PEACEFUL PROTEST ONLY!!!

sponsoredwalk

In light of the CONSTANT refrain from people who lust for a reason to
blame all protestors I think it's time we, as a people, from boards call
on EVERYONE to think before they do something stupid. From now on
instead of resorting to throwing mars bars and shoes (and all the other
things that just give protest bashers more reason to justify their obvious confirmation biases)
we need to be more effective and peaceful in our protests. There are
alternative things we can do to be heard than pseudo-violent things
that only further alienate otherwise noble efforts of people trying to
tell the government they are screwing up and not listening to what
the people want.

Specifically I've read the claim it's the SWP (without proof) and if it is
them, or anyone for that matter, rather than undemocratic calls for
trying to silence them (that I know people would just love to indulge :rolleyes: ) why
don't we do things more akin to Ghandi or the other successful
approaches taken throughout history?

Lets assume the SWP may be behind this, or more specifically, members
within the SWP and not the entire organization itself (just to be on the safe
side). I think that if we actively participate in contacting the SWP and
request a response from them on whether or not their members are
responsible we will be one step closer to either stopping these stupid
things happening or to finding out who is really behind these actions.
We'll either stop the hate against the SWP or straighten them out

Please write to the SWP at info@swp.ie with the following message or
your own personal message (preferred ):

Subject: Protest?
Dear SWP,
In light of the increasing number of protests occuring & increase of
interest by the general population there is much discontent to be found.
The general agreement is that the resort to violence, or semi-violent
actions, by people within the crowds is the main reason holding many
potential members back. The media is being given ample opportunity to
portray the actions of a few people as the over-arching motives of the
entire crowds and this has to stop. One need only look at Tony Blair
and the odd shoe thrown, this was characterized as mania by the media
worldwide, it was inconsequential that this was a minor event. It was
enough to hide the reasons why so any people were protesting Blair's
arrival. Similarly we can talk about "storming Leinster House", this was
enough to detract from the meaning of the protest that day.

We respect the freedom of your members to bring flags, flyers, leaflets
etc... but disrupting peaceful protests by throwing objects like bars,
eggs, cans, all this stuff is just ridiculous. People wont stand for it and
you'll notice nearly every article on yesterday's protest has to qualify
things by mentioning these actions. It's getting tiresome and it's time
we ended this.

We would like to request that you find out from within your organization
if it is indeed members of your organization that are doing this and to
end it. A lot of the accusations are at your organization and it's time you
put out an official message on your position in this. It would end the
scapegoating of your organization, or at least counteract it.

This message comes from ,
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68850931#post68850931
it would be a good place to post a response
and this site would be a great place to read
a lot of the condemnation to see what people
actually think of these actions.
Unfortunately the whole country will not
read that link but clarification of this position is
sorely needed, it's simply a big enough issue to
allow people to justify condemning attending
protests.
Yours,
sponsoredwalk

So boardsies, do you think the SWP are behind these things and if it's
shown that they are going to discipline their own members who resort
to these things would you feel better about attending protests?
If it's not the SWP then why do you think they are getting so much
flack for this in all the threads on boards?
Don't you think actively trying to stop the violent activities is a good way
to change the public perception of protests so that we have no excuse
but to focus on the reasons for the protest rather than the stupid
actions of a minority?

Eliot Rosewater

Oh but you see, you don't understand, boards.ie is merely a manifestation of the capitalist-corporate-state complex, and is currently operating a covert slur campaign to undermine the SWP. Certain officially sanctioned boards.ie agents such as "Amhran Nua" are additionally pressuring governmental agencies to ban the SWP and other left-wing groups. In reality your opening post wasn't created by your own mind, but is rather the product of years of brain-washing by capitalist and state personages, such as the generic "fat cat banker" or "greedy pig". The SWP proposes the only viable alternative to the capitalist regime. Our alternative world will be one of plenty, peace and happiness. We will achieve this by throwing bricks and eggs at Guards.

Biggins

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Oh but you see, you don't understand, boards.ie is merely a manifestation of the capitalist-corporate-state complex, and is currently operating a covert slur campaign to undermine the SWP. Certain officially sanctioned boards.ie agents such as "Amhran Nua" are additionally pressuring governmental agencies to ban the SWP and other left-wing groups. In reality your opening post wasn't created by your own mind, but is rather the product of years of brain-washing by capitalist and state personages, such as the generic "fat cat banker" or "greedy pig".

Eliot Rosewater

Look at the violence inherent in the capitalist system. Biggins has already censored my post, cutting off the last three sentences.

sponsoredwalk

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The SWP proposes the only viable alternative to the capitalist regime. Our alternative world will be one of plenty, peace and happiness. We will achieve this by throwing bricks and eggs at Guards.

