Skip to content or view screen version

I am so Jealous of Paris

Gary24 | 18.03.2006 19:48

After what i have seen this week and 3months ago I am so jealous from Parisians and so sad to be from London and England.

Three months ago we had the working-class rioting against the government from the Banlieus and this week we see the middle-class students rioting against the government.

While watching the pictures i am pleased to see French people standing up for themselves against the real violence of the government and the real criminals who are the police but i am also jealous beacause in my country i see nothing.

Londoners are soft, Londoners and apathetic and Londoners need to start having some self-respect and start believing in something.

We have to copy our French brothers and bring protests to the streets of London to the similar oppressive Laws and oppressive Police we have here.

LET FREEDOM RING!!!!!!!!

Gary24

Additions

why is this here?

19.03.2006 09:31

Sorry what is the news here? That you like rioting?

1. This isn't a bulletin board so why is your post here? It's not news, and it doesn't add to my understanding of the situation.
2. Your point is crap. It's not a bloody game, it's a dirty, violent business that should be done with great reluctance when there's no other option. Yes the French fight back, and good on em, but being jealous of the fact they're having to take on trained police in riot gear, armed only with rocks, to voice their dissent at a draconian new law is just bloody stupid. Be jealous of the rights the French have defended while we gave ours away, not of the fact they're having to do it again now.
3. Londoners (incidentally, there's an entire country outside London which is also in existence, it's called the UK) aren't soft, they're defeated and divided. The British government is a great deal more clever at doing these things than the French. Insulting peoples' will to fight is just irritating and a piss-poor analysis of the situation.

Saii


bring it on

19.03.2006 13:30

We're not going to achieve change without challenging the authorities and that means violence - and breaking with hegemonic notions that prevent us from achieving our goals. Drop the faux fleet street pretensions and shut the fuck up - the time to fight is now!

people of the world unite!


Go on then

19.03.2006 16:48

I await the results with interest. Anything you're going to be fighting for in particular? Or will it be just to get that monumental chip off your shoulder?

Seriously though do you actually read anything that you post? Capitalism won't stop because of a riot, it will stop when communities linked by bonds of mutual goodwill, and industries filled with people who want a better world, decide it. And you don't build goodwill by calling people weak. You don't build solidarity by proclaiming riots as something to be jealous of. You do it by sensibly and reasonably building from the ground up a sense that self-preservation is about fighting your neighbour's corner against all-comers. Calls to arms ONLY work when you have the trust of others, when you have proven you aren't just some wild-eyed maniac who thinks a couple of scraps with the police will end an all-pervasive social/economic/political system.

France has something closer to that level of mutual trust, we don't. That's a major reason why people in the UK don't fight, and French people do. It's also why this mindless sloganeering is counterproductive - you are not trustworthy, and you have shown nothing to suggest you are. Why should your statement be anything but dismissed out of hand? Why should your post be worthwhile filling up a major platform like indymedia, displacing real journalism or useful commentary?

What is the point?

Saii


Opinion in a comment box

19.03.2006 19:36

But I'm not arguing that riots are a bad thing, I'm arguing that they're sometimes a necessary evil in the face of governmental excess, but they should not be painted as anything other than what they are. There's a very good reason why people are sickened by governmental glorification of violence - people get hurt - so why does this suddenly not apply any more when it comes to ordinary folks vrs the state? By all means laud the people doing it, but you wont get much support if you're saying 'I wish we had riots over here', because no-one with two bain cells to rub together wants to get caught in a baton charge if they can help it.

I'm not arguing against organising either, in fact that's precisely what I'm arguing for. But you AREN'T arguing for ogranising. You're arguing that you and whoever is impressionable enough to follow you to take to the streets with no plan and no solid base of support, and imploring people who don't trust you to do the same simply because you say so. I'd love to have hundreds of thousands out on the streets to fight injustice, but I'm also a realist, you have to build the structures to allow that to happen long before you try anything, or it a) gets crushed b) gets everyone arrested c) makes no impact.

