Did ENOUGH people come out onto the streets and stay there until the situation changed? No. A protest march ain't going to cut it, clearly it wont. The evidence demonstrates that fact. The only way for a state to stop the kind of effective protest that i imagine is what the Chinese did in Tiananmen Square Our Government has no stomach for that nonsense and therefore the only option would be to cave in. No Government could stop a sufficiently large crowd of determined people from, for instance, over running the houses of parliament. I am not advocating this behaviour i just see it as obvious
So a mob of one million people swarm onto the streets and demonstrate violently for X. What about the other 60 million people in the UK? Most of them may not support X; they may strongly oppose X; they may have voted against X, and intend to do so again. Democracy is not just about who can put on the streets the largest and most aggressive mob. Here's an example: fox hunting with dogs. Large numbers of people demonstrated against the fox hunting ban, but polls showed a much larger number, a huge majority in fact, in favour of the ban. The demonstrators complained bitterly because their views did not prevail, some even saying it was "undemocratic"! Here's an opposite example: the Poll Tax. Large numbers of people demonstrated against the Poll Tax, and polls showed a very large number, a huge majority in fact, also against the Poll Tax. The demonstrators' views did eventually prevail, because they had captured the national mood.
Pete: # who said anything about violence. # I was not advocating it as an alternative to democracy, in fact as you will have read i don't advocate it at all neccessarily. However i maintain that to counter the notion that the people have no power, my scenario is valid.
I agree. It is legitimate for people to demonstrate, to call attention to their concerns, and to try and build support. If the demonstrators speak for a majority, they may well prevail in reality. But if demonstrators try to impose their unpopular views on others by threats, that is not legitimate.
I agree but that is not what i said. Unless you believe that a large enough group of people on the streets is of itself a threat, i dont.
Wide-scale demonstrations involving thousands of individuals are relatively rare. The majority of people, when faced with something they disagree with, will mutter or complain against it ... but they won't take to the streets. For an issue to bring people out of their semi-apathy, to campaign energetically, there has to be a great deal of dissatisfaction. To bring greater numbers out of their homes to demonstrate, the dissatisfaction needs to be correspondingly greater. The trick for Government is to work out whether a large demonstration represents: 1. a small block of people, all of whom feel passionate about the issue (e.g. miner's strikes) 2. or is it down to a wider issue, affecting greater numbers of individuals, which is so contentious that it brings people who are normally apathetic out into the streets. For Government, Option 1 can and will be safe to ignore. Option 2 is far rarer but the perils in ignoring such a demonstration are sufficient to bring a politician into a cold sweat.
1. A small block of people? ffs............you are talking whole communities after communities.......
Chill, Andy! Small in this context means, "Unlikely to be enough to change the number of our seats in Parliament". I'm not trying to define "small" ... it's the politicos that are doing that
These demonstrations of 'people power' are so few and far between they barely warrant a mention. As for poll tax, I pay more in council tax than I ever did in poll tax. The fact remains that in more mundane circumstances we have no power to stop the councils and the government doing whatever they want. And if I don't like something I will stand up and shout about it, voter or not. I don't need to be a club member to make myself heard.
I've just checked...I'm the only one with a safety deposit box* in Hatton Cross. *Well when I say safety deposit box I actually mean a small metal chocolate box with my change in it.
Good point. To take the examples from the 1980s, the Thatcher government took the view that being very nasty to the miners would gain them more votes than it lost, and they turned out to be right; the more the miners demonstrated, the more true that became. They also took the same view as regards imposing the Poll Tax, but they turned out to be wrong; the demonstrators caught the national mood, like I said. There are some valuable political lessons in all this.
Massive demos against Iraq War too but made no difference. Tony knew best. God was on his side and God trumps an electorate every day of the week. Mind you, it's hard to imagine an anti war demo descending into the only demo that a government takes notice of - a full-blown riot.
I spoke to the guy that was organising protests about Westminster council charging bikes to park. I went on 3 demos, the last being 4000-strong, but it was all too friendly and too legal. I told him we needed to make the evening news, and he said no. So we pay to park now.
You should vote folks. I can't argue too much as i never got to register in time myself. But someone at work said, it's not about getting in power who you want, but stopping those you don't want. Stating that us in the discussion didn't want Muslim law in Britain. But if none Muslims for example don't vote, and all Muslims did vote how long would it be before Britain was not how we know it.
