No we can't!

Obama says yes we can! Seems we can't here... Hild tried to join the G20 protest today but the police had blocked off the economic district (the area around the Bank of England). This meant that protesters were dispersed, and the level of antipathy far less visible than it should have been. The blocking also meant that anger was geared at the police when it should have been leveled at the nominal issues for which people were protesting. The reason for these 'emergency' measures was the violence of early protesters. But where is the line? How violent is violent? Furthermore, the peaceable climate camp near Liverpool Street was blocked-off later in the day, neither letting people into the area nor out: there was no violence visible to justify these measures. As well as these major grievances, I am concerned by how unwilling people were, upon seeing the police barricade, to remain close to the central part of the protest: most left, assuming if they were not with the main protesting body, they would not perform a significant enough role; either that or it was less fun to be on the periphery. This was disappointing. In the light of it I would advocate a position suggested at the 'Idea of Communism' conference I recently attended at Birkbeck: 'if we can't we must'.