We’re just getting started
This is just the start. Tonight’s vote was a terrible blow to our generation – to our country’s future. Our response may not have succeeded in preventing it. But we have woken Britain from her slumber. And that is a mighty feat. And because of that, tomorrow, the struggle continues.
The struggle continues because the attacks will continue. The Educational Maintenance Allowance has not yet been removed. And so we must defend it. University funding has not yet been cut. And so we must secure it. And these fees have not yet been signed into law. And so we can still stop them.
And the assault on the young and the poor doesn’t stop at the gates of our schools and our universities. Massive job cuts are hitting under 25s hardest. And as a generation is thrown onto the dole queue, the dole itself is being slashed and housing benefit sliced. And under 35s are taking the biggest portion of that, because we’ve committed the crime of being young under Cameron’s Conservatives.
And at the same time, we see youth centres decimated, school sports slashed, and the privatisation of under 18 education. And we are being forced to witness an historic failure to face the housing crisis which will make millions sick this winter, the bonfire of talent that comes with mass unemployment, and the climate crisis which endangers all we will build in our lifetimes.
And it’s not just the young who are being punished. It is women, disabled people, the sick, and anyone who can’t find a job. So if the hashtag of our uprising so far has been #solidarity then we must remember what that truly means. Because these people are our brothers and sisters and our neighbours and our grandparents and our friends.
And we don’t know what the government has in store for us next year, or the year after.
This is just the beginning, because we have lost a battle, but there’s a war we’re winning. The marches against the invasion of Iraq didn’t stop the bombing of Baghdad. But it may have prevented war with Iran and Syria. We have no idea what would have been next in the government’s drive to sell Britain to the highest bidder. But whatever it was, they’ll think twice. They thought we would be passive. They were wrong.
We didn’t stop the vote passing tonight. But that’s ok. Because this is just the beginning. We’re just getting started. And now that our alienated generation has woken from it’s slumber, now that our muscles are flexed, who knows what we can do next.
Yes perhaps there might be different circumstances where this could pose more of a problem in trying to influence change. Worth bearing in mind I think. Thanks for your responses to me on this Mark.
Now we’re all friends again, I think the real danger Matt points to is fetishisation of a particular protest tactic. The road protest of the early 90s are a good example of this, where tactics appropriate for particular times and places, like the direct action at Tyford Down, stopped being one tactic among many and became the default option.
In the same way I don’t think there was much choice but to campaign on HE funding through public protest, occupations and marches. That doesn’t mean that’s the only way we should campaign against cuts in the future. There may be times when a softly softly approach works better.
Appreciated Peter, and thanks Kevin for your apology.
Thanks Mark – Maybe the ‘backed into a corner reaction’ isn’t quite so applicable in these particular circumstances, although it did strike a chord with me thinking about how people can be prone to react like this.
Also, as you say I guess it is unrealistic to think that in this case the tories can be budged on driving through their ideologies while they have the chance, and aslong as the Lib Dems keep playing along with them they’ll have the majority to do so.
Oxford Kevin – Be very careful what you assume. I know there are people such as you describe with hidden agendas etc, but you are quite wrong to label me like that (very incorrectly might I add) with such speed and resolve. I’ll admit I’ve had my doubts about the impact that protesting like this can have, which I’ve voiced on here before, but I think that it is a legitmate view point for me to express to, and seek further thoughts and opinion from, other people with whom I feel closely aligned to politically, and it doesn’t mean I don’t agree with the cause, as you seem to also suggest.
Oh well, better get back under my bridge!…
Matt you have my apologies.
Kevin,
To be fair, I think Matt is genuinely repeating a Lib Dem line. The Lib Dem line is concern trolling. I don’t think Matt is. He’s a regular contributor to debate here, and is very sincere in his comments.
You’re quite right that what the Lib Dems are doing is concern trolling and should be rejected for the reasons you describe.
Peter
I think Matt is a Betroffenheitstroll or in English a concern troll.
The best definition I have found is this one: “The ‘concern troll,’ which I occasionally translate as Betroffenheitstroll, is a special variant (of troll). He acts as if he accepts the group consensus but places it indirectly in doubt by pretending to find problems in what he claims to be his own position, creating reasons why one should worry that the consensus is false. In truth, the concern troll does not agree with the consensus, but he tries to hide that.”
The purpose of the concern troll is to waste time and sew doubt.
We should never be dependent on back room deals. The pressure should come directly from people. Politicians will only respond to power and that power for most of us can only come from direct action and protests. The poll tax protests proved that.
The terms “wonder” and “just made me think…” have been commonly used by concern trolls in discussions on climate change for a long time. You soon recognize the behaviour.
Kevin
Hi Matt, I think the tory aim is clear – to move higher education from the public realm, as a public good paid from the public purse, to the private realm, paid by private individuals. It will cost more to provide higher education in this way, but the deficit is useful cover.
The tories (rightly) see this as their one chance in a generation to end socialised higher education – so a softly softly approach was even less likely than public disorder to make them change their minds.
Thanks Mark, yes you’re probably right there about the political spin, and I certainly agree with you about the Lib-Dems unforgivable backtracking here.
I just wonder, and I’m thinking perhaps more about the tories here (who are the real holders of power with the Libdems just being taken for a ride) if there is any truth in the argument that by backing them into a corner with a high profile aggressive campaign like this then you risk completely removing any possibility of change, because for the tories to shift their stance on anything at all after such public opposition it would just seem like so much more of a defeat for them, so they dig their heels in even further, rather than be open to any comprimise?
It just made me think, that’s all…
Completely agree with Noel. There were far more riots that went unreported. As for Middle England creating the about turn as stated by Sean Watters, they’re 90% NIMBYs and their self-interest has always been disgustingly evident and laughable to those in power. Lobby the huge conglomerates to become more ethical and greener to raise their social conscience and responsibility without solely worrying about their profits – people not profits should be the main concern.
Completely agree with Noel. There were far more riots that went unreported. As for Middle England creating the about turn as stated by Sean Watters, they’re 90% NIMBYs and their self-interest has always been disgustingly evident and laughable to those in power. Lobby the huge conglomerates to become more ethical and greener to raise their social conscience and responsibility without solely worrying about their profits – people not profits should be the main concern.
Matt, I think this is pure spin, and a rather feeble attempt to shift the blame onto student protestors, rather than backtracking lib-dem MPS.
Vince Cable and Nick Clegg nailed their colours so firmly to the mast in October, backing the hike in fees so strongly, that from that point on there was almost no room for compromise.
They chose to try to take the moral high ground, claiming that these proposals were in and of themselves a good thing, not just the least worst option. This gave them very little wiggle room. If they had been clearer that this wasn’t what they wanted it would have damaged coalition unity, but enabled them to claim a victory if there had been more significant concession.
However, Clegg, in particular, went out of his way to say that those opposing trebling fees did so from a position of ignorance. Therefore the only option for change was to try to get as many lib-dems as possible to rebel.
I heard an interesting point of view on tele this morning. A lib Dem MP I think it was, who was suggesting that the high profile nature of the protests actually stopped any progress being made by people ‘behind the scenes’ to try and get the government to compromise/change their plans. He was implying that the governement needed to be seen to be strong, especially during one of its first big pieces of legislation to go through parliament, and that as a result of the protests they would instead have appeared to be weak and surrendering to student pressure if they went back on anything.
Not sure what to think about this really. Any views?…
Could it be possible that, without high profile public opposition, negotiations and pressures from people within Westminister who were against the changes would have more chancee of being successful, as the government would risk much less perception of weakness if they conceded anything?
I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts on this, as I’m not sure about it all!
Actually Sean I think the mass non payment movement that had the riot in central london had just a little bit to do with ending thatcher and the poll tax, and despite your pessimism, the cuts are a similar situation in that everyone will be effected except the rich, now you can sit back and think the battle is lost before we start, but we won’t, and I believe that if we bring enough people together we will end this, unelected government. Yesterday we cut their majority by three quarters…this is only the start!
It wasn’t civil unrest that stopped the Poll Tax. It was the anger of ‘Middle England’ being stung by higher bills than they’d paid under the rates, leading to a self-interested calculation by Tory MPs that they were in danger of losing their seats and so a change of direction was required.
As cuts bite and people feel personal impacts the anger will grow, but it may not coalesce round a single issue and may be weaker for it. And the deferred nature of the tuition fees proposal means it’s unlikely to be a rallying point.