The Life Of B.B. King

This timeline charting the life of B.B. King, king of the blues, was compiled from the work of Charles Sawyer, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, and the B.B King museum and made interactive by Anthony Moser of BG Blues and Music News. Most dates are approximate and are accurate to the year.

September 16, 1925

B.B. is born

The place B.B. King was born

Riley B. King is born (originally spelled "Rileigh") to his parents Albert and Nora Ella on the planation of Jim O'Reilly in Berclair, Mississippi. He was named for his father's brother, who vanished when Albert was a boy.

 

January 1, 1931

Moving east of the Delta

Alluvial map of Mississippi

 

Riley's parents separate and his mother moves with Riley to the hilly part of Mississippi east of the Delta. For the next 12 years, he lives alternately with his mother and her new spouse (Elger "Picaninee" Baskin), and then with his grandmother Elnora Farr and various aunts and uncles from the Pullian clan.

 

January 1, 1935

His mother Nora Ella dies

Nora Ella dies at approximately 31 years old. Probably cause of death: complications from diabetes. Riley is left in grief and shock with his grandmother

 

 

January 1, 1936

January 1, 1940

Church and school

 

 

 

Seal of the Church of God In Christ

Riley lives with his grandmother, aunts and uncles. He attends the Church Of God In Christ ("Sanctified Church"), Rev. Archie Fair pastor. Music is the driving force in worship and Reverend Archie plays a guitar in the services. Archie’s wife and wife of uncle William Pullian are sisters. After church the sisters visit and Riley is allowed to play the Reverend’s guitar. It is love at first touch.

 

 

January 10, 1940

Grandmother Elnora Farr dies

 

A Mississippi cotton field

Grandmother Elnora Farr dies January 10th, after a brief illness. She and her grandson had been sharecroppers on farm of Edwayne Henderson. Farm records show she died owing Henderson $21.75 (over five months’ living allowance). Henderson offers Riley to stay in grandmother’s cabin and raise cotton on one acre of ground for a monthly allowance of $2.50. Riley King, alone in the world, begins adult life at age 14. Henderson farm record lists grim facts: interest charges of 8% applied quarterly; charge of 40¢ for “3 yrds cotton sack; charge of 50¢ for “wrench;” credit $1.00 “by work.” At settlement time Riley’s return on his crop is $4.18; he owes Henderson $7.54, nearly four months’ “furnish.”

September 1, 1940

Moving to Lexington

Albert King

Albert King arrives and takes his son to live in Lexington, Mississippi (pop. 3,000 approx.), county seat of Holmes County. Riley meets half-siblings and stepmother, enrolls in colored school.

 

 

October 1, 1941

Back to Kilmichael

 

In late 1941, “big city” ways, cruelty as a common place, the humiliations of segregation, and a feeling he is a stranger in his father’s home, compel Riley to get on his bicycle and ride two days (~ 45 miles) back to Kilmichael to be reunited with his cousins and familiar surroundings. Finding his kin gone Riley takes residence with family of white farmer Flake Cartledge, lives in shack on Cartledge farm, walks to school.

 

January 1, 1943 Indianola

Riley King, age 18, Indianola MS

Riley moves back to the Delta, to Indianola. He joins his cousin Birkett Davis and gets work as a tractor driver on Johnson Barrett plantation.

B.B. and Martha King

January 1, 1944

Marries Martha Denton

Riley married Martha Denton. With his cousin and three other people he began singing in the St. John's Gospel Singers. He was inducted into the army, but discharged after basic training when classified as essential to war economy based on skills as a tractor driver.

January 1, 1947

Flees to Memphis

Bukka White

Flees to Memphis after damaging his tractor, leaving Martha alone and a crop in the ground. Whereabouts are closely held secret in community lest Planter Barrett send the law to fetch Riley. Lives in Memphis with cousin blues singer Bukka White.

January 1, 1948

Returns to Indianola

 

Returns to Indianola in the Delta, works off debt for tractor damage, resolves to return to Memphis.

 

 

October 1, 1948

The Pepticon Boy

 

The Hooks Bros

 

In late 1948, he arrives in West Memphis, Arkansas, across the Mississippi from Memphis, goes straight to radio KWEM where Sonny Boy Williamson hosted daily radio show. Plays one song, live, on the air. Lands a gig at West Memphis’ “16th Street Grill.” Goes to Memphis station WDIA where revolutionary programming targets all-black audience, auditions in the lobby and lands daily 15-minute spot as “The Pepticon Boy,” selling alcohol-laced health tonic Pepticon.