Your post has to be the strangest response I've ever had on boards but
the above indicates what you mean. You think I'm from SWP or something?
If you bothered to read my post without the policeman inside your
head running wild you'd realise I was talking about trying to end people
throwing eggs, or bricks or anything at anybody.

I'm glad we had your response, it was so automatic that you responded to
your own bias and to nothing I actually wrote. Good job :pac:

Please don't sidetrack my thread again with irrelevant nonsense.

Bobby42

I was at the student march yesterday and even before it started the SWP were there encouraging everyone to protest like the french. right from the start they had their own agenda. they had their own socialist signs and posters that had nothing to do with what the students were marching for. the idea of the march was to literally just march to government buildings and then go home, obviously the SWP had other ideas. i'm not putting all the violence on the SWP, obviously students got involved too, but their presence didn't help and didn't contribute anything positive.

r3nu4l

I'm pretty sure ( I hope I'm right) that Eliot was employing satirical humour.

I think protest is a fantastic idea but to be honest, more often than not, protests are hijacked by radical groups such as SWP who use these events for publicity and in the hope that piggybacking on such events will make their support base look a lot stronger than it actually is. They also know that they will have increased visibility and that their rhetoric will at least be heard (if not actually listened to or considered) by virtue of the fact that they will have a captive audience.

I refuse to protest (since my student days) simply because any time any protest at NUI was ever invoked, the oiks from SWP reared their ugly heads and tried to represent me with their flag-waving and anti-capitalist ranting. I'm not anti-capitalist but I recognise flaws in the capitalist system and seek to have those addressed but not in the way SWP and their ilk would like me to.

Peaceful protest? Only if the radicals can sit this one out thanks

Rancidmaniac13

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

the other successful
approaches taken throughout history?

Can you elaborate on this a bit please?

I am not condoning this particular instance of violence overshadowing a peaceful protest but I do think that the assumption that all violence is bad should be questioned.

Do peaceful protests really achieve much?

Is there cause to respond to the institutional violence of the government and the police?

Violence flows both ways in society, normally from the ones with power towards the less powerful. It only makes big news when it goes the other way.

Again, I'm not associated with the SWP and I'm not trying to high-jack this thread. I am genuinely interested in this question and all the underlying assumptions that go with it. I have an open mind to any intelligent criticisms or comments.

sponsoredwalk

Bobby42 wrote: »

I was at the student march yesterday and even before it started the SWP were there encouraging everyone to protest like the french. right from the start they had their own agenda.

So protesting like the French is a bad thing? As for the agenda
argument, I mean the people in Leinster house can use this argument too,
"Them protesters just have their own agenda, it sickens me!". What kind
of an argument is that? We can go on for ever down this sinkhole and
get nowhere, everybody in the world has their own agenda ffs...

You might as well be honest and say they have an agenda that I don't
like. That's fine, I don't agree with a lot of people's agenda's but I do
agree with the reason people were protesting yesterday and if the SWP et al.
are the only one's organizing and leading the people out there what do
you expect???

Bobby42 wrote: »

they had their own socialist signs and posters that had nothing to do with what the students were marching for. the idea of the march was to literally just march to government buildings and then go home, obviously the SWP had other ideas. i'm not putting all the violence on the SWP, obviously students got involved too, but their presence didn't help and didn't contribute anything positive.

In a free country I respect anybodies right to carry signs for anything
they want. Obviously it annoys you when people express an opinion
different to that which you expected. I'm sorry you feel that way but
it's simply an integral part of our society, to allow people to express
themselves.

Het-Field

The Far Left have always had a penchant for violence.

I have seen it more then one. The far-left have just as many crazies in their ranks as the far right. Its amazing, they run around with their t-shirts with Che "the butcher" Guevara's face on it, and then start decreeing who should be entitled to freely express themselves on their own terms.

sponsoredwalk

Rancidmaniac13 wrote: »

Can you elaborate on this a bit please?

I am not condoning this particular instance of violence overshadowing a peaceful protest but I do think that the assumption that all violence is bad should be questioned.

Do peaceful protests really achieve much?

Is there cause to respond to the institutional violence of the government and the police?

Violence flows both ways in society, normally from the ones with power towards the less powerful. It only makes big news when it goes the other way.

Again, I'm not associated with the SWP and I'm not trying to high-jack this thread. I am genuinely interested in this question and all the underlying assumptions that go with it. I have an open mind to any intelligent criticisms or comments.

Thanks for the response. I'm not affiliated with SWP or anyone either but
I do believe protests and the associated things that go with them have,
throughout history, achieved the most benefit for ordinary people.
The violent ones don't do anything but bad in my opinion but they
also have led to social change, it's an unfortunate reality.
If you read my original post I'm asking for nothing but a peaceful
protest and to end all the stupid acts, but brb

I'm sorry but I'll write a detailed response later, please check back

granturismo

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Please don't sidetrack my thread again with irrelevant nonsense.

