Numbers count for something

Socrates once complained that 'thorubos', the 'tumult, baying, shouting, the acclamation of the rabble' - disrupts the course of justice (Hughes, 2010). But what of organised mass action?

As opposed to the 'tumult of the rabble', organised protests have proved a powerful means of improving the way the world works. From Gandhi to Dr King to the women's suffrage movement, organised peaceful protest can be an excellent vehicle for change.

In that spirit, movements have been made in the Lords to repeal rules preventing protests within 1km of parliament. Lord Tyler's private member's bill seeks to break down the barriers that prevent the powerful hearing the voices of demonstrators. While protests are well coordinated campaigns, such as the Avaaz involvment with anti-Murdoch & anti-News Corp protests (Kingsley, 2011), demonstrations and strike action can withstand the calls of reactionaries for continued suppression of mass action.

Charlie Gilmour's imprisonment, along with other incidents resulting from recent protests, has shown us that violence is always a risk when demonstrating. And when violence occurs, it not only sullies the name of mass action, but can overshadow the purpose of the event itself. In the Westminster cuts and tuition fees protests, the causes behind them became obscured by so-called teenage 'anarchist' window smashing. And in the past week we have seen a matter of police conduct in Tottenham completely drowned out by arson & looting - more violence that can be used as justification for anti-strike & anti-protest regulations.

This is no new debate. It is Dr King or Malcolm X; it is Suffragists or Suffragettes; it is non-violent civil disobedience or the use of violence to advance a cause.

The women's suffrage movement in particular is a fine example of this violent versus non-violent conflict. The Suffragettes have become the better known group, but for all the wrong reasons; that is they are known primarily for the militant extremism that led some members to lose their lives. Yet they failed to achieve the aims of their cause. The larger, more organised and more peaceful Suffragists, backed by women & men alike, engaged in peaceful protests & debates. Eventually they tipped the balance of the argument in their favour, thanks largely to the widespread involvement of their members in taking over previously 'masculine' jobs during the Great War.

For years, organised protests, demonstrations and strikes have been an effective way of displaying public consensus on an issue, often in opposition to majority elected members; and acting as a check & balance that keeps both sides honest. Where we can overcome Socrates' 'thorubos', mass action plays an essential role in the democratic life of a nation.

But when we act we must always consider what our actions will justify and legitimise.

What past incidents will my actions be used to justify? What future actions will I legitimise? The fact is that numbers count for something - but for what will you make them count?

==========
References:
==========
+ Bettany Hughes' 'The Hemlock Cup'; Cape, 2010.

+ Lord Tyler's second reading of 'Demonstrations within the vicinity of Parliament Bill' to the House of Lords; 10 June 2011.

+ Patrick Kingsley's 'Avaaz: activism of "slacktivism"?'; in The Guardian, 20 July 2011.