Over the past seven days there have been two major demonstrations in London: the anti-capitalist, banker-baiting protests outside the Bank of England that coincided with the G20 summit last week, and a pro-Tamil Tigers demonstration outside the Houses of Parliament yesterday that called on Gordon Brown and the United Nations to put pressure on the Sri Lankan government to “stop its genocide” against Tamils. Both demos were loud, colourful, well-attended and led to scuffles between protesters and the police. There was a minor riot of sorts at the G20 protest and the police dragged Tamils off the roads outside Parliament yesterday when they blockaded traffic.
But that’s where the similarities end. It was the differences between the two demonstrations that was most striking and which sheds some light on the chasm between old forms of protest (as represented by the Tamils and their demands for a ceasefire and national self-determination) and new forms of protest (as personified by the anti-capitalists complaining about the “coming apocalypse” and demanding the punishment of “greedy bankers”). The demos, separated by a mere week, spoke to a sweeping historic divide between the dignified but fast-fading radical politics of the past and the shrill, self-pitying radical politics of the future.
The instantly striking thing about the Tamil protest yesterday, where about 2 000 Tamil men, women and children protested against the Sri Lankan authorities’ heightened war effort in northern and eastern Sri Lanka and their attempt to wipe out the Tamil Tigers, was the clothes the protesters were wearing. At the G20 protests last week, the largely middle-class anti-capitalists were, for want of a better phrase, “dressed down”. They wore tattered jeans, slogan T-shirts, fairy costumes, drag outfits, clown gear and, of course, the fashion item that no contemporary radical can be seen without: the Palestinian keffiyeh. (Donning one of those is the radicals’ equivalent of “blacking up” and becoming “one of them”: one of the victims.)
The Tamils, by contrast, were smartly dressed. They seemed to be wearing what we in Britain call our “Sunday best”. Some of the men wore ties, or at least ironed shirts with collars and cuffs, and many of the women wore trousers, blouses, new jackets. The younger, British-born Tamils were sharply dressed, too, with a little bit of bling. Where the garb of the G20 anti-capitalists seemed to signal their alienation from mainstream society, their wilful rejection of “rat race Britain” in favour of off-the-peg fairy, clown or anarchist gear, the Tamils’ outfits spoke to individuals who very much want to be treated seriously — who consider themselves part of the social fabric, of everyday human interaction, but who want a more equal footing and to have their grievances resolved and their national rights recognised. Where the G20 protests looked like fancy-dress radicalism — with protesters making an elaborate, costumed performance of their rejection of what they referred to as “zombie” society — the Tamil protests had a serious, well-dressed feel to them.
The other striking difference was the slogans. Ironically, while the Tamil protesters have a great deal more to be worried about than the G20 protesters (one Tamil told me that she has not heard from her brother and his wife, who are in Sri Lanka’s so-called “Safe Zone”, for more than 10 days), their chants and demands were more measured than those of the G20 anti-capitalists. The Tamils chanted “Don’t kill Tamil people!” and “Ceasefire, ceasefire, ceasefire!” Some also demanded the establishment of Tamil Eelam, an independent homeland for Tamils in northern and eastern Sri Lanka. The G20 protesters, by contrast, sounded shrill and hysterical and were almost consumed by visions of banker-induced Armageddon. They marched behind the “four horsemen of the apocalypse” (Climate Chaos, War, Financial Crimes and Land Enclosures) and predicted the destruction of the Earth by “climate zombies” (that’s you and me) and “evil bankers”.
Where the Tamils’ protest was grounded by some kind of political vision — of a future homeland, of an end to war, of winning international respect for Tamils’ rights and equality — the G20 protest was a mish-mash of various out-of-control visions of future doom and destruction, driven not by a clear political agenda but by a left-wing version of the politics of fear. Hence the Tamils, despite facing a far more terrifying predicament than anything experienced by the middle-class, messy-haired boys and girls outside the Bank of England last week, made demands that were rooted and measured, while the anti-capitalist protesters wailed about the End of Days. This made the Tamils’ anger — and there was a lot of it — more convincing than the shrill cries of last week’s anti-banker lobby.
Perhaps the key difference between the Tamil and the G20 protesters, and the one that revealed most about the degraded nature of contemporary, so-called radical politics was that the Tamils were protesting on behalf of themselves and their families and friends, a collective group of people with shared interests and ambitions, while the G20 protesters were speaking “on behalf of others”: the poor, the disillusioned, even “the planet”, which they claimed to represent against polluting, carbon-emitting mainstream society. Indeed, the G20 protests were a largely white affair, with Third World people only appearing as pet victims who might be used (and abused) as a way of forcing through the protesters’ narrow, environmentalist agenda. For example, some green-leaning protesters outside the Bank of England demanded carbon cuts in order to “save the vulnerable of Bangladesh”.
By contrast, the Tamil protests, a largely brown affair (there was surprisingly little solidarity from anti-war or anti-capitalist campaigners), represented “Third World people” speaking for themselves — and they demanded, not economic restraint or carbon cuts, but liberty and equality. The gap between these old-style, nationalist protesters representing themselves and the new-fangled anti-capitalists representing others speaks to an important shift over the past 10 years from an interest-driven politics based on goals and solidarity to a disinterested, aloof politics of pity that imagines the world is dying and the poor and the pathetic must be “saved”. The venues chosen by the two sets of protesters — with the anti-capitalists focusing on the “greedy” financial district and the Tamils setting up camp in the political heart of Britain — was also revealing. The anti-capitalists were effectively moaning about bankers’ warped moral values, whereas the Tamils were more interested in effecting political change.
Finally, the different temperaments were revealing. The police behaved terribly on both demonstrations, penning the anti-capitalists into a square at last week’s demo and forcibly removing Tamils from the streets of Westminster yesterday. However, where these rough scuffles remained marginal to the Tamil protest — with the protesters dusting themselves down and quickly getting back to the political chanting — they became the central focus of the G20 protests. Clashes with police and attacks on banks intensified as the day progressed. That is because the anti-capitalists, unlike the Tamils, had no higher motivation beyond smashing things up.
The anti-capitalist protesters were what Leon Trotsky might have described as “impatient revolutionaries” (though they weren’t very revolutionary) in the sense that they were continually itching for action, for confrontation with the cops; some wore their truncheon-caused bruises as a badge of pride. It was precisely their lack of political grounding, of a shared vision, of coherent aspirations that made the anti-capitalists lust for action, action, action. Their street run-ins with the police were not a continuation of politics by other means, but a substitute for politics. The mini-riot last week was nothing positive, but rather a fairly pathetic battle between misanthropic, philistine protesters and tooled-up police. The Tamils, by contrast, stood up to police heavy-handedness, not for fun or for the sake of it, but in order to continue their political protest. It is telling that there was far less media presence at the Tamil protest: where the G20 demonstration seemed to be executed for the cameras, the Tamil protest had an internal logic of its own.
This isn’t to say that the Tamil cause has remained utterly unchanged over the past 25 years. The Tamil protesters’ description of Sri Lanka’s actions as a “genocide”, and their call on Gordon Brown effectively to save the Tamil people, suggests that their one-time politics of independence has become withered, giving way to a victim-oriented demand for outside protection. Their protest in London seemed driven by desperation, as the Tamil Tigers face final defeat. However, in expressing old, rarely seen political ideals on the streets of London, they threw into relief just how shallow and narcissistic the newer strand of political radicalism is.
If the destruction of the Tamil minority in a genocide over a quarter of a century while the world watched proves anything, it proves that the United Nations is totally incompetant.
It also proved that they would have done nothing but protest against SA either had the whites just held on to power.
Of course the nutty greenies got more attention – they represent a voting block.
And I do wish that people would comprehend that unregulated lending of credit that you don’t have is NOT capitalism!
You tale smacks of arrogance and loathing of your fellow man. Let me get this straight.
First you say that the older strand of political radicals (Tamil Tiger protests) protesting on behalf of themselves and their families and friends has gotten “withered” and “driven by desperation”.
You then say that the newer strand of political radicalism (G20 protesters) is “shallow and narcissistic” because they protest about issues on behalf of others – the poor, the disillusioned etc.
Rather than being condescending about people who have the courage to stand up for their beliefs, tell us what you really stand for?
Your right wing rant must have felt good for you, but it has little relation to what actually happened last week at the G20 demos or with the Tamil demo in Parliament Square. I have observed both demos for several hours each. A man died last week on Cornhill Street in The City and, while it is yet uncertain if there is a direct link between police violence against protesters and Ian Tomlinson’s death from a heart attack, Mr. Tomlinson was assaulted by police. My observations of the G20 protests,and I was on Cornhill Street when Mr. Tomlinson collapsed, is that the police instigated far more violence than any protester did. Any so-called “protester” who does use violence against others as a form of protest is not worthy of anything. Try actually walking around and seeing things for yourself next time. You might learn something.
Thank you very much for finally distinguishing Tamil protestors from any other protestor. Many have condemned our actions but we must remind them that we had no choice. When our brothers and sisters continue to die back home we can no longer sit back and remain silent. If this is the only way we can get media attention then can you blame us? It is now up the the media to put pressure on the British govt to ensure that Sri Lankan holds and immediate ceasefire and make way for peace talks. We need independent viewers to be granted access into these North-East regions to verify all these allegations of human rights abuses and truely see for themselves what atrocities the Sri Lankan Govt are commiting. This can not be done without the help of the international community!
Why should Britain even care a tinker’s cuss about the Tamils and their desire for a secessionist state in Sri Lanka? British grumblers don’t trek off to Sri Lanka to make noisy demands of the Sri Lankan government.
Well, the problem with supporting the Tamil Tigers is that although their cause is legitimate, they are, like the Sri Lankan government, a gang of slaughterous thugs. Perhaps that’s why they were not more broadly supported. I don’t think many lefties would fail to support the demonstrators if they were just calling for peace and harmony.
As to the anti-G20 protestors, this is a fairly big issue. The world is going to hell on a bus driven by the leaders of the G20 — their policies have caused the current crises and their plans appear designed to make the situation worse. A big issue, donchathink? Or are you too dim to understand it?
Apparently so, for your view of the protestors seems entirely drawn from the Daily Mail — or the Express, whose local sewerage-outlet put a picture on the cover of a policeman punching a G20 protestor in the face with the caption “Protestor taking part in violence”, or words to that effect.
You can live in smug denial as much as you like, Brendan, but people are starting to get angry out there, and they aren’t as ignorant as you appear to be.
Jon
The Tamil minority were enslaved by the Singhelese majority after independence.
You approve of slavery do you?
Jon
To spell it out they WANT A BANTUSTAN for protection!
Jon our govt is responsible for selling weapons and providing millions of £s in aid to the Sri Lankan govt (which in turn is diverted to pay for this genocidal war).
Since Jan according to the UN over 3000 Tamil civilians have been slaughtered due to the Sri Lankan Army’s indiscriminate bombing and shelling:
http://tiny.cc/VxIvw
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have repeatedly called for foreign donor govts to curtail funding of aid to the SL govt for its atrocious human rights record. Yet the British govt persists. This is why Tamils are protesting against Britains govt’s role.
And MFB not all the Tamil protestors there support the Tamil Tigers and their methods. I would say all are against the genocide of Tamils. Its sad that the meaning of the protest has been hijacked by misrepresentation. Yesterday we were joined by a few Socialist Party members (non-Tamils) who voiced their opposition to the slaughter of Tamils and chanted slogans.
Jon…the reason why the British government should ‘care a tinker’s cuss about the Tamils’ is because it was due to them that the Tamils were robbed of a place to call their home land…Britain went to Sri Lanka and joined the Tamil and Sinhalese parts for administrative ease.
“Love Not The World”
”For the WHOLE world is under the control of the evil one”(I John 5:19)
“Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world will pass away, and the lust thereof: but he that does the will of The Only True GOD will abide for ever.” (I John 2:15-17)
“If you were of the world, the world would love it’s own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said unto you, the servant is not greater than his Master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept My saying, they will keep yours also.” (John 15:19-20)
“Where do wars and fighting among you come from? Do they not come of your lusts that war in your members? You lust, and have not: you kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: you fight and war yet you have not, because you ask not. You ask, and receive not, because you ask amiss, that you may consume it upon your lusts.
In 1799 June, Sir Hugh Cleghorn, the first British Colonial Secretary wrote to the British Government…
Two different nations from a very ancient period have divided between them the possession of the Island. First the Sinhalese, inhabiting the interior of the country in its Southern and Western parts, and secondly the Malabars (Tamils) who possess the Northern and Eastern Districts. These two nations differ entirely in their religion, language and manners
A Conservative Party politician in the United Kingdom, Dr. Rachel Joyce, apologised for the error of Colonial Britain in making a unitary Ceylon out of two nations, the Tamils and the Sinhalese, now resulted in blood bath in the eastern Srilanka. Over 75,000 Tamils died in the past 61 years as a result of ill fated constitution and democratisation since independence in 1948. Can you blame the Tamils for this great injustice and the blunder resulted with the whole Tamil population displaced as refugees and killed in Srilanka. Military solution of mass killing of Tamils will be genocide.
Only solution is to go back to the basic and recognize Tamils right to live in their own country as Tamils. Fundamental right to live in their historic homeland Eelam is denied today by the majority Sinhalese under a smoke screen of ‘democracy’ conveniently targeted the whole Tamil population as ‘terrorist’.
Thank you for bring this timely article. This protest is still continuing for the 11thday and 10days of hunger strike at parliament square peacefully demanding permanent immediate ceasefire, attempt to stop another Rwanda. Tamils have lost faith in the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) and now seek revivification of separate homeland, Tamil Eelam, for the following reasons.
1. Tamils have witnessed structured systematic oppressions by successive GoSL over sixty years.
2. Tamil leaders struggled peacefully against the state aided Sinhala colonisation and ethnic cleansing of Tamils for over quarter of a century and that fell in deaf ears. Inaction of successive GoSL, lead by mono-ethnic mindset politicians, and the silence of the international world forced our youth to take-up arm struggle to protect our people and our homeland.
3. GoSL has used every ceasefire agreement to build its military power and unilaterally waged the war against Tamils.
4. Tamils have used the ceasefire to build and run a parallel government. We have proved to the international world that Tamils have the means and capabilities to govern ourselves just as we did prior to the independence of Sri Lanka.
5. On the other hand, the GoSL has demonstrated its inability to structurally and ethically bring a peaceful solution to the long standing South Asian conflict. They had over sixty years to resolve this issue peacefully.
International community should condemn the state terrorism, call for immediate and permanent & support Tamils right to self-determination. Thank you.
For writer
Thanks for your article, at least some of you are minding our voice.
Thanks a lot