Protesting
 

Protesting.
What are you views on public protesting?
Have you ever protested?
Is there anything that would make you take to the streets!
Does protesting achieve anything?

I am in the GMB union and work in a school so recently we protested about the changes to pensions... there was a protest in central London and also a local protest at the town hall on two separate days. I feel in the main protesting doesn't achieve as much as striking, but if you feel strongly about something peaceful protest is better than apathy I guess.

Never protested.

I dont think it acheives anything.

Despite that...I was tempted to join the newcastle protest about the bedroom tax mind, because it affects so many people that I know.

If you feel strongly about it you should, if it doesn't achieve anything then at the very least you went out and showed your support, just leave your baseball bat at home.

I know protesting gets a bad name, but actually it is quite a good day out.

Yeah I probably should have just sucked it up and gone :laugh:

Not many showed up at the newcastle one though apparently, so I would have felt a bit of a plum. Was thousands at the one in glasgow.

I'm generally a too apathetic and lazy person to bother protesting

Yeah I'd expect that from a Marshall :tongue:

am I the only protester on here then?

I hate it.

I support protesting in general as a principle (although that sight of thousands of French people protesting AGAINST gay marriage a few weeks ago was upsetting)....

It doesn't seem to accomplish much though.

I think when you live in a democracy there are so many more productive avenues to affect change that protesting doesn't really make much sense. It's much more important to talk to your community and get them to vote for candidates that support your cause instead of trying to intimidate people with a MOB. unfortunately when people get together to protest, it ends up just being a MOB. or sometimes even worse, a riot.

If you are happy to accept everything the government dishes out to you without question then that's your perogative of course.

seeing as it does pretty much nothing, yep, that's exactly the case

[QUOTE=lostalex;5936398]I support protesting in general as a principle (although that sight of thousands of French people protesting AGAINST gay marriage a few weeks ago was upsetting)....

It doesn't seem to accomplish much though.

I think when you live in a democracy there are so many more productive avenues to affect change that protesting doesn't really make much sense. It's much more important to talk to your community and get them to vote for candidates that support your cause instead of trying to intimidate people with a MOB. unfortunately when people get together to protest, it ends up just being a MOB. or sometimes even worse, a riot.[/QUOTE]

Not always Alex there are many many peaceful demonstrations held every week which go off with no trouble at all.

We are the only bulwark against the country descending into anarchy I'll have you know

It might work though at some point, as protesting has helped change laws in the past, and governments have been known to do U turns when faced with a public backlash.

:laugh2:

I just think it's very unprofessional.

Just say I protested, I work with children. If I protested, (and say more members of staff did too), then we would lose the ratio of having 1 member of staff with 4 children. If they lost me, it would then become 1 member of staff for every 6 children. with my age group this is difficult. Now saying that it's not only me protesting, we could loose another 3/4 staff. Then we would have a 1:15 staff/children ratio.

i wouldn't do that the my manager/the staff I work with. it would be incredibly selfish, not to mention potentially dangerous for the kids.

hell, with this new government scheme where we have a higher ratio of children with less staff, I want to protest. Instead, i'll probably sign a petition, write a letter or let people know how i feel. I'm not going to act selfishly, take a day off work and hope that standing in a crowd will help.

it gets its point across, at least

that is a form of protest, you don't need to stand on a picket line to protest. Most protests are held on a Saturday when most people are off work. Going on Strike is a different matter.

i thought the OP meant protesting in the streets...

anyway, yeah i'd do that if it's a form of protesting.

but yeah, once people take time off work to protest, i think it's too far.

I got myself new Nikes and a hd tv during the riots :pipe:

were you protesting against capitalism GG, May day is around the corner.:joker:

I have, and to be fair the British people are reasonably tolerant, all they want is a fair crack of the whip.
Are they getting that now...How else are we meant to get our feelings across when a strongly worded letter just won't cut it?

and my bra you thieving slut

The Union organised the pension protest on a Saturday so there was no time taken off. When I was in my 20s I worked in the Civil Service and they went on Strike I went in as i couldn't afford to strike and lose a days pay, it was simple econmics so I get where you are coming from in taking time off.

:laugh:

Yep, I was fighting capitalism and poverty at the same time.

:laugh2:

For me, I don't really like marches and protesting demos really but I would never say they shouldn't be allowed.

I think now, what happens is that genuine protesters do a march or demo but it ges hijacked by troublemakers who go on to cause damage at times and asl bring down the march/demo by their actions.

Sadly the media go along, not to highlight the grievance the genuine protesters have but to really look out for the trouble aspect of such protests and that is what gets broadcast.The genuine protesters then often get labelled as louts or scum along with the troublemakers.

I will though,break my own rule not to join a protest and join any such protests against the bedroom tax.
Sometimes and I hate to say this, there has to be great disruption to get a totally unjust law or ruling done away with especially when you have a heartless Govt that refuses to listen.
However, though only to certain sections of UK citizens, in this Govt's case it is the weakest and most vulnerable they treat like mushrooms,keeping them in a dark place and shovelling .... muck on them.

Totally joey, I agree will all your points here, those who have a genuine grievance and wish to make their voice heard are drowned out by the media wailing against one or two individuals who have broken the law during the course of the protest, whether or not they are there as part of that protest. You can then bet this will be the lasting impression and image that is used, so the original message is lost or rendered irrelevant.