 

 

 

 

 

 





January 1, 1949

January 1, 1959

Blues Boy King

 

Regional stardom on radio and in area joints around Tennessee, Arkansas and Mississippi brings him to attention of a small record label, cuts four sides for Bullett Records, including "Miss Martha King." Radio spot expands, Pepticon Boy becomes “Blues Boy”, then plain “B.B.” King. Survives near fatal bout of hepatitis; escapes flames of burning dance hall after rushing back into inferno to save guitar, thereafter named “Lucille” as a reminder to avoid foolish risks.

 

July 1, 1950

The Modern Recordings

California independent record company Modern Records records B.B. King at Memphis Recording Service operated by Sam Phillips (soon to be home of Sun Records, first label of rising star Elvis Presley). Recordings leased on R.P.M. label get national distribution but little commercial success.

 

August 1, 1951

3 O'Clock Blues

Modern Records records “3 O’Clock Blues” at improvised recording space in Memphis YMCA. Song had been a minor hit for Oklahoma guitarist Lowell Fulson. It was release in December, 1951 b/w "That Ain't The Way To Do It"

The Regal Theater

 

 

 

February 2, 1952

First #1 Hit

 

“3 O’Clock Blues” hits #1 on Billboard R&B hit parade. B.B. King gets a shot at a national audience. Signs with Universal Attractions booking agency, goes on tour with stops at Washington, D.C.’s Howard Theater, Baltimore’s Royal Theater, Chicago’s Regal Theater and Harlem’s Apollo. B.B. rises to the challenge of a new kind of audience and wins wide acceptance and affection across the national network of big city theaters, southern juke joints and road houses called the Chitlin’ Circuit.

 

 

March 2, 1952 — December 31, 1956

B.B. King performs with the Bill Harvey Band at the Hippodrome, in Memphis, Tenn.

 

March 2, 1952 — 12:00 AM

December 31, 1956

The Bill Harvey Band

Partners with Memphis’s most respected bandleader, Bill Harvey. The Bill Harvey Band becomes the road band for B.B. King, for the next four years. Booking agency is “Buffalo Booking Agency,” of Houston, Texas, run by Evelyn Johnson, owned by Don Robey, a growing force in R&B music.

 

 

 

 

 

April 1, 1952

First divorce

Riley King and Martha King divorce; there are no children from the marriage.

November 8, 1952

#1 Hit - You Know I Love You



 

Second hit “You Know I Love You” reaches #1 on the R&B charts. It spent 18 weeks on the charts.

November 9, 1952

December 31, 1955

A string of hits

Ten more B.B. King singles reach top 20 in R&B charts, including two #1 hits.

 

January 1, 1953

Leaves WDIA

B.B. King leaves the roster of DJ’s at WDIA—the road has too big a claim on his time.

 

February 1, 1953

#1 Hit - Please Love me

 

January 1, 1954

#1 Hit - You Upset Me Baby

B.B. King's fourth and final #1 hit.

 

 

"Big Red" the tour bus and the BB King Band

 

Forms the BB King Band

Forms first big “B.B. King Band,” buys first bus, “Big Red.” Touring compliment of 16 people, including Walker brothers (bus driver Cato, and bassist “Shinny”), Evelyn “Mama Nuts” Young, drummer Earl Forest (song writer of “Next Time You See Me”).

 

 

 

On May 14th, 2015, at 9:40pm, B.B. King passed away and the world became a smaller place. This is Buddy Guy’s statement on the passing of his friend, and an interactive timeline celebrating the life of B.B. King. (Click here to open the timeline full size in a new window.) -Ed
“This morning, I come to you all with a heavy heart.
BB King was the greatest guy I ever met. The tone he got out of that guitar, the way he shook his left wrist, the way he squeezed the strings… man, he came out with that and it was all new to the whole guitar playin’ world. He could play so smooth, he didn’t have to put on a show. The way BB did it is the way we all do it now. He was my best friend and father to us all.
I’ll miss you, B. I love you and I promise I will keep these damn Blues alive. Rest well.
All my love,
Buddy”

http://bg.buddyguy.com/the-life-of-b-b-king-an-interactive-timeline/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Sağduyu ve adaletin el ele yürümesi, yakın bir ilişkide olması gerekmez miydi? Eduardo Galeano

Sizinle bazı soruları kafamın içinde vızıldayıp duran sinekleri paylaşmak isterim. Adaletin doğru tarafı mı yukarıda duruyor? Yoksa dünya adaleti baş aşağı bir konumda donup kalmış durumda mı?

