'as long as you don't destroy them’ (Anarchy in the UK)

Member Name: samantha

Product:	Anarchy in the UK
Date:	04/05/01 (18 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: none

Disadvantages: see below

‘So tired of anarchists looking at me don't need their credibility "destroy," they say, "defy! condemn!" as long as you don't destroy them’

(Adam Ant/Marco Pirroni )

An anarchist is defined as anyone who ‘rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power.

Personally as someone who believes in the necessity of, and is interested in the law I have always been very dismissive of the idea of anarchy. However as someone who does not claim to be very well versed in politics the ideals behind anarchism escape me, to the best of my understanding anarchy is against hierarchy and therefore authority. And that anarchists want a society without an economic or political
hierarchy.

I understand that hierarchies create those who have and those who have not and I’m afraid that I will argue till I am blue in the face that this is the natural state for a civilised society, structure and order and law. A good hierarchy will do its best to iron out the injustices that this necessary structure can create for those further down the ladder.

From this clearly limited viewpoint it would be difficult for me to launch into a diatribe against anarchy. In which case I would like to look at the perceptions and the ‘image problems’ that are created by people who label themselves anarchist.

The recent May Day protests clearly showed that there are a lot of different groups who buy into the theory wholesale, but by far more that accept that certain social ills are caused by globalisation and I think they have every right to say so PEACEFULLY. AS I was interested in how they approached the legal side in the run up to the May Day riot, what the protesters were advised to do, I visited the web site of the The International Lobster Party (Directed from a number of sites including reclaim the streets). They explain that;

‘May 1st became known as a day
of action, solidarity and resistance for the oppressed world-wide to commemorate the Hay market Massacre in Chicago, 1886. Though hijacked for many years by the authoritarian left for dull marches and displays of military power, the last few years have seen Mayday re-discovered as a day of global grassroots protest and carnival’

Legal advice was on site, (only 2 pages). The 2 pages consisted of ‘If you are arrested, don’t panic’ (fair enough), ‘don’t talk’ (why if you are trying to make your views more widely know?), ‘you’ll soon be out’ (depends what you have done!) and the second page was just the solicitor on calls number and address.

This did not seem to be enough information to enable people to be aware of their legal position, public order law is very complete, the law on assault and GBH can easily be transgressed without even realising it (spitting on someone is actually assault). Everyone has a right to be informed of their legal rights and obligations and they should have made much more of an attempt to make these clear rather than 1) don’t talk and 2) ring these solicitors.

I understand that this protest would not have been subject to the rigorous policing that would have arrested persons for minor crimes. Complaints that the police have approached the policing of the protest in a rather gun ho fashion can be explained by the fact they were clearly expecting trouble after last year. If a dog bites you every time you put your hand down to stroke it, you will approach with caution and the expectation of being bitten.

The image problem is something that can be explained in two ways. 1)Many people who believe in the ideals cannot have a platform to say so as the country would not welcome academics/speakers etc with open arms who it was believed would support the erosion of the order of society 2) A lot of the people involved (and I’m sorry) are hypocrit
es. The reclaim the streets protests in Nottingham have always seen a flood of people enter the city in cars, buses etc (giving money to those nasty capitalists who supply petrol, run national travel networks). A friend of mine who ‘believes’ in anarchy – lives in a house owned by his well off parents, called the police when his house was robbed, claimed on the insurance and works for a communications firm – am I missing something, I’m more radical than that.

Now many of the groups have some very worthwhile agendas. For example Peoples Global Action against "Free" Trade and the World Trade Organisation (PGA). State they;

‘Reject all forms and systems of domination and discrimination including, but not limited to, patriarchy, racism and religious fundamentalism of all creeds.’

and

We embrace the full dignity of all human beings.

I don’t think you can argue with these objectives but rather than waving flags in the street why not accept the current social structure, even grudgingly, and work within it to make things better. I have many complaints about the treatment of minorities, university funding, human rights, George ‘ One cucumber short of a picnic’ Bush. But to effect the status quo its best to work inside the system, it’s the only way that you will be listened to. And god forbid you should actually make a difference because then you will become ‘one of them’ and someone will be waving banners and spitting outside your door.

Summary: