[g8-sheffield] assuring our right to demonstrate

[@mp]

> I think that this exchange has opened up some important issues; It's
not yet
> clear that we can't achieve consensus, but I'd like to hear other
points of
> view before suggesting a different wording.


OK, then perhaps Critical Mass representatives will not approve either...


Skeptically (apologies, but truly sceptically), who does believe that
the police this time will allow a demonstration in the town centre?
As for "handing control" I agree with J.S. that even if only
*symbolically* that shouldn't happen.
BTW, legal observers are reassuring to protesters.


> I'm not anticipating any disorder, instead we should try to
> anticipate the
>> public battle we have to wage to assert our right to demonstrate.

Thank you, JS, and Jillian, and all who are negotiating actively
on behalf of the others: this is already a public (or semi-public)
battle going on.



Please have your saying too,
Thank you for your open mind

amp





John Smith wrote:
> Our main concern must be to do what we can to get the biggest
> possible demonstration in the town centre. To do this, we have to
> work out a route with the police. But this is very different from
> limply handing control of *our* demonstration over to the police. We
> assert our intention to take responsibility ourselves for the conduct
> of our protest.
> 
> You ask: "what kinds of disorder are you anticipating that the
> stewards are going to be tackling? I can't think on any example of
> something happening on demos in Sheffield that has required this kind
> of stuff..."
> 
> I'm not anticipating any disorder, instead we should try to
> anticipate the public battle we have to wage to assert our right to
> demonstrate.
> 
> 



> Dear Chris
> 
> I'm not suggesting we demand that the police don't turn up, I'm
> trying to establish the principle that we don't need and don't want
> the police to police *our* demonstrations.
> 
> You say "The two of the best demonstrations I can remember in
> Sheffield, the Mayday 200 one and the one on the day war against Iraq
> started didn't have defined routes, in a situation like that the
> stewards would have ended up being left on their own by everyone..."
> 
> Such a spontaneous action as those you mention is very different to
> the context and nature of *this* demonstration. For one thing,
> Sheffield wasn't crawling with armed police and CIA like it will
> be... In fact, day one of the war met with very light policing. The
> whole question of security is at the opposite extreme this time. A
> small incident can quickly escalate out of hand. We must give people
> confidence that we are in control of our own demonstration, not the
> police - and neither any small group who might think about sitting
> down or straying from the agreed route. What is wrong with asking all
> who join the march to abide by the route and assist the work of the
> stewards in ensuring that the march proceeds?
> 
> Our main concern must be to do what we can to get the biggest
> possible demonstration in the town centre. To do this, we have to
> work out a route with the police. But this is very different from
> limply handing control of *our* demonstration over to the police. We
> assert our intention to take responsibility ourselves for the conduct
> of our protest.
> 
> You ask: "what kinds of disorder are you anticipating that the
> stewards are going to be tackling? I can't think on any example of
> something happening on demos in Sheffield that has required this kind
> of stuff..."
> 
> I'm not anticipating any disorder, instead we should try to
> anticipate the public battle we have to wage to assert our right to
> demonstrate.
> 
> 
> I think that this exchange has opened up some important issues; It's
> not yet clear that we can't achieve consensus, but I'd like to hear
> other points of view before suggesting a different wording.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> John S
> 
> 
> 
>