May Day Protests Against Global Capitalism

Published on Tuesday, May 1, 2001 in the Guardian of London
Confusion Reigns as London Police Brace for May Day's Mayhem

May Day Scale of protest remains unknown quantity, while polls show public
shares activists' disquiet over might of global capitalism
by John Vidal

The largest force of police ever assembled in London will today confront
10,000 people. Or perhaps 2,000. There may be 1,000 people intent on
damaging property, or there may be 500. Or 200. Or 5,000.
The police intelligence is at a loss to predict clearly what will happen,
just as the protesters themselves do not have a big picture. Modern protest
is no longer about people making great speeches and leading orderly marches
behind banners; increasingly it is a form of free expression, with
disinformation rife by both "sides".

With more than 30 separate protests across London against everything from
capitalism to the banning of pigeon feeding in Trafalgar Square, the police
have a near-impossible task. They must justify why they will be adopting
draconian no-tolerance policies, while at the same time they must not be
accused of curtailing civil liberties. The line is fine, but to cross it with images
of over the top policing would be disastrous for New Labour.

The protesters were worried their message of solidarity with others around
the world, anger at world debt, or disappointment with global governance
might not get through either. No matter that 9,000 people are peaceful, if
1,000 run riot in Oxford Street or in the City the media will focus on the
violence. Any appeal the majority would make to the public about the
justness of their cause would be lost.

Last night there were conflicting messages coming from both sides, with
some protesters sensing more people would turn out on the principle that no
one should be deterred by a massive police presence, and the police and Ken
Livingstone, mayor of London, suggesting the authorities had succeeded in
keeping many people away.

An opinion poll yesterday indicated people agreed strongly with one of
the protesters' main complaints - that corporations influence life more than
government does. An NOP poll for C4's Powerhouse programme had 76%
agreeing "big international companies usually care only about profits, and
not the interests of the people in the countries where they operate". Only 19%
disagreed.

Of 1,000 people asked whether they agreed or disagreed that "big
international companies have more influence on daily life in Britain than
our own government", 67% agreed while 25% disagreed. On the other hand,
only 25% disagreed with the suggestion that international companies had
helped to increase prosperity in Britain by building factories and creating
jobs.

The protests in London are expected to be mirrored across the world, with
many countries preparing for the traditional workers' day with massive
street demonstrations against globalization, unemployment and corruption.

In Berlin the government has banned anarchist and other marches in an
attempt to prevent violent clashes. But a court decision allowing a march
by the neo-nazi National Democratic party threatens to heighten tension.

In France, where global free trade is widely blamed for cultural and
economic problems, thousands of people are expected to demonstrate
against recent job losses at international firms, including Marks & Spencer.

In Australia a predicted 10,000 activists will blockade stock exchanges and
other financial institutions in the big cities. Spanish trade unions have organised
61 demonstrations to denounce precarious working conditions and labour
market reforms by the conservative government, which they say favour
companies which want to make redundancies cheaper.

Protests over unemployment, discrimination and poverty are also expected in
Greece, Poland, Guatemala and Taiwan, where some 20,000 people are expected
to take to the streets.

The Japanese, for whom May 1 is a normal working day, brought forward their
protest to last weekend when 450,000 people turned out to demand wage rises.
Peter Mandelson, MP for Hartlepool, and Arthur Scargill, the National Union
of Mineworkers leader who is challenging him in the next election, clashed
yesterday over the protests . MrScargill backed the anti-capitalists but Mr
Mandelson responded that he was an "an extremist prepared to give more
support to a bunch of violent anarchists than a democratically elected
Labour government".

Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001