Donate SIGN UP

Protest Vs Extremism

Avatar Image
modeller | 09:35 Thu 13th Jun 2013 | Society & Culture
35 Answers
Which achieves its purpose . Peaceful protests or more extreme action.
What causes authorities to take action ?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 35rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by modeller. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Ireland would still be part of Britain if it wasn't for long violent protest
peaceful protest is good, violence is not.
That's the problem that the suffragists had. Marches, petitioning Parliament, speeches, rallies, extensive argument, even getting within an ace of a bill being passed, all had failed. The Pankhursts decided on a campaign of what we would now call terrorism. This has been played down since, but it involved setting fire to buildings, including a church and a home of the Prime Minister.Damage running into what would now be millions of pounds was caused. The death of Emily Wilding Davidson at the Derby was dramatic but a mere part. All this probably had a great effect in showing that large scale civil disobedience was in the offing at a time when the government already had problems with labour unrest and was living with thoughts of uprisings all over Europe and the Russian Revolution developing.

But we'll never know with certainty because the Great War intervened. However, after it, the government wanted peace at home and may well have remembered what had happened before.
Anything that has a financial bearing or effects opinion polls will work.
//peaceful protest is good, violence is not. //

So shall we take the army's guns away and give them placards?
The Civil Rights campaigners in the USA used peaceful protest. But maybe they were successful because they were pushing for changes whose time had come.
Question Author
em //peaceful protest is good, violence is not//

Those are not the questions, which were : #Which achieves its purpose .# and #What causes authorities to take action ? #
Question Author
I can not think of a single peaceful large protest that achieved its aim without provoking extreme action on one side or the other.

//The Civil Rights campaigners in the USA used peaceful protest.//
That was peaceful on the part of the protesters but it provoked violence on the part of the authorities and lasted for 20 odd years. Some say it still hasn't fully achieved its object.
If an e-petition gets more than 10,000 signatures the subject has to be brought before parliament so the one I mentioned a few weeks ago has a result!
Question Author
jomifl That's interesting . What was the subject and did it result in the change you wanted ? Or will/was it the usual talk talk ?

I know some petitions are debated in parliament but don't get any further,and they are usually on small local issues . In my area we are protesting about an unwanted development but unless we do something dramatic/extreme we don't stand a chance.
For part of the history of peaceful protest, try reading about Gandhi. He obtained freedom from colonialism for India by peaceful protest.
Gandhi may be an example of the time being right. Britain was bankrupt after the War. We could not afford India. We would never have given India up if it it was profitable to us and we could afford to administer it as in the past. Gandhi succeeded by pushing against an open door and there was always the thought that, if we didn't give up, violence would follow; Gandhi wanted a peaceful solution but others would not, if denied; with even more expensive consequences, to no avail to us
JTP do you always twist everything, i honestly don't know why i bother to respond.
i would go with peaceful protests, extreme actions as we have seen over and over rarely gets the results it wants. Look at Syria, which is just about to fall into the abyss, now that the US has said send it will send troops, arms.
Jake, you do say some daft things at times - you really do.
JTP you seem to assume that all soldiers are violent, that is absurd thinking. They are paid to do a job, and would be the first ones we call upon to defend us in the event of war, they often get the short end of the stick when there is a strike, cleaning up other people's mess.
not 10,000, over 100,000 thousand

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/how-it-works
I'm not sure Jake would want the army to defend us.
if not the army who?
I often get the impression that Jake wouldn't want anyone to defend us. ;o)

1 to 20 of 35rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Protest Vs Extremism

Answer Question >>