Comment by handelaar | Hacker News Reader

Comment by handelaar | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

As someone who used to organise large demonstrations in London for CND [a UK anti-nuclear org] a long time ago -- there is no point that the crowd is ever so large that a combination of the organasition itself with the police where the crowd "should" be unable to control it. In fact when you're putting together a demo in London you meet the Met police and meeting that requirement is one of the things you discuss with them.

On Feb 15 2003 a demo against the impending second war in Iraq was so ridiculously larger than anyone (police and organisers included - it was at least a million people) expected that I personally [long story] caused Waterloo Bridge to be closed at about 2pm. The senior police on the day were so understaffed relative to the crowd size that not only did I close a major traffic artery but we volunteers with some previous experience also got called out by the Metropolitan Police on TV for thanks.

Still was a very strange feeling to, after years earlier spending many similar days being condescended at by untrained idiot coppers, suddenly being drafted by their bosses into making major crowd-control strategic decisions when the situation had become incredibly dangerous mostly because those same police had utterly misgauged the turnout().

( On that day having left the org in question some years previously I didn't believe it was going to be that big either. And had turned down their request to help. Then I was in a bank in town a few days before surrounded by ordinary regular nonpolitical people and everybody in the queue joined in a discussion about which tube station they needed to be at for Saturday. Both I and the org were wrong about how big it was going to be by a factor of between 2 and 5.)

> As someone who used to organise large demonstrations in London for CND [a UK anti-nuclear org] a long time ago -- there is no point that the crowd is ever so large that a combination of the organasition itself with the police where the crowd "should" be unable to control it. In fact when you're putting together a demo in London you meet the Met police and meeting that requirement is one of the things you discuss with them.

It sounds like that depends on the police and protesters being at least nominally willing to cooperate, however grudgingly. That's not always the case. If the police and the local government think that the protesters have no right to be there at all and the only thing preventing open violence is the fear of bad publicity, it's a lot more of a powder keg.

If the protest is about police violence, for example. Have a friendly advance chat with the police about where, when, and how many, and you'll likely show up to find your venue packed with concrete barricades and cops in riot gear to "preserve public safety". You need to get a critical mass of protesters in place with cameras on them before the cops can get fully organized, or they'll shut you down before you can begin.

(tl-dr: There's no such thing as a crowd that "should" be uncontrollable. Only a demo that was poorly planned by the people who are supposed to ensure that it's safe for everyone who attends.)

Are demos supposed to always be 'safe'? That seems like pre-emptively neutralizing mass political expression that might actually be motivated by a desire for a change of government. You're basically saying that demonstrations should be gestural, not actually change anything. With that attitude no wonder Blair and Bush pressed ahead with the Iraq war, as there was no danger of having to face any political consequences.

Interesting. The Met vs. crowds seems to have a varied history; I ended up next to the famous May Day 2001 protest where people were "kettled" in Oxford Circus for 8 hours, entirely by accident.

I was between jobs and had gone to the shops on Oxford Street, noting a commotion and went to have a look. I then noticed that police lines were forming loosely around me, and decided that I needed to be behind them quickly. Very much the right decision. A little later I was looking at a completely deserted Regent Street (unthinkable given how busy it is normally), chatting to the only other bystander. He was a rightwinger's caricature of a "liberal elite"; an English lecturer at a polytechnic dressed in a red corduroy suit. We discussed Marxism. It seemed appropriate under the circumstances.

This sounds like an awesome story. Please do share if you already haven't somewhere!

Did you close off the bridge because the bridge wouldn't be able to support the weight of so many people marching? Or for some other reason?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com