I just hope that the heavy handed tactics such a kettling are not used again, this practice was unnecessary and once again showed the police used as militia during protests.
I had a giggle at your last point, this is how the public feel, they are confused and let down by government, they feel betrayed and abandoned. From cradle to grave there is not one section of society the welfare cuts have not negatively affected. Anger, frustration and resentment at the cutting adrift of the poor, elderly and disabled in Britain is building.
But most of all I would say they feel blindsided, nobody in 2010 saw this coming.... just like in 1979 nobody saw the cuts inflicted crippling communities in the early 80's coming.

I don't know how or why people get so jumpy at the mention of protests, they are testament to the gumption and the spirit of the British. The very thing that we were expected to feel proud about during the war is now seen as a negative. Those who protest are seen as those to be subdued and tutted at... why?

this was the real reason behind the riots:shocked:

Not every time.
Many times it gets the Public Hating Students

We'd all be paying Thatcher's Poll Tax if it wasn't for "protest" ..... :pipe:

Yeah screw those stupid suffragettes and their pointless protests duh.
Women voting pah wasting there time they were. :whistle:

And what about that knobhead in Tiananmen Square pah should have just took his shopping home.

I have and do protest both in real life and online if i feel something is unfair or encroaches against someones life unfairly i will do what little i can to help their cause.

Its easy to sit and do nothing or to try and look down on others that are trying to fight for what they believe in when it doesnt directly effect you. Thats the cowards option.
When it comes to something that is going to impact on you personally dont be suprised when you are left on your own if all you have done is look down and sneer at people in the past.

The post made above as to the poll tax is a perfect example of why demos and marches should be allowed.
It was a ridiculous and unjust policy and it was the demonstrations that helped make the Govt get nervous and think again as to it,then get rid of it.

Campaigners would gather at a mass rally before departing
 

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...htsspeaker.jpg

That lot look like troublemakers to me ..... :suspect:

:laugh2:

150,000 people took part in each of the 1961 and 1962 marches. Their achievements may have been minimal but they considerably increased public awareness of government deception and self-interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaig...r_CND_policies

The Poll Tax riots in the early 90s, despite being quite violent at times, did bring about the end of Poll Tax and forced the government to rethink... and yet the peaceful protests by hundreds of thousands of people against going into Iraq were completely ignored and we were taken to war on a string of lies. I believe in people's right to protest, but I'm not sure it ever achieves anything.

You didn't get the right to vote just because those with wealth and power thought the masses should join their club ..... :nono:

As many as 15 "protesters" were killed and 700 injured at Peterloo, where a crowd of 60,000–80,000 (including many women) had gathered to demand the reform of parliamentary representation, by the sabre, bayonet, ball and hoof of the Manchester and Salford Yeomanry ..... :sad:

I do 100% agree we were taken to war on a lie as to Iraq, although I do myself believe the World is a better place without Saddam Hussein in power,

In fact near the whole of Parliament didn't listen to those demonstrating against the invasion and I firmly believe, without a lie or with a lie, no matter which party was in Govt, Labour or Conservative that we would have still supported the US led invasion of Iraq and the results would have been the same probably.
I do though agree, we were likely taken into that conflict and action by being misled by the PM of the day,namely Tony Blair.

Which was ridiculous anyway because no way would the then opposition Conservative party gone against the requests of a Republican President of the USA either.
So the vote would have been won in any event to go to war as to Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2477023.stm

Investigations revealed the gun was part of "Project Babylon", the brainchild of Canadian Dr Gerald Bull, who was assassinated shortly before the parts were discovered.

In April 1990 two men - a scientist and a director of the company Walter Somers company - were charged in connection with the "supergun".

However, charges against them were withdrawn suddenly and without explanation in November.

In 1991 after Iraq's defeat in the Gulf War United Nations weapons inspectors working in the country destroyed two "superguns".

A 1992 report on the affair concluded the government had known more about Project Babylon than it had admitted.

British Ambassador's likely return

9. The FCO is concerned that Walker's return to Baghdad has been caught up with factors extraneous to his recall. Originally scheduled to return on April 16, his departure was delayed first by news of the interception of nuclear triggers and now by the supergun controversy. The FCO told us (please protect) that Saudi Ambassador to the US Prince Bandar had convinced "the highest levels of the Government," i.e., Mrs. Thatcher, that British Ambassador Walker should not return unless the Iraqis cede something on British detainees. Otherwise the British move would be perceived as caving in to Iraq. Bandar reportedly pledged to seek to convince Saddam Hussein to make some gesture on one of the two long-term British detainees – Daphne Parish (who was sentenced to fifteen years for spying in connection with the Bazoft affair) or Ian Richter (who is serving a life sentence). The FCO believes the possibility of such a gesture is close to nil.

http://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/109446

(Margaret Thatcher made the seemly applications for clemency, and the incident certainly strained the countries’ relationship. But the Tory government would later be embarrassed by revelations that, before and even after Bazoft’s hanging, it was pushing for closer trade relations and helping British firms skirt the law to ship Baghdad the weapons it would use against British troops in the coming Gulf War.)

http://www.executedtoday.com/tag/daphne-parish/

Here is some Thatcher related information for those who are interested in it.

I don't know what this post has to do with anything I said, and I didn't need the history lesson.

I get the feeling this was aimed at me, but without any kind of comment, it's hard to say.