Friday 3 April 2009

G20 Financial Fools Day: I was there


(This was the intended article on the G20 protests due to go up for Harry's Place, however in haste my e-mail to them was mistakenly put up instead.)

The sound of smashing glass from the RBS branch there were followed by cheers from the crowd, and as protesters pelted fruit and plastic bottles at police officers stood high on the steps of the Bank of England, I advised friends that we should leave before anything got worse. I had been to the G20-Meltdown rally that day, not as a ‘revolutionary’ or an anti-capitalist, but rather as a pro-capitalist classical liberal, expressing my concern over the way in which the Labour Government has handled the economy. I should have known however that once the first scaffolding rail had pierced the dull glass of RBS, none of that now mattered, my opinion was irrelevant.

The front of the Daily Express the next day had the headline ‘Anarchy does not rule UK’, its following coverage making a fervent and unashamed hard line against yesterdays protesting hoards. A photo on the cover of the newspaper showed demonstrators clashing with a gauntleted police officer, above the line ‘...police clashed with demonstrators trying to force their way into the City’, however as many other media outlets since have reported, a very opposite scenario had in fact occurred.

Rushing from the middle of Threadneedle St to the back of the four-thousand strong rally, I squeezed my way to the line of police blocking the road ahead only to be denied exodus. Two strongly linked chains of florescent garbed officers, separated by a bus-length, held back the few hundred wishing entry to the rally and prevented those inside from leaving. Members of the press were refused past the line, as were the elderly, and it did not go unnoticed that a young man with a seemingly severe head injury was also denied from exiting the scene. Chants ensued “let us out!”, “shame on you!” and one individual shouted impatiently at officers claiming his wife was in labour at the hospital.

An hour soon passed, and scuffles began as determined protestors scarped between lines only to be dived on, handcuffed and dragged away by more officers. The use of the surrounding walls as a urinal block was a sure sign that things were becoming dire, and as rumours of prolonged kettling for another two hours spread throughout the crowd, subtle pushing began. United only by common treatment and a desire to leave, the disgruntled caged masses surrounding the Bank of England had had enough of the interpreted disregard for British liberty. As banners waved and horns sounded a charge began on both sides of the divide, and as the oppressive chains disintegrated before us, officers fell back, retreating and regrouping with a keen desire to re-establish control.

With the chain now gone, I and my pro-capitalist cohorts swiftly left the scene, making our way to St Paul’s underground with a yearning to move on. The police later arrested the few who had caused most of the trouble, and subsequent reports suggested that control was later established after remaining protesters were allowed to drain away. The day had been eventful and enlightening to say the least, but the taste of appal was still in my mouth, after all how could the footsoldiers of Scotland Yard have acted in such a manner? Simply being in that crowd had evidently meant that our right to leave was denied by the state, the core foundations of liberty had not been allowed us any longer.

In contrast, to the oppressive 'kettling' techniques which protesters experienced on Wednesday, was the reaction of the metropolitan police when in January of this year- hundreds rioters took to the streets of Kensington in protest at the Israeli invasion of Gaza. How did the police react to this variety of protestors? See for yourselves:

Tuesday 20 January 2009

Quid es Veritas?


A few weeks ago, notably on the Isle of Man, I attended a public lecture by historian Professor Ronald Hutton of Bristol University quaintly entitled 'The Druids', in which the Professor articulated on the history of Druidry in Britain and its Isles. Perched afront a sea of bleary eyed, bearded, woolen garbed representatives from the modern Druid community, and members of the local intelligencia, Professor Hutton spoke about the historical evidence backing up the existence such a world-renowned ancient religion, or lack thereof, and its relevance today. Having pulled apart some of the myths perpetuated about ancient Druidism in Britain, he went on to suggest that despite historical sources, principly that of the Roman- Tacitus for which nearly all understanding of British Druidism is based, it seemed more than probable that no such religion or movement officially existed here. He even went on to say that the word Druid, from the word druidae was actually the name of a barbaric individual refered to by the ancient Greeks and that this had ultimately been misunderstood by chroniclers over time.

Once having swiftly dismantled the historical basis for such a religion, assumedly leaving many in the hall wondering how sure they were of themselves, he then went on to the revival of Druidism as a Germanic reaction to renaissance Italy, its subsequent spreading throughout Europe, and to the modern Druid movement and its early beginnings in C18th London. What astonished me most was that the heckles of "Rubbish!", and other such remarks from severely unkempt members of the audience upon hearing Prof Hutton suggest that modern Druidism was nothing more than a dressing-up club spurred on by remnants of the 60s hippy-generation, were evidence that his lecture was having little or no effect on the mindsets of those self-acclaimed 'Druids'.

Overall the lecture was highly insightful and extremely enjoyable, and I am glad to say was evidently appreciated by the majority of the audience, whom later rewarded Professor Hutton with great applause. Upon leaving the lecture theatre however I couldn't help but realise what this might actually have signified in the grander scheme of things. You see religion, it would seem, does not value the importance of evidence, fact or reason, and does not apparently care for the logic behind its practices or origins. The only obvious truth in religion is that it is community, a set of mutually benefitial tribes of likeminded people who deep down do not really care if what they believe is proved to be fabricated or forged. The overwhelming temptation for an instinctively tribal, naturally social animal to 'belong' to any social group is almost impossible to resist; and modern advancements in science, medicine, anthropology, philosophical growth and even the enlightenment period still (it would seem) cannot break the overpowering desires of those whom purport to be 'the religious', to be just that. But then again, as Jonathan Swift once said, it is useless to attempt to reason someone out of an attitude which they were never reasoned into.

(Picture 1: British Druids at Stonehenge.)