The Right To Protest Is Not Absolute

The UK’s Home secretary Theresa May banned all marches in 5 of London’s boroughs for a period of 30 days. This was carried out under the pretense of taking into consideration a petition signed by 25 000 persons asking for the EDL march through Tower Hamlets on the 3th of September 2011 to be banned. This kind of ban has little effect on the demonstration the EDL is still planning to have tomorrow. Instead of an out-and-about march they’ll have a static demonstration but still be allowed to parade through Tower Hamlets under police escort since they will have to move from their meeting place to their final destination where the static demo will take place. The fact remains that the EDL will have their demonstration and that there will be counter protests.

Since this specific ‘ban’ didn’t work it’s extremely unsettling that whilst they should be mobilising to stand with the local community against the racist and Islamophobic EDL, the left chooses to enter into a nonchalant and rather confusing ‘debate’ on ‘The Right To Protest’. All in an effort to scrutinise the government’s manipulation of a specific event, the EDL march, and a specific request by a minority, the petition to ban the EDL from marching, and to delegitimise protest as a whole. The Government should be attacked for reacting in such an over-the-top manner and trying to curb civil liberties in a covert manner. It’s still nonchalant to make a connection between the ban on marches by the government, the right to protest and the EDL march as has been the usual way of conducting the ‘debate’ by the left. Because by using this connection it is implied that the EDL has a right to protest. And this is where it gets confusing.

Confusing since linking the EDL with The Right To Protest does not make any sense at all. The framework within which Human Rights operates is one where rights are not absolute, but rather relative. This means that the Right To Protest is a right, as long as it does not infringe upon other rights. The EDL has shown in the past that it’s more than comfortable with its racist aim of marginalising and demonising the Muslim minority in the UK and elsewhere to fit their racist political agenda. Their previous marches have also made clear that the EDL’s invasion into majority Muslim boroughs have an objective of seeking violent confrontation with those hated ‘others’. This means that the EDL has no interest in local communities’ rights which their presence violates in the worst manner. The local communities’ rights that are infringed upon include The Right to Religious Freedom, The Right not to be Discriminated Against, The Right to Equality and The Right to Safety.

There’s no doubt that the debate’s topics must be separated and handled with care. Shouldn’t we be clearly stating that the EDL must be opposed and that this racist group has no right to protest nor the freedom of expression to spread hatred and disruption in local minority communities? Shouldn’t the government’s efforts to curb rights rather than to facilitate those rights, as is their role in the HR framework, be treated separately from the EDL ban, so as to not give the impression that a Conservative government has our best interest at heart?

And finally shouldn’t we mobilise to the fullest for the counter protests tomorrow in Tower Hamlets? The national demonstration against the English Defence League on 3 September will now assemble in Whitechapel. The new assembly point is 11am, corner of Vallance Road and Whitechapel Road, London E1.

Nous Sommes Le Pouvoir

On White Moderates

“I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

Martin Luther King Jr.

Why We Still Need The World Social Forum

This is a response to this and a crosspost from here.

I must confess that I’ve never made it to an actual World Social Forum or European Social Forum. It was certainly not due to a lack of trying or will, but there was always something preventing me from making the trip. In 2004 for the London ESF I got caught up in a rather bizarre car accident with fellow activists trying to make it from Greece to the UK. For the 2005 WSF in Porto Alegre I got stuck in Mexico as I miscalculated how long it would take me to hitchhike from the USA down to Brazil. The 2009 WSF in Bélem I missed simply because I couldn’t afford the plane fare. And just last year I even forgot that there was an ESF taking place in Istanbul.

Thankfully, due to the means of modern communication, I could still follow what was going on during the forum meetings. That’s also how I keep myself up-to-date today as the 10th World Social Forum proceeds in Dakar.

I must say that I’ve always found myself in awe with the whole concept of the WSF, dating back to when it was established in 2001. A global meeting to debate, formulate and exchange ideas and proposals, all oriented towards the ultimate goal and motto of “Another World is Possible” just strikes an emotional chord in me. But looking at the bigger picture the World Social Forums provided a source of public condemnation, resistance, and mobilisation against the wrecking neo-liberal thinking that currently rules our world. If anything is proven by the last decade and the current financial crisis is that whatever is attempted by civil society present at the WSF’s isn’t just naive ramblings of few or ideological extremism by leftist elements. Simply put; 10 years later the vision of the WSF still stands firm in opposition to deals that are closed in Davos.

It is true that the WSF has reached a crossroad. But this isn’t the first crossroad the WSF has encountered since its inception. The movement has proven to deal with the criticisms and adapt to it with every meeting. The greatest example of this is how different the WSF works today after the protests at the 2007 Nairobi WSF. So instead of asking whether we still need the forum as a global civil society the better question would be how we could cross it.

From what I hear and have read of what is happening in Dakar civil society is answering the previous question. And not just that. The following questions are also discussed.

1 – Do we still need thousands of delegates to fly from across the world to meet together?

With 70 thousand during the opening march, 1.200 self-organised activities, 132 countries present from all the continents and 75 thousand overall participants I would like to think that the numbers speak for themselves. It is however true that numbers are down for this WSF, as they also were for the ESF in Istanbul.

