I’m surprised that the article doesn’t mention the figure of 3.5%. There are plenty of references to this number on the profiles of people on social media. It’s the amount of a population needed to effect change in that change has, it is claimed, always happened where the number of people actively supporting a particular cause has hit this threshold.
Reading it it really is a better article than you make out saying that non-violent non normative actions can be the most effective.
It also mentions starting point which for me is very important. For my example I’ll take animal rights movements who used a lot of direct action and in doing so came out with a lot of information that shocked public opinion. This was essential as abuse to animals was very secretive also animal rights.
Such things are probably easier and quicker these days with hacking and stuff.
Another recent example is the ‘Gilets Jaune’ in France they occupied round abouts and got immense support, that support as many of their demands where common. They took over round abouts preventing free traffic flow. The support for the movement only wained after the government acted and satisfied a large proportion of the public (violence or not).
2 examples with very different starting points one considered quirky at the onset and gained support with information gained from direct action. The other that had large popular support from the go as it concerned the well being of the majority of the populace (there was syncroniseation).
I think BLM needs more study as it clearly shows an enormous divide in the US populace it really is white Vs black and a really horrible starting point. (Let’s face it the go to protests they chose in the article BLM and Arab-Isreali relations in Isreal are wicked starting points).
Certainly a very simple strategy, just engage rent-a-thug and you’re away.
Waiting for the Big Brother one!
No, he doesn’t.
Looks like Williamson has stuck his head above the parapet again
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/gavin-williamson-schools-covid-lockdown-b1827735.html
Can we ban all these parasites from having side jobs writing for papers please? Cabinet members have far too much to do running the bloody country, especially at the moment.
As for bad behaviour in schools, it should be cracked down on anyway.
Agree on writing for papers
On Williamson however he seems to be blind to the fact that people have just come back from basically a year out of school. He also ignores that many schools already have no phone policies etc.
As usual he seems disconnected from reality.
Or same one?
Fuck, I hate some of the bellends in this country. Absolute disgrace
I couldn’t agree more.
I’d ban all MPs from second jobs if I had my way. You’re elected to represent a constituency, then that’s a full time job in my opinion. You’re in Parliament every day required and in you constituencies dealing with local issues when not.
Great statement
This is relevant.
FT article from 27 March last year
https://archive.ph/X1YHM
By the way, in case it ever becomes an issue, I don’t want Boris Johnson at my funeral either.
Rumours that the enquiry will be headed by George Osborne, Samantha Cameron, and the Hinduja brothers so far unconfirmed.
David Cameron and Rishi Sunak are reported to be confident that they’ll be cleared.