - Rocker

    Edit - Another problem with your definition would be that you seem to think anarchists advocate small communes with the idea of small scale production: on the contrary, we want democratic worker-based associations to co-operate on a national/international basis to organise large scale production. We are not totally ignorant to economics.

    More detail can be found in the FAQ I posted. Anyway, describing ancap does you no favour since the anarchists who are getting involved in the protests are clearly not ancaps (otherwise why would they be interested in scrapping tuition fees?).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hamijack)
    The majority of student protestors today did not come intent on violence, as the police, via the media, are suggesting. Violence broke out today because the police stopped innocent protestors from leaving by beatin them with batons and riot shields. Scared and angry people tried to force their way out and became violent.

    It was the police's fault.

    Simply trying to get out I and two of my friends were forced back by riot police and one of my friends was tackled and the other was knocked to the ground. Shame on them assaulting children like that.
    why the **** were you there, then?





    I thought these protests were serious- then I saw an LSE student whine to a cameraman that "he hadn't been allowed to go to the toilet or eat for 6 hours".

    Absolute ****ing joke, your eating out of the governments hand and ****ting on their doorstep.

    You are right, you're all kids
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 12, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.