Terörist kim? Suçlu olan kim? Meksika’daki Atenco Halkı, Şili’nin yerlileri Mapucheler, Guatemala’nın Kekchieleri, Brezilya’nın köylüleri mi? Hepsi kendi topraklarına sahip olma haklarını savundukları için terörizm suçuyla suçlanıyorlar. Toprak kutsalsa, yasa böyle

söylemese bile, onu savunanlar da kutsal değil midir?

Foreign Policy dergisine göre Somali dünyanın en tehlikeli yeri. Ama korsanlar kim? Gemilere veya yıllarını dünyaya saldırıp şimdi de acıları için milyonlarca dolarla ödüllendirilen Wall Street spekülatörlerine saldıran aç insanlar mı? Dünya neden yağmacılarını ödüllendirir ki?

Adalet neden tek gözü görmez bir kadındır? Wal-Mart, dünyadaki en güçlü şirket, sendikaları yasaklıyor, McDonalds da öyle. Bu şirketler hem de cezadan muaf kalarak uluslararası hukuku neden ihlal ediyorlar? Bu bizim çağdaş dünyamızda, iş çöpten daha değersiz, işçilerin hakları daha da değersiz bulunduğu için olabilir mi?

Erdemli olan kim, alçak olan kim? Uluslararası adalet gerçekten varsa, güçlü olan neden hiç yargılanmıyor? En feci kasaplıkları tasarlayanlar hiç hapse gönderilmiyor. Acaba hapishanelerin anahtarlarını aslında bu kasaplar ellerinde tuttuğu için olabilir mi?

Birleşmiş Milletler’de veto gücü olan beş ülkeyi dokunulmaz kılan nedir? Veto güçleri ilahi bir kökenden mi geliyor? Savaştan kâr edenlerin barışı koruyacaklarına güvenebilir misiniz? Dünya barışının aynı anda dünyanın ana silah üreticileri olan aynı beş ülkenin elinde olması adil mi? Uyuşturucu tacirlerine saygısızlık etmeksizin, bu düzene örgütlü suç örneği diyemez miyiz?

Her yerde ölüm cezası olsun diye yaygara koparanlar, dünyanın sahipleri konusunda, tuhaftır, sessiz kalıyor. Daha da kötüsü bu yaygaracılar sürekli eli kanlı katillerden yakınıyor, ama eli füzeli baş katillerle ilgili hiçbir şey söylemiyorlar.

İnsan kendi kendine soruyor: Bu kerameti kendinden menkul dünya sahipleri öldürmeye bunca bayılıyorlarsa, insan cinai meyillerini toplumsal adaletsizlere yöneltsinler diye neden dua etmesin? Her bir dakika askeriyeye üç milyon dolar harcanırken, aynı zamanda 15 çocuğun açlıktan veya önlenebilir hastalıklardan yok olup gittiği bir dünya adil midir? Bu uluslararası toplum denen baştan ayağa kime karşı silahlanmıştır? Yoksulluğa mı, yoksullara mı?

Dayak cezasını canla başla savunanlar hiddetlerini neden tüketici topluma, kamu güvenliğine doğrudan bir tehdit oluşturan değerlere yöneltmez? Ya da, bitmez tükenmez reklam bombardımanı suça teşvik içermiyor mu? Bu bombardıman milyonlarca işsiz veya çok az para ödenen genci uyuşturup onlara olmak = sahip olmaktır, hayatın anlamı arabaların ya da marka ayakkabıların sahipliğinden gelir yalanını berdevam öğretmiyor mu? Sahip ol, sahip ol, deyip duruyorlar boyuna, bir şeyi olmayan hiçbir şeydir’i ima ederek. Ölüm cezası neden ölümün kendine uygulanmaz?

Dünya ölüme hizmet için düzenlenmiş durumda. Askeri sanayi karmaşasının ölüm üretirken kaynaklarımızın da enerjimizin de çoğunu yiyip bitirdiği doğru değil mi? Yine de dünyanın sahipleri şiddeti ancak başkaları uyguladığında kınıyor. Dünya dışı yaratıklar, eğer varlarsa, bu şiddet tekelini açıklanamaz bulacaktır. Keza, bütün kanıtlara karşın hayatta kalma umudunu sürdüren dünya sakinleri için de şu desteklenemezdir: Biz insanlar, birbirlerinin soyunu karşılıklı tüketmede uzman olan, sonuçta gezegenimizi ve üzerinde yaşayanları da yok edecek bir imha teknolojisi geliştirmiş tek hayvan türüyüz.