But I find that devaluing this as the death of the movement is pretty harsh. Especially when one needs to take into consideration on how the financial crisis has also taken its toll on the funds of civil society. It’s only logical that NGOs are simply limiting the number of delegates, and individuals are opting for local meetings in this current financial climate. This doesn’t diminish the multiplier effect of those who will have attended the forum nor does it limit the information flow that is coming out of Dakar.

I don’t believe that the WSF would ever lose its unique place as an open space for civil society. It’s always good to remember that civil society presence at governmental meetings, like the climate talks in Copenhagen and most recently in Cancun, are at the grace of the governments present. Something that was made very clear to the participating NGOs during the COP15. Civil society should never be used like during the COP15, painting a picture perfect of inclusion and participation in the global governments discussion making process, because it simply isn’t true. We should all be aware of the kind of image we’re giving governments by partaking in their schemes. That foul stench also affects the perception of civil society around the globe.

It may be unfortunate but the WSF and its regional offshoots still remain as 1 of the very few open places where global civil society can state that there is an alternative to neo-liberal ideology and the corporate ownership of the world. Every day it becomes more clear that our current system is stretched to the limits of what our planet, society, economy can handle.

2 – Does the Forum help to amplify alternative voices, or simply provide an echo chamber to preach to the converted?

It’s true that the presence of left-wing populist politicians like Lula, Morales and Chavez get a lot of attention when they talk at the WSF. But let’s not kid ourselves. They get that amount of attention everywhere they go because their policies are a direct proof that another form of society and economy is possible. It’s also worth noting that the WSF still is a place for civil society and that political party representatives, members of parliament and heads of states are meant to participate in ‘personal capacity’. Their actual place is in the ‘World Parliamentary Forum and the ‘Forum of Local Authorities.

The WSF is as such not just a political space for social movements to fight the neoliberal globalisation. It is also a technical networking forum for sharing information, knowledge, experiences, best practices and different perspectives. The importance of such a forum for civil society in the Global South can not be underestimated.

With the WSF taking place in the Global South it also minimises the effect all knowing Northerners can have on these exchanges. This shows that the issue of domination of the North is tackled whilst fully empowering the Global South.

It’s very clear that the forum as such recognises that the traditional media outlets have not been receptive. That’s why there will be much talk during the forum itself about how the battle over information should now be given top priority. But we shouldn’t overestimate what traditional media can do. The effect multipliers who come back stimulated and energised from the WSF shouldn’t be underestimated.

3 – What has the World Social Forum actually achieved?

Whilst the anti-war protests of 2003 can certainly be contributed to efforts the movement made, it certainly is not the only thing the forum has achieved. I would consider the creating of an open space where participants learn new information, ideas, and ways of thinking, in panels, workshops, information fairs, and informal discussions, a massive achievement. Considering that participants even learn how an alternative world might work by modelling it and implementing it during the event. The Forum as such establishes connections between people who otherwise might not have met, by bringing together activists from many different countries, movements, and issues.

Another achievement of the WSF has been its ability to decentralise, now held every two years in a different continent in the Global South, and link it to experiences and policies that are rooted on the ground through the continental, regional or local forums. This all should be considered achievement enough, but the mere fact that this past decade and the current financial crisis has provided a vigorous confirmation of both the critique and the premise that inspired the World Social Forum must top that.

The World Social Forum still has a massive following, without it the organisation of the event would not be possible. I for one hope that the people’s power, the power of civil society coming together as they do in WSF will eventually lead to “Another World”. And if it doesn’t I am certain that the WSF will object the same way it has done this past decade.

For now I’ll just stick to following what’s happening in Dakar through Facebook, Skype, live streams, blogs and Twitter.

Tuition fees demo ‘may be hijacked’

London Calling

I Also Shouted Push

I know I’m extremely late in proclaiming my solidarity. I thought about putting this online the moment the “I also shouted Push” campaign started but somehow I didn’t get around to actually putting it online. And with today’s news that the 2 Climate activists have been found guilty of inciting violence against the police during the “Reclaim Power” action during last years COP15 held in Copenhagen, it only felt right to post this now.

I was there. During the “Reclaim Power” action. I also shouted PUSH. One of the mere thousands who were trying to push through the police barriers and hold a people’s assembly inside the Bella Center where our supposed leaders were disappointing the world by not coming up with a fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement to tackle Climate Change.

I witnessed firsthand how brutal the Police itself was in treating the protesters. They head butted, kicked and pepper sprayed activists whilst they were protesting in a non-violent manner. I myself got pepper spray in my eyes and multiple kicks in my groin for being in the first line to try to get in the Bella Center. Nicely squished between police and the activist force.

Therefor this sentencing of the Climate activist is too ridiculous for words. Because if there were any that had trouble breathing it were the activists present, not the f*cking cop’ers with their gasmasks.

If you’re going to break a window, smack it near the corner not in the middle. People don’t realise this. I am definitely not advocating breaking windows.

the T-ruth on Stonewall, Trans Erasure and Whitewashing