St Paul's Tent City - whose voice is being heard?

This week I was set the task of setting up an online discussion on current affairs, aimed at 16 year olds in just 500 words. 

Here is my attempt:

Since mid-October, some 200 tents have sprung up around St Paul’s Cathedral. The tents represent the English version of a worldwide occupation movement with satellites in New York, South Africa, Rotterdam and Athens. The movement claims that the aim of the occupation is to reclaim public spaces, for the public, but has a strong ‘anti-Capitalist’ theme in London. The occupation represents a shift in the way the public protest, away from marches towards occupation or sit-ins. Although the genesis of the St Paul’s site came from the Occupy Wall Street campaign it is quite transformed by the location of the site, outside one of London’s most significant landmarks and religious sites. As there has been plenty of discussion as to what should happen to the tent city it is interesting to think about who has the right to have their own voice heard and why?

Protesters

The protesters outside St Paul’s have been non-violent and are camped on public property; as such they cannot be easily removed without a specific sanction. With increasing levels of legislation being applied to traditional methods of protest, criticism of the government has arguably become more difficult. Many of the protesters camped outside St Pauls continue to go to work and have created a learning environment. Is the occupation just an innovative way of getting through a legal loophole providing accountability for banks and governments?

Local businesses

For many local businesses the situation looks quite different! The tent city occupies a large space in the heart of the city from which it criticises, amongst other things, capitalism. This has had a detrimental effect on the sales of many businesses, but this occupation is particularly lethal for the small businesses. Local businesses often do not have the support of other outlets across the country or investors to support them like their larger counterparts. One of the occupation aims is to criticise these big commercial enterprises; is it possible that the protestors are actually having the inverse action to that which they planned, by cutting off small businesses and barely denting the sales of the big firms?

St Paul’s Cathedral

The location of the protest is just outside one of the most internationally recognised church buildings in the UK, St Paul’s Cathedral. When the tent city arrived the church had to shut its doors for health and safety risks. It has been shut for nearly two weeks now at a daily cost of £23,000! Buildings like St Paul’s cost a lot of money to maintain and £322,000 will take a long time to raise alongside ongoing costs. It is the first time the church has shut since the Blitz (1940’s) and tourists and worshippers alike have missed out on its services. Should protestors gathered for political reasons be able to stop other people from religious worship?

As the tent city looks set to stay, maybe it is time to consider whose voice is being heard?

What do you think? And what role do you think social networking plays in our understanding of these events? Write your comments below, but remember that only polite messages will be posted. Anything deemed offensive to any party will not be posted; democratic debate is encouraged.