Bu teknoloji kendini korkuyla sürdürüyor. Bu korku, kaynakları askeriye ve polisle çarçur etmenin gerekçesi olan, düşmanlardan korku duyma hali.

Ölüm cezasını uygulamak demişken, neden korkunun kendisine ölüm cezasını yasalaştırmıyoruz? Böyle yapmak bizi, profesyonel korku salışlarını, evrensel diktatörlüklerine son verebilir hale getirmez mi? Panik yayanlar, bizi yalnızlığa mahkûm ediyor, dayanışmayı ulaşılmaz kılıyor:

Bize itin iti ısırdığı bir dünyada yaşadığımız, elinde olanın yanındakileri ezmesi gerektiği, her bir komşunun arkasında tehlike barındırdığı bir dünyada yaşadığımız yalanını öğretiyorlar. Sakın kendini, deyip duruyorlar, dikkatli ol; bu komşu senden çalar, diğeri sana tecavüz eder, o bebek arabasında Müslüman bir bomba var ve seni izleyen o kadın -o masum yüzlü komşun var ya- kesin sana domuz gribi bulaştırır.

Bu baş aşağı duran dünyada, bizi adalet ve sağduyunun en temel eylemlerinden bile korkar hale getiriyorlar. Başkan Evo Morales yerli çoğunluk aynada kendine baktığında artık utanç duymasın diye Bolivya’yı yeniden kurmaya başlayınca, edimleri paniğe yol açtı. Moralesin meydan okuması, gerçekten de ırkçı düzenin açısından bakıldığında felaket gibiydi; bu düzenden kazançlı çıkanlar Bolivya’nın tek seçeneğinin kendilerininki olduğuna inanıyordu. Onların inancına göre, kargaşa ve şiddeti Evo getirmişti, böylece üzerine atılan bu suç ulusal birliği havaya uçurup Bolivya’yı parçalara bölebilecek çabaların gerekçesi oldu.

Ekvador Başkanı Correa ülkesinin gayrimeşru borçlarını ödemeyi reddettiğinde, haberler finans dünyasında kargaşaya neden oldu ve Ekvador böylesi kötü bir örnek olmaya cüret ettiği için en korkunç, ivedi cezayla tehdit edildi. Eğer askeri diktatörlükler ve çapkın politikacılar hep uluslararası bankalar tarafından şımartılmışlarsa, halkın kendine vurulan sopanın ve onu yağmalayan açgözlülüğün bedelini ödemek zorunda olmasını, kaçınılmaz kaderimiz olarak kabullenmeye kendimizi çoktan şartlamış durumda değil miyiz?

İyi de, sağduyu ve adalet hep birbirinden ayrılmış halde miydi?

Sağduyu ve adaletin el ele yürümesi, yakın bir ilişkide olması gerekmez miydi?

Sağduyu ve aynı zamanda adalet, biz erkekler hamile kalmak zorunda olsaydık, kürtajın serbest olacağını söyleyen feminist sloganla uyumlu değil midir? Kürtaj hakkını neden yasallaştırmayalım? Bunun nedeni, kürtajın artık yalnızca parası yeten kadınların ve bu parayı alan doktorların ayrıcalığı olmaktan çıkması olmasın?

Aynı şey adalet ve sağduyunun reddedildiği skandal gibi başka bir vakada da gözleniyor: Uyuşturucular neden yasal değil? Bu da, tıpkı kürtaj gibi, bir halk sağlığı sorunu değil mi? Ve kendi nüfusunda diğer ülkelerden çok daha fazla uyuşturucu bağımlısı olduğunu söyleyen o ülkeye gelince, kendi uyuşturucu tedarikçilerini mahkûm edecek hangi ahlaki yetkeye sahip? Ve kendini uyuşturucu belasıyla savaşa adamış yaygın medya, dünyada tüketilen neredeyse bütün eroini sağlayanın tek başına Afganistan olduğunu neden hiç açık etmez? Afganistan, kendine hepimizi kurtarma görevini ihsan eyleyen o kutsanmış ülkenin işgali altında değil mi?

