To think there shouldn't be a right to *protest*

[Bathingnow]

People constantly repeat that the right to protest is some kind of sacred democratic principle that must be protected at all costs. I genuinely do not understand why this is taken as an unquestionable truth. What about the rights of everyone else? What about the right to go