I'm fighting capitalism every day, I'm just smart enough to realise that limited resources should be used wisely and not frittered away on idiot schemes which have no long-term realism and don't contribute in any meaningful way to the cause. Calling for riots in a situation where society is atomised, divided and unable to even run its own communities effectively is pissing in the wind. What should be called for is the rebuilding of community so that the support base for effective resistance to be called can eventually be viable.

I am posting comments on your 'article', not putting something up on the newswire - that's the function of the comment box. If you wish to comment on breaking news, I suggest you use the fucking comment box like everyone else, or find a forum and stop publishing slogans on the front of the site as though they should carry the same level of authority as proper reportage or even proper analysis. It's crap like this filling up the site that makes the 'promotion' wire necessary.

Saii


Comments

Hide the following 11 comments

blog

18.03.2006 20:40

blog with 24 coverage:
 http://www.libcom.org/blog/

sofuckingeasy
mail e-mail: latedaylight@yahoo.co.uk
- Homepage: http://www.libcom.org/blog/


OVERTHROW THE CRIMINAL REGIME

18.03.2006 22:53

Something to consider.

Reclaiming the “Orange Revolution”
by Jordan Thornton
 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Sept05/Thornton0918.htm

Don't Give Up, Don't Accept Anything Less


WAKE UP!!!!!!!!

19.03.2006 03:56

LONDON, LIVERPOOL, GLASGOW, BIRMINGHAM, MANCHESTER, LEEDS, BRISTOL, SHEFFIELD, everywhere in Britain needs to WAKE UP QUICK

Big Straight Al


London riots.

19.03.2006 08:13

We have riots in London too, but admittedly not enough.

Checkout:

 http://www.geocities.com/londonriots/chronology.html

Alf Narkist


time time is now!

19.03.2006 17:23

You said earlier that people feel divided and defeated - the way to end this is to start organising now - and practicing - our politics : part of a long path towards dissolving power and devolving decision making to the lowest possible levels. People need to practice and experience power, to taste victory against authority and capitalism to organise more effectively. This leads to an increase in peoples' confidence and experience and leads to further victories in the struggle against capitalism and statism. Following laws and submitting to authority is actually a practice of impotence. And it is an abrogation of our responsibilities as well. Rioting is effective - and this is why there are so many laws and attempts to prevent rioting. I swear that if the 2million strong demo against the Iraq war had kicked off, we would have had our only serious chance of stopping the war. As it was, the peaceful march was actually used by Blair and co to justify their invasion of Iraq ("You believe what you believe - and I believe that going to war is right. So there!").

There are always people trying to put the brakes on peoples desires; often their real reason for doing so is that they are scared of people taking responsibility for their own actions and hence dissolving the power of those who presently hold it; this is often dressed up with words such as "the time isn't right". What this really translates to is "the time isn't right for us to benefit from your action so please don't try it". This is something that opposition politicians do all of the time; Trade Union leaders are other prime examples: think May 68 for example.

Finally, have you ever thought about what 'opinion' actually means? Why argue against 'opinion' pieces on Indymedia while hypocritically doing precisely what you argue against? Just because you feel it 'isn't the time' to fight capitalism doesn't mean that you are right. It is simply your opinion. So please stop masquerading as the voice of reason - you are no more and no less entitled to your views than anyone else. And get with it - all of this is opinion. Everything is opinion in the end so if you don't like it you'd better get used to it.

Voice of Opinion


I'm with Saii on this one.

19.03.2006 17:36

Could we have some examples please from recent history of when rioting has actually achieved anything apart from engendering wider public hostility to the particular movement the violence was supposedly supporting?

I can't actually think of any myself. Perhaps someone would enlighten me?

artaud


Not Really Violence

19.03.2006 17:38

The main point for me is that the riots are not that violent in comparison to the violence of Corporations.

In riots u have a small amount of burnt cars, some smashed windows and a few injured. But with N.I.K.E for example you have 10,000s working in virutal slave labour and being humilated on a daily basis.