As r3 pointed out - the contribution was sarcastic and I thought it was very relevant.

sponsoredwalk

r3nu4l wrote: »

I'm pretty sure ( I hope I'm right) that Eliot was employing satirical humour.

I think protest is a fantastic idea but to be honest, more often than not, protests are hijacked by radical groups such as SWP who use these events for publicity and in the hope that piggybacking on such events will make their support base look a lot stronger than it actually is. They also know that they will have increased visibility and that their rhetoric will at least be heard (if not actually listened to or considered) by virtue of the fact that they will have a captive audience.

I refuse to protest (since my student days) simply because any time any protest at NUI was ever invoked, the oiks from SWP reared their ugly heads and tried to represent me with their flag-waving and anti-capitalist ranting. I'm not anti-capitalist but I recognise flaws in the capitalist system and seek to have those addressed but not in the way SWP and their ilk would like me to.

Peaceful protest? Only if the radicals can sit this one out thanks

I hope the SWP read this, this response is all over boards and while I
don't agree with it because you should be able to distinguish between
the crazy people and normal people I do acknowledge that protests
are hijacked when people do stupid violent things. For that reason I've
started this thread as it's so common a feeling.

But seriously, I've got maths to do, be back later

Wolfe Tone

There is a time and a plcae for violent protest. This is not it.


However, I would not describe standin in a dept building lobby as violent, or sitting down in Kildare street. Stick to that, just that and you will get somewere.

Eliot Rosewater

r3nu4l wrote: »

I'm pretty sure ( I hope I'm right) that Eliot was employing satirical humour.

I thought I was well enough know around these parts - and that people were open to little light-heartedness - to be able to have a satirical dig at the SWP. Apparently not...

Iwasfrozen

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

There is a time and a plcae for violent protest.

No there isn't.

sponsoredwalk

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I thought I was well enough know around these parts - and that people were open to little light-heartedness - to be able to have a satirical dig at the SWP. Apparently not...

I'm such a tool, apologies!

Wolfe Tone

There clearly is. Can you think of no situation were violent protest is necessary? Where all peaceful protest has been ignored?

Laminations

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

No there isn't.

Yes there is. All uprisings and mass revolutions are violent forms of protest. This 'never any justification' attitude was shown recently when Harney got paintbombed. While her being paintbombed may not have been justified (thats the debatable bit), it is untrue to say that it is never appropriate to paintbomb somebody.

feicim

peaceful protests are stupid. I'm going to organise a march to protest against so called "peaceful protests". And if the guards don't beat me up, I shall brutalise myself.

Bobby42

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

So protesting like the French is a bad thing? As for the agenda
argument, I mean the people in Leinster house can use this argument too,
"Them protesters just have their own agenda, it sickens me!". What kind
of an argument is that? We can go on for ever down this sinkhole and
get nowhere, everybody in the world has their own agenda ffs...

You might as well be honest and say they have an agenda that I don't
like. That's fine, I don't agree with a lot of people's agenda's but I do
agree with the reason people were protesting yesterday and if the SWP et al.
are the only one's organizing and leading the people out there what do
you expect???



In a free country I respect anybodies right to carry signs for anything
they want. Obviously it annoys you when people express an opinion
different to that which you expected. I'm sorry you feel that way but
it's simply an integral part of our society, to allow people to express
themselves.

I've no problem with people expressing themselves. I do however have a problem with the SWP hijacking the student march. let them organise their own march. the students were there to protest against fees and cutbacks. the swp were there for something else. i don't see how mixing different agendas into the same march helps either the usi or swp.

Eliot Rosewater

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

I'm such a tool, apologies!

Don't worry about it.

There was a serious point to my post, beneath all the silliness. During the Lisbon referendum, and at other times in between, people have come onto Boards to air their views, and then had those views dissected and shown to be proven false. Instead of admitting that their views were not well made they attack Boards.ie itself, and accuse Boards.ie of being some conspiracy. This way they can safety ignore everything that has been said to them.

You linked to this thread, and the first thing I thought was that the person who opens that may very dismiss Boards.ie as some anti-socialist conspiracy, or find some other interesting mechanism to justify ignoring views they disagree with here. I admire the fact that you did mail them, I just think that they live in such a different reality with regards to fundamentals, such as the use of violence in politics, that it will be impossible to change them around.

Dirk Gently

I thought your response was pretty spot on Eliot. You're obviously more aware of who and what the SWP are than other posters who didn't quiet get it.

The SWP see themselves as a revolutionary organisation. Their purpose is to agitate and infiltrate other organisations. They seek popular revolution as opposed to the ballot box while capitalism still dominates. While they do organise protests themselves, their speciality is infiltrating and taking over other protests from housing through all sorts of community grievances. They suggest setting up resident committees and then put forward their own members to run those committees, thus hijacking whatever the local cause may be to push their own agenda, which they see as legitimate ways to gather support.

