The Occupy Melbourne protest turned violent this morning when police descended on demonstrators shouting chants such as “the whole world is watching”. This video, filmed on a demonstrator’s iPhone, is best watched full screen.
Daily Mail
Elsewhere
Policy
Partners
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media, business, the environment and life.
Copyright © 2012 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey. All Rights Reserved.
Web development by Valegro
Editor: Jason Whittaker
Publisher: Eric Beecher
Political Correspondent: Bernard Keane
Level 6, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000
Ph: 1800 985 502
Fax: (03) 8623 9975
12 Comments
Well maybe, but does the whole world know what it is watching?
Can’t really see the protest turning ‘violent’…more like a few minor interactions while police took people away…perhaps the use of the term violent is a bit overdone..unless I’m missing something.
“Whats the charge?” Now there’s a good question.
Is this the most pointless protest there’s ever been..
How out of practice are we with these demo things ? More fake blood, organisers !
“The whole world is watching”. actually, after about 2 minutes, I fell asleep. I remember Melbourne cops being more agressive than this, the whole video reminds me of mustering sheep in the shearing yard.
Solidairty brothers and sisters, just don’t put out any more video until something interesting happens.
Violent? Ha! Beat up much?!
Thank you for giving them the boot, CoM! If the mob had any mild understanding of economics and the workings of government in this country, support may have been warranted. This makeshift commune with no consistency or compelling fight is laughable.
Incoherence or inability to articulate doesn’t not automatically render protest meaningless.
And I might argue that the confection of Alan Jones trucker outrage in Canberra was vastly more pointless. Protests against policy by special interest groups doesn’t mean anything on a social or cultural scale - it is merely the exercise of political muscle to ensure a favourable -usually financial- outcome for participants.
Real social change happens because of a deep unrest with the state of life within the State, and might be ignited by any number of flash-points. The Arab Spring is not universally acknowledged to be about a single ideas or in poursuit of a single outcome. You can stil find plenty on YouTube telling the world how great life was sunder Gaddafi - despite the vast gulfs between rich and poor, the corruption at State level, the Secret Police to enforce the ban on political opposition and any number of farcical foreign policy decisions detrimental to the well being of Libyans (let alone Berbers).
The point is, most protesters in successful movements begin by not knowing what it is they want, but being absolutely sure what they don’t want. Clarity will come. And it may even initiate real and resounding change, and wouldn’t that be something?
Atticudash, all well and good, but, a protest is a protest. People take to the street to show their support for and raise awareness of AN ISSUE. Admittedly, often those taking part in a protest march or signing a pettition or whatever don’t always agree with each other - or even have a coherent idea - on how to resolve the issues they’re contending.
My beef with Occ. Melb. is this, even when protests are very large and very direct about a particular issue - I’m thinking the anti war rallies post 911 as a good example - they invariably go home at the end of the day. I can’t think of a rally in Australia in recent time that has resulted in direct and immmediate action by Government or coporations to address the concerns of the protesters. Democracy is a dish only served cold.
Occupation is legitimate in workplace disputes (and fatally under utilised by modern unions), in instances where the protesters have literally nowhere to go and when the Government IS the problem - Egypt, Syria, et al. Wall Street, being a symbol of the capitalist plague is also a ligitimate target for occupation, London too perhaps but less so, Melbourne? Sure maybe a couple of nights in a sign of solidarity, then it becomes a matter of time before the authorities run out of patience and the locals out of sympathy.
Whatever the concerns of Occ. Melb. the Melbourne City Authority, the Victorian or even Federal Government could do little to satisfy them. Make your point and go home or make a mess and be sent home. Occ. Melb. chose the latter and they’ve ended up looking pretty silly.
Mattsui - even though others have said similar things to what you are saying, I am really not convinced. Since when is a prolonged peaceful protest somehow deemed “bad” or “inappropriate to a democracy”? Do protests have “rules” they must follow (say your piece then go home?)… seems a bit self-contradictory doesn’t it? The one great “rule” or better: “principal” - of non-violence - is wonderful and should therefore not be interferred with in an aggressive way, by those who are meant to protect democracy.
I was not surprised the Andrew Bolt or Alan Jones were not supporting the protestors rights for “freedom of speech”! But isn’t it pathetic! Only truckies and old white wealthy people protesting Julia Gillard, are allowed to get their support for “freedom of speech”. Certainly not non-violent young people questioning corporate greed and materialism!
Yeah, I just reckon, if you’re gonna squat on public land for an extended period of time, disrupting the public amenity and stifling business, you really should have a legitimate reason.
Compare Occupy Melbourne to the Aboriginal Tent Embassy.
The protesters in this particular video were spoiling for a fight, and they got it.@JIM R It will be used by those commentators you cited as a stick to beat future more coherent protests.
Like it or not, these days it’s all about public perception.
I would suggest that perception is created by media. The “violent” protests of Melbourne were “world news” … sure…. police taking people from a protest! They must have wished for “better footage” of some punches being thrown and some heads being smashed… but alas… not there. But still it gets called “violent protest”….
You cant win with the media (owned and controlled and edited by the multibillionares of the world)…. they will paint you as a rat bag even if you are a Gandhi. Oh hang on.. they did with him too for some of the time!….