Whilst I see Howard's point [in an email urging people to go to a CACA march rather than a previously arranged Green meet at the same time], I personally am pretty dubious about the point of "anti-cuts" campaigning. The basic thrust of the campaign is to try and preserve something that is frankly part of the problem and not part of the solution - by which I mean that the problem is late capitalist industrial civilisation and spending time arguing about tinkering with the balance between different parts of it is rather like discussing which tree to chop down for firewood when a hurricane is heading your way and will flatten the forest anyway.
For another analogy try this blog post from John Greer
If the campaign provided a serious opportunity to raise awareness of the predicament we are collectively in and develop both individual and group practical responses then I might be inclined to take part. But in reality I think for most people it is about trying to maintain their lifestyle and comfort level whilst protesting about (and hopefully preventing) changes in the arrangement of deckchairs and the access to the first class saloon.
In fact I could go further and argue that the anti-cuts campaign is profoundly bad because in effect it is promoting the idea that one group of people (the majority) can go on living as they have been if minor changes were made affecting other groups of people (the well-off, the arms manufacturers, the bankers, the tax-dodgers or whoever the hate figure of the day happens to be) - the truth is that no-one can go on living as we have been and the sooner we start acting on this basis the better our individual prospects will be.
In summary I now think that CACA is an anti-green movement and I urge people not to join the march - but I don't expect many people to agree with me (or possibly even to see the point I am trying, and probably failing, to make). Do whatever you feel is right.
" by Low Anthem.
" by Fionn Regan
" by the Oysterband