Gary24


Importance

20.03.2006 00:24

The importance of what going on is so much that it is worth the space. The point of my post is to state the problems in British society.

Gary24


IM Volunteers Hide Unpopular Views as Opinion and Make Additions of Popular Ones

20.03.2006 14:37

This debate has turned into a farce now. Saii's comments are now labelled as 'additions', whilst the articles that led to those 'additions' are hidden in the 'comments section'. This is despite the fact that both sides have opinions to make - one of which goes counter to hegemonic notions of what is acceptable.

Saii rails against the newswire being used to promote 'opinion' - though he has failed to say where 'opinion' and 'fact' end; every newspaper would be consigned to the dustbin using the strictest definition that he seems to be arguing for on the newswire. Even deciding to post on a certain subject is an act of power and opinion: that someone feels something should be reported over and above something else. Trotting out accepted notions and the majority view doesn't make an opinion correct either.

Yet in a farcical move, we now see his/her opinions 'upgraded' for all to see by an Indymedia volunteer - which amounts to promotion of one side of the argument to the detriment of the other by the very medium that states it's independence. I thought Indymedia was trying to get away from 'opinion' by hiding the comments. Now I see what this partial hiding can actually amount to: promotion of 'popular' views (as 'Additions') and the hiding of 'unpopular' ones as 'Comments'. All decided at a whim by the Indymedia Volunteer who dresses themselves in the lofty principles of Indymedia while failing to check their own partiality.

Now that is something to moan about: unlike the original complaint, that an article consists more of 'opinion' than 'fact'.

Opinion


Not to be promoted - opinion only !

21.03.2006 00:34

I don't think the promotion/hidden system is intrinsically bad.
I've criticised IM even more heavily in the past for inconsistent admin decisions to hide comments, and I complained when I got one 'promoted'.

Promoting a comment that is part of an argument does make the argument much more difficult to follow, you have to check the time-stamps to see the context. It's okay if a particular comment only references the original article though, and its okay for IM volunteers to promote or hide as long as they are as consistent and transparent and thick-skinned as possible.

I only used to post here on the odd occasion I'd actually done an action, but if rightwingers are allowed to comment - and they often do -then I will too. Most comments are mostly opinion but if they are all just opinion it becomes dull and pointless, the IM volunteers feel the need to stress it I guess which explains the boxes. It's easy enough to spice up any comment with the odd fact. Although I'm struggling to do so with this one.

So if you have just facts or just a response to the original article, then it is worthy for consideration to be promoted. If you are getting involved in the subsequent arguments then I agree your article shouldn't be promoted. Better software could solve this glitch and they are requesting help just now, or if you hate the admins you could always volunteer to become one. And then they can take the night off and bitch about your decisions.

sin


More comment

21.03.2006 10:36

I have nothing to do with promotions to additions, tis up to the indymedia admins, though i agree there probly should have been more context added to that bit of the thread if it's going to be done.

The difference between reportage, analysis and opinion of the sort expressed at the top of this page is that the first two add new understanding of a piece of news, either by adding information, or by finding a new angle on it and then fully explaining that angle.

In order for news to be taken seriously, it must a) Provide facts* to back the assertions contained in the story (ie. this, this and this happened, in this context). In order for analysis to be taken seriously, it needs to have facts backing the assertions (again), and usually it will be written by someone with a direct link to the situation or at least some provable degree of expertise in the subject. That's how news works, again, you need the level of trust before you can make any observations that a wider public than your mates will read and agree with.

This, on the other hand, was an unnecessary and irrelevant assertion on the state of Londoners compared to the French which was highly insulting, badly thought through, and there was no reason to take the writer seriously. See the difference? I have no problem with it being written, Gary's entitled to his opinon (disagree with it though I may), I have a problem with it being put up with undue prominence on the newswire's front page, where it undermines better work.

*And yes, I'm aware of the philosophical argments surrounding use of the word, thankyou, but in a newswire context it's fairly obvious what is meant, and pretending that there is no difference is pointless if this newswire is to have any kind of useful outreach function.

Saii