Ironically they also put forward candidates in the people before profit alliance (the most successful of richard byodds attempts to front a sister "I cant believe its not the SWP party" organisation. I suppose its his revolution and ballot box strategy seen as how the SWP are all about revolution (infiltration , agitation ) and the PBP gives him the ballot box option. I suppose he saw the socialist party get some success in elections and wanted to capitilise :pac: on that, something he couldnt do while advocating revolution and non participation in capitalist elections for the SWP.

Eliot's response here would be typical of how an SWP member would respond. They are quiet irritating and they do infiltrate every potential movement, usually causing people to turn away from supporting what was originally there.

sponsoredwalk

Bobby42 wrote: »

I've no problem with people expressing themselves. I do however have a problem with the SWP hijacking the student march. let them organise their own march. the students were there to protest against fees and cutbacks. the swp were there for something else. i don't see how mixing different agendas into the same march helps either the usi or swp.

Read this post and tell me you still believe what you just wrote.

r3nu4l

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I thought I was well enough know around these parts - and that people were open to little light-heartedness - to be able to have a satirical dig at the SWP. Apparently not...

Oh you are, I was just hoping that you hadn't suddenly turned to the dark side

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Read this post and tell me you still believe what you just wrote.

Many years ago at NUIM there was a guy running for SU President who had some very flashy posters and manifestos, much flashier and more professional-looking than any of the others. He also had a very fervent support team. When asked was he a member of SWP or were they supporting him he publicly stated 'No'. However, someone had the presence of mind to remove one of his election posters from the wall and it turned out that the bottom part of every single poster that had been hung had been turned back on itself and folded behind the poster before the poster was blue-tacked to the wall. Guess what was written on the bottom bit of each poster...

If you guessed SWP then you don't win a prize but you are correct They were dumb about it to be honest because one of the campaign leaders was a very well known mouthy and militant SWP member. He should have stayed hidden in the back-room The candidate polled disastrously after that.

To be very honest with you we all know that groups like the SWP form many little spin-offs as a front for their activities. Many times this can't be proven but it's well known. Now I'm not saying the SWP were the cause of the violence but we all know that wherever they and their kind go, things get ugly quickly.

sponsoredwalk

Rancidmaniac13 wrote: »

Can you elaborate on this a bit please?

I am not condoning this particular instance of violence overshadowing a peaceful protest but I do think that the assumption that all violence is bad should be questioned.

Do peaceful protests really achieve much?

Sorry for the late response, it's a really interesting question though, I mean
it is something I'm still reading into to find out more about but I'll mention
some of the interesting things.

First off, my favourite, is a protest that actually failed

The Mai '68 protests in France were a failure in their stated aims,

May 1968 was a political failure for the protesters, but it had an enormous
social impact. In France, it is considered to be the watershed moment
when a conservative moral ideal (religion, patriotism, respect for authority)
shifted towards a more liberal moral ideal (sexual liberation) that today
better describes French society, in theory if not in practice.
Although this change did not take place solely in this one month, the term
mai 68 is used to refer to this general shift in principles, especially when
referring to its most idealistic aspects.

but they changed the country immensely. To me this is the classic
example of why it's important to keep the protest option open. The
country isn't shy about protesting now, nor is it shy about it's
moral perspective on life.

It's late so I'll just post a few links that are worth reading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_French_Caribbean_general_strikes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_day (very important)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Lock-out (both failed and succeeded in ways)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonstration_%28people%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Solidarity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Polish_strikes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protest
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fare_strike
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/oxfordshire/5393896.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Satyagraha
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quit_India_Movement
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_embargo (aparthied embargo, 130 countries protested!)

You get the idea

sponsoredwalk

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Don't worry about it.

There was a serious point to my post, beneath all the silliness. During the Lisbon referendum, and at other times in between, people have come onto Boards to air their views, and then had those views dissected and shown to be proven false. Instead of admitting that their views were not well made they attack Boards.ie itself, and accuse Boards.ie of being some conspiracy. This way they can safety ignore everything that has been said to them.

You linked to this thread, and the first thing I thought was that the person who opens that may very dismiss Boards.ie as some anti-socialist conspiracy, or find some other interesting mechanism to justify ignoring views they disagree with here. I admire the fact that you did mail them, I just think that they live in such a different reality with regards to fundamentals, such as the use of violence in politics, that it will be impossible to change them around.

Wow, that's pretty sad lol, but we are all aware of the point when
someone whose lost the foundations of their conversation resorts to
other technique's to save face. I'm sorry, I should have recognised
this was a joke simply from your sig, it would have reminded me of
your book thread lol I'd have no excuse except for utter stupidity
to link the opinion with the person then

Out of interest, these Lisbon conversations, was it people for or
against the measures that went all conspiracy claims? :pac: