To march or not to march?
I wasn’t sure whether to attend Belfast’s march and rally for peace in Gaza yesterday, organised by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.
On the one hand, like many people, I’m horrified at Israel’s actions in Gaza and their disproportionate response to the undoubted provocation from Hamas, an organisation that doesn’t want to co-exist with Israel but to destroy it. I wanted to be part of the march in order to be counted. On the other, I was aware that the event would attract people whose definition of the word ‘ceasefire’ is somewhat more one-sided than my own or, indeed that of other participants such as the churches or Amnesty International.
In the end I went along and was glad that I did. There was a good turnout and a good-natured atmosphere, although I could have done without the ‘Israeli Nazis’ flag. The BBC’s pictures were biased: they focused too much both on the overtly pro-Palestinian gestures and also on the attendance of Irish republicans.
I missed the éirígí direct actions at Castle Court before the march and at Marks and Spencer afterwards – I was too busy warming up in Clements to be shopping, for once. I’m dubious about the effectiveness of a boycott of Israeli goods. It’s political rather than economic action that’s needed to stop the killing – not least from Barack Obama after his inauguration next week.
But what makes me furious is the intimidation of shop workers – which, from the report on Slugger clearly did take place (although éirígí's report implies that a jolly time was had by all) . How does attacking low-paid workers in Belfast advance peace in the Middle East? How does jeopardising the safety of women working to feed their families in Northern Ireland prevent the deaths of other children in Gaza? What kind of working class solidarity is that from an organisation that claims to be socialist as well as republican?
I’m in favour of carefully targeted and non-violent direct action, but in this case the analysis was flawed and the tactics were woeful.
6 comments:
Good post
I'm of the Unionist persuasion and felt compelled to attend. Also blogged about it here: www.scrabopower.wordpress.com
Horrified as I am by the unbridled carnage in Gaza, I also can't see the point of harassing innocent shop employees who have little or no influence over their bosses. In the end it's just gesture politics rather than anything productive.
So basically, not buying the goods was not enough they had to go in and harrass the shop employees? See, that's what I don't like about protests or rather large group gatherings for a purpose. Somewhat, in many places, it turns into a mob movement. Few slogans, shouts, and voila you have an aggressive bunch of people. Aggressiveness in a protest for peace defies the whole purpose of the protest to start with.
Gx
Jonny - thanks for the link and yes, the church reps did go on a bit didn't they! Your point about opinion dividing here on sectarian lines: I think all those defending Israel's actions are unionists but that doens't mean all unionists are of that view, as you are well aware.
Nick - I suppose I feel so strongly about it because we've both been shop workers - even the managers of individual stores have little power nowadays.
Gaye - Luckily the group protesting in the shops were a very small minority of those who attended the march and rally, but it worries me that people might not go on future demonstrations if they thought there would be violence or intimidation.
I'm all for the speaking up of a demo, Jenny, if it is peaceful and non-aggressive. Good for you on going and as to the shop workers, fingers crossed.
the worst crime of all is to be silent in the midst of such appalling atrocities.
XO
WWW
www - thanks for this. I agree one shouldn't be silent, but it can be a problem if speaking out means being associated with a group that is actually perpetuating conflict.
Post a Comment