If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
A Tale of Two Marches
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
The Liberty and Livelihood (sic) March 8 days ago must have been the first time in history when the police agreed with the organisers of a march about the number of people attending a demonstration.
Normal service was resumed on Saturday though, as the police downgraded the number of people attending the Stop the War march from the 400,000+ given by the organisers to a mere 150,000.
The more cynical minds, like myself, are inclined to think political interference was at play- especially since the organisers of this march used the same counting method as the the Countryside Alliance a week earlier (minus the stupid electronic counter that looked out of an scalextric set).
Needless to say this march has produced but a small fraction of the thousands of column inches devoted to the hunters' march in the press, despite being of equal size and, to anyone with an ounce of common sense, of much more importance. But this is a matter for newspaper editors and their warped view of the world.
I'm still highly suspicious of the attendance number given by the police. Surely not an attempt by Blair to dampen opposition to an attack and silence critics?
Normal service was resumed on Saturday though, as the police downgraded the number of people attending the Stop the War march from the 400,000+ given by the organisers to a mere 150,000.
The more cynical minds, like myself, are inclined to think political interference was at play- especially since the organisers of this march used the same counting method as the the Countryside Alliance a week earlier (minus the stupid electronic counter that looked out of an scalextric set).
Needless to say this march has produced but a small fraction of the thousands of column inches devoted to the hunters' march in the press, despite being of equal size and, to anyone with an ounce of common sense, of much more importance. But this is a matter for newspaper editors and their warped view of the world.
I'm still highly suspicious of the attendance number given by the police. Surely not an attempt by Blair to dampen opposition to an attack and silence critics?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
The Antiwar march was a one issue event and was attended mainly by the left wing and islamic groups.
It seems only common sense that the livlihood march would get more attendees. Having said that, nobody ever gets the numbers right, its an impossible task. Just take the number given by the organiser and the number given by the police. Somewhere in the middle is the real number.
It doesn't matter how many went to either because their is zero chznce of the government taking any notice on any of the issues raised.......
democracy shemocracy
Naturally the anti-war protestors were going to have to inflate their figures after the previous march. Bearing in mind that most of the war marches will also be anti-anything (notably capitalism) there would be a large contingent of "class-warriors" and they would never accept that the "toffs" attracted more protesters than they did. Many have trouble accepting that a large portion of the population care more for our countryside than they do for war in Iraq.
That said between the two is more likely than either extreme.
I disagree; I went to the Stop the War/Freedom for Palestine march, and didn't see a single anti-capitalist there. There was a broad spectrum of people present, of all ages and ethnicities. Yes, there were local Communist parties, but these tended to be in the minority, and I didn't see a single "destroy coca cola" stlye anti-capitalist. This isn't to say they weren't there, it's just that they weren't among the several thousand people I saw in the five hours I was there.
On the issue of the numbers, it's not easy to tell from within a crowd how big it is. However, I stood for three hours on the Embankment waiting for the march to start still when the front of
the march was already spilling into Hyde Park; such a situation suggests that 150,000 was on the conservative side, which is to be expected from the police. I'd definitely put the figure closer to the 400,000 quoted by the organisers and the Mayor's Office, but that's just my view.
All in all, it was a great march, and the largest anti-war march ever seen in Europe. It was peaceful (only two arrests for minor public order offences out of 150,000-400,000 marchers), and the atmosphere was great. An anti-capitalist demo it was not.
I agree that there is a large portion of people that feel that way, but I believe that the majority, particularly in cities (where the overwhelming majority of the population is concentrated), would care more about the war. Opinion polls are still firmly against war without a mandate from the UN, don't forget.
On the issue of media coverage, was it coincidence that the Times broke the Major/Currie story to coincide with the march? Perhaps I'm a little too cynical
Sorry, I wasn't clear. Its not those who attend who release the attendance figures, but those who organise the event...I'm sure the two (anti-cap/class war & anti-war) are linked. Look over at Urban 75, as an example and see the same names appear...
and a larger percentage support war with the resolution. But this march was anti-war with Iraq, full stop. Not pro-resolution.
If I was a cynic, I'd say that got Archer off the front page
But the fact that no paper has given this march the same credit that they gave the previous one, is no surprise either. Who owns the papers - surely not country based "gentry"?