Neden uyuşturucular hepten yasal ilan edilmiyor? Askeri istilaların en iyi bahanesi oldukları, ayrıca gecenin karanlığında para aklama merkezleri olarak iş gören büyük bankalara en tatlı kârları sağladıkları için olabilir mi?

Lewis Carroll’ ın kraliçesi, Alice’e aynalar dünyasında adaletin nasıl dağıtıldığını şöyle açıklıyordu:

İşte Kral’ın Habercisi. Şimdi hapiste, cezasını çekiyor, mahkeme gelecek çarşamba başlayacak; ve tabii suç en son sırada.

Bazen, tarihin anlatıları kötü şekilde sona erer, ama tarihin kendisi hiç sona ermez. Tarih Hanım ne zaman hoşça kal dese, aslında yalnızca geri döneceğim, diyordur.

*Uruguaylı düşünür, yazar, gazeteci Eduardo Galeano’ nun İspanyolca yazdığı metnini, counterpunch.org’da yayınlanan Dr. Moti Nissani’nin İngilizce çevirisinden Tolga Korkut'un çevirisiyle.

From Iraq war to anti-austerity marches: do mass demonstrations achieve anything?

Within days of the Tory victory in the UK general election, 7 May 2015, thousands protested in towns and cities across the county, including London, Sheffield, Bristol and Cardiff.

 

 

Cole Moreton 17 May 2015. Posted in News     

If the biggest anti-war protest in human history could be ignored, then why bother marching for or against anything ever again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE PROTESTS are coming. Polish your placard, stitch up your banner, wash the tear gas out of that old bandana. Get ready to rally over the coming weeks, months and years, because what else is there to do?

 

If you don’t like the new government, if you don’t want to see the welfare budget cut by billions, if you are made fearful, distressed or furious by what the Conservatives are planning, what can you do except march? Join a political party?

 

Thousands of new members have signed up to the defeated parties since the election, apparently, but Labour is still in disarray, the Liberal Democrats are nowhere, the Greens unconvincing, Ukip is eating itself alive. The SNP is the only effective opposition and that’s no comfort outside Scotland. Things can only get bitter.

 

Many trade unions are too weak to strike; and David Cameron is planning to strangle the rest with changes to the law that the TUC says will leave its negotiators “with no more power than Oliver Twist when he asked for more”.

 

On the other hand, prime ministers who try to act strong bring out strong reactions in the people who oppose them. And social media makes it easier than ever to organise a protest: a generation ago, it took six months of campaigning to fill Trafalgar Square; now you can organise a flash mob in an hour.

 

Unions, faith groups, charities and campaigners are taking a longer run up by calling all dissenters to gather under the banner of the People’s Assembly, with a national march against austerity on 20 June that will start outside the Bank of England.

 

They will want a peaceful protest, a carnival of concern: a vast version of an anti-austerity event that happened in Bristol last Wednesday and drew a couple of thousand people. It got less attention than the smaller, more angry confrontation outside Downing Street the day after the Tories came back to power, when smoke bombs and traffic cones were thrown at the police (who had come in their body armour and riot shields ready for such a clash).

 

Protest thrives in days like these, when there seems to be no alternative, but is it worth it? Does it work?

 

Those are questions posed by a new film called We Are Many that looks back at the biggest protest in British history: the day a million people – or maybe two million – marched in London against the war in Iraq. They were from all walks of life, and many were protesting for the first time ever.

 

The actor Mark Rylance remembers in the film that he thought he had stumbled into a different march: “I thought: ‘This must be for something else.’ Because there were all these families, people with pushchairs and babies, people who I had never seen before on these things and the outpouring of rage from the people was so beautiful, really passionate and eloquent and beautiful, people crying out and shouting.”

 

We Are Many records the great swell of opinion that brought people out to protest in nearly 800 cities in 72 countries on 15 February 2003; and the great hope that grew in the hearts of many of the 30 million that surely there could be no war after this. But it was the day a generation lost its innocence.

 

“The scales fell from people’s eyes,” says the director Amir Amirani, who spent nine years making the film. “Up until then, they still had a faith in politics: that there would come a point at which the politicians would have to listen. The realisation that this was not the case was a huge moment which, as the author John le Carré says in the film, has stuck in our craw ever since.”

 

We Are Many will have its premiere in London on 21 May and be released in cinemas on 22 May.

 

Amirani, a Londoner of Iranian descent who trained at the BBC, says he is one of a “huge swathe of voters who have said they will never vote Labour again because of what the party did with that war. Where do those people go?”

 

His answer is that they have gone into single-issue politics or campaign groups such as 38 Degrees, whose co-founder David Babbs appears in the film.

 

“Quite a few went into the climate camp, the Occupy movement or direct action,” says Amirani. “A whole generation was radicalised and politicised, but just could not buy into the politics of their parents: ‘You vote Labour or you vote Tory.’ Those people grew up and they are looking for answers that the election did not give to them. What will they do next?”

 

Protest is the answer. They are in place and ready to go. But what’s the point? If the biggest anti-war protest in human history could be ignored, then why bother marching for or against anything ever again?

 

We Are Many has a good stab at coming up with a positive answer. First it argues that 15 February 2003 was like a spark for the Egyptian revolution. Then it suggests that Parliament’s decision not to go to war in Syria in 2013 was a direct result of politicians knowing there had been “structural shift in public opinion away from war”.

 

Surprisingly, Tony Blair’s ally Lord Falconer says the anti-war march did change things: “If a million people come out on the streets in the future, then what government is going to say they are wrong now? When the last time the public expressed their opposition in that way, history said the people on the street were right and not the people in the government.” That’s quite an admission from a man who still believes going to war was the right thing to do.

 

Dr Eliza Filby, a lecturer in modern British history at King’s College London, says he is right but such an admission is rare. “Yes, protesting does have an effect, but politicians don’t admit it. They can’t.”

 

History tells us there are three main ways of making an impact with a protest, she says. “You can have huge numbers, as they did in 2003. You can have prominent people – that works.” The third option is to smash things.

 

“You’ve got to have lots of violence against property and destruction of property, because that breeds chaos. Governments don’t like chaos, it undermines their authority. They won’t admit this, but they will do anything to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

 

One example is the race riots under Margaret Thatcher. “The riots all over in the summer of 1981 scared the hell out of a cabinet that was divided and weak. There was the Scarman report, the government did start putting money into the inner cities. Thatcherism was not stopped in its tracks but it did change,” says Dr Filby.

 

“The more chaotic a protest looks, the more a government will condemn it publicly and the more fearful it will be privately, and so liable to make changes.”

 

These can happen in secret over a period of time and are rarely exactly what the protesters want, she says: the protests in 2003 did not stop the invasion of Iraq but they did create a climate in which no prime minister can now go to war without the support of the Commons. “That is a direct consequence of the march.”

 

How many protests achieve anything at all? About a third is the answer, according a remarkable piece of work from the Initiative for Policy Dialogue at Columbia University. Researchers studied 843 protests in 84 countries between January 2006 and July 2013, from Occupy Wall Street to mining strikes in South Africa and rallies in Brazil.

 

The report says the number of protests is rising, more middle-class people are marching and more than half of demonstrations are against austerity measures or poverty. “Today we are experiencing another period of rising outrage and discontent and some of the largest protests in world history.”

 

But only 37 per cent of protests resulted in “some kind of achievement” in the short or medium term. Those that did were usually about domestic policy.

 

So, if you are going to protest, here’s how to have the most impact. First, make sure it’s an issue that effects people around you, not far away. Next, make a clear demand like stopping a war or raising the price farmers are paid for milk.

 

Get celebrity backers. Go break a window or two. Don’t hurt anybody or daub graffiti on war memorials as some idiot did during the Downing Street protest, but if you want to get noticed then absolutely do make it look as if there is chaos on the streets and the authorities can’t cope. These are the lessons from history.

 

Huge numbers really help. Be warned, though: even if you can draw a jaw-dropping, record-breaking crowd, be prepared for the politicians to ignore you. The only way to bring immediate change is to gather day after day after day in the same persistent massive show of force, as happened in Egypt and other countries during the Arab Spring.

 

Could that happen here? Do we even want it? As the film director Amir Amirani says: “This is the big question facing all of us in society: what is left for people to do? Is it non-violent resistance? Is it direct action? Is it Egyptian-style, Greek-style and Spanish-style opposition? If a million people do come out again, is it a one-time demonstration and then we all go home again like before?”

 

The protests are coming, but if they are ignored will we do what we did in 2003 and melt away, almost embarrassed to have caused a fuss?

 

“As Ken Loach says in our film, government can handle that,” says Amirani. “What it can’t handle is real organisation. Whether we will have that in Britain over the next five years remains to be seen.”

http://stopwar.org.uk/news/from-iraq-war-to-anti-austerity-marches-do-mass-demonstrations-achieve-anything