The anti cuts protests and London riots, which have shaken the country to its core during the past months are increasingly exposing the shortcomings and social costs of the coalition government's austerity plans. In order to maintain an image of apparent control over the nation, Prime Minister David Cameron has been advocating a tough love approach, which appears to be affecting in particular the younger sectors of the population. With a year of protests ahead and mounting discontent will England become a country of young criminals?
While, clearly there are important differences to be made between anti austerity protests and the riots both these phenomena share, at their core, important common elements. Firstly, the frustration towards the cowardice of a political class, which is unable or unwilling to uphold the interests of its population against those of large multinationals, albeit not perfectly articulated in the case of the riots. Secondly the demonisation of young people in their aftermaths.
While resistance to structural adjustments and resentment towards policing injustices have been cross generational events the condemnation spree on part of the media and government has focused on students and 'troubled youths'.
This Autumn will see many of the students and other protesters from the last year charged with public order offences (particularly violent disorder, which carries a maximum five year prison sentence) in court. Around 400 people have been arrested over anti cuts protests and over 2,000 during London riots according to London metropolitan police sources. This amounts to nearly 2,400 people arrested of which the vast majority are aged between 18 and 25.
Prime minister, David Cameron has been increasingly relying on heavy handed policing and exemplary sentencing as a 'cure' for what he has described as 'broken Britain'. Over the past few months, mps have been debating the introduction of water cannons during protests, revising laws related to political activism (such as strike laws and trespassing laws ,which may affect future student occupations) whilst training an extra one thousand riot police officers.
The anti cuts protests which took place all over England over the past year have proved that students are not apathetical they are demoralised by a government that preys on the resources of citizens. Undoubtedly the rage felt by the younger generations is part of a growing political awareness, triggered by the failings of the current economic model and social institutions. Thus these acts of violence , or to be more precise vandalism, are not isolated episodes, but symptoms of a much broader array of issues, which this government will have to confront.
One example of the renewed government approach towards vandalism are the policing techniques deployed during past demonstrations. Beyond the controversial kettling of protestors , regarded by many as a violation of basic human rights recent events have seen the introduction of new, more troubling methods. For example, snatch squads roaming the March 26 demonstration. During the day police officers were arresting anyone who had their faces covered, by tackling them to the floor and cellar taping hands and legs (most of these as young as 15).
Another example are the seeming inequalities in the application of the law. The actions of the police officer who stroke student Alfie Meadows, causing him to have emergency brain surgery, were found 'justifiable' by the IPCC, while the student has been charged with violent disorder. At the same time 18 year old first time offenders are being handed over 12 month prison sentences so they can be 'an example to others'.
The disproportion between crime and sentence is in many cases laughable (if you are not the one doing the time that is). Everyone remembers the college student with no criminal record who was sentenced to six months in prison for stealing a water bottle during the London Riots? Or Edward Wollward an 18 year old first time offender who got given a custodial sentence of nearly three years for throwing a fire extinguisher from a roof top.
Given the exceptional circumstances trials have become even more distressing with over worked court staff and overcrowded prisons. For several of the ongoing violent disorder cases the time span between preliminary hearing and trial date is between four and eight months, with judges often finding themselves apologising to defendants.
The point is not to advocate absolute impunity, but perhaps questioning the motives and the effects of making 'examples' out of 18 year olds. The defiance of these youths shows a will to be heard which goes far beyond mere indignation and promises not to decrease over the coming years.
This raises important questions over the sudden urge to sedate dissent. Is this tough love approach really a cure or a tactic? A disguise, to hide fears that the unfettered enthusiasm and rage felt by these 'kids' is increasingly become a concrete challenge to the coalition government.
While this question has no short term answer, the effects of this approach are gradually unfolding before our eyes. These new measures emplaced to control dissent are exposing one of the gravest social costs of implementing austerity: the demonisation and stigmatisation of an entire generation.