How can the West be concidered Democratic when mass protesting achieves nothing?

Question

The best example was when hundreds of thousands marched through London to protest the war in the Middle East and the Government did absolutely nothing regardless of all the protesters? I'm fairly sure there are countless other examples in other countries as well.

Given the fact that as a people, us Brits are easily walked over, that so many stood up in protest and nothing was done, how can people say we live in a democratic society?

Well I don't know what it's like over in the US, here, in the UK, I am noticing an ever increasing attitude of can't be bothered.

I'm not sure of the stats, but I know there is a massive % of the population that doesn't vote.

I'm 17 so I can't vote yet, but I don't see why that means I cannot be interested in politics.

The government know how to control the masses, the UK population works on an individual basis, even our families have broken down to a state of non existence. 1 in 3 families are single parent ones. I admire protesters, because they can be bothered to do something. Then the government, and people here, can say well only a small fraction of the population wants to stop the war, just because x amount of people turned up at protests. I wonder what the situation would be if the Government told people for the war to meet up at a certain place and then just see how many people didn't bother to show up for either for or against meetings. I reckon it would be a hellofalot.

Answer 1

you elected those leaders. therefore it is democratic society. if things got stopped everytime some hippies protested what kind of society would that be?

Answer 2

Like the man in an answer below wrote time will tell. Other than that perhaps using Separation Of Church and State or some variant to place Greed itself as a religion in a Church Of Greed outside politics. A religion cannot inter fer with other people under this law ,rule. Neither can National Armies be used to fight wars if Greed were a religion. All adherents could do would be worshipp it. None can be harmed under this law. maybe try both this approach and protest.

Answer 3

You are wrong. Two million protested in February 2003 against the invasion of Iraq. It eventually led to Tony Blair's downfall. It took some time, but it finally happened. And Brown is slowly taking British troops out - not as quickly as I'd like to see them, though.
Also note that last week that the Iraq war was the cause of the ruling party losing the general election in Australia, as well as a couple of years ago in Spain.

Answer 4

You cant run a country by mob rule. If the people are that upset, and a majority of them vote for change, change will happen. Just because a few thousand people get mad does not and should not effect a nation and how it does business.

I don't always agree with the President, Bush, Clinton, Ford, Carter, Reagan or any of them, but, I didn't protest, I voted and that is the only way a voice can be heard. If enough people vote, their voices get louder until it is heard loud and clear.

Answer 5

You are lucky to be in the really democratic west where mass protesting is permitted. However violent protests are not permitted, usually some anarchist group jumps on the back of a peaceful protest and that's why they are broken up by the authorities. Perhaps you would prefer to live in Zimbabwe or one of the so called communist democratic republics where protesters are beaten up or shot by the government forces if they dare to protest.

Answer 6

Sorry my friend you have missed the plot, the fact that you can quite freely post questions on this site is an example of democracy in it self, albeit, a small one,
You write the massed protests achieved nothing again I must disagree that emphasises democracy that they could mount a protest in any event.,our parliamentary system is democratic you vote , you elect, or not, as the case maybe.

Answer 7

That MAY be your experience; however, over an 8 years period I watched that method of protest stop a Raging war in Viet Nam. THAT, and several thousand tons of TNT dropped on Hanoi in '72; but, it was the prostests' that really forced it to an early end. I think the trick it to stick with it for the long run; just as the "Joint Chiefs of Staff" do with thier war plans.
Am I on the U.K site?? Or are you on the United States site?? I'm confused here, or my machine is.

Answer 8

Because while there might have been a few hundred thousand marching in London, there were 60 million people who did not.
Democracy does not mean giving in to the demands of a single group. Democracy means giving people the chance to vote in a free and fair election.
That's what general elections are - you did vote in the last one I take it??

Answer 9

i think of you may recommendations-set it from 3 perspectives; college training and its availability and affordability, retirement and what the destiny holds for them and how undesirable it may desire to be as antagonistic to now and how it rather is for their mum and dad residing on fastened earning or approximately to survive fastened earning, thirdly-our environment. jointly as those issues are actually not immediately appropriate all 3 carry extensive social and financial effect for the greater youthful adults of this united states of america which will influence them for some destiny years as quickly as they're nicely previous their mid 30s and 40s an into their retirment years even. by changing into in touch and helping and taking a hand now with the techniques and policies which would be made they're helping to set the direction for their destiny.

Answer 10

There were also large protests in the UK by Muslims to wanted death to the Infidels. Should the government have started shooting the English?

Answer 11

Protests must be considered by the government because it is the impulse of the people.