Protesting against muslims and protesting against hedge funds invites a different response from the police

Tuesday's raid on the convergence space in Soho is not without precedent. Those of us who were at the G20 protest in 2009, which led to led to the death of Ian Thomlinson by riot police, will recognise a familiar pattern. The police obtain a search warrant from compliant magistrates under the pretext of searching for “illegal weapons”, or criminal suspects. In both cases the search proves fruitless, but in any case the police have gained possession of the building, and protestors have been arrested and taken out of action through the pre-emptive arrest and the imposition of bail conditions, which forbid participation in future protests. Such tactics are designed to intimidate and frustrate protest and protestors. These tactics are invariably used against anti-capitalist protestors. The implicit assumption being that protesting against capitalism must be a criminal - or a potentially criminal, activity. The full weight of public order legislation and anti-terror legislation introduced since the miner’s strike, the poll tax protests and 7/7 is brought down on such protestors. The blatantly political nature of this “total policing” became even more apparent in the attempts to snatch the flags and banners of those marching through the streets of the West End on Tuesday.

Contrast this with the license afforded to the EDL by the police on 27th May. The EDL were allowed their drunken rampage through Leicester Square throwing bottles at passers-by with not a single arrest. It appears that the police desire to protect the “rights” of the EDL to protest against Muslims, but to deny the rights of those who choose a more deserving target such as the hedge funds of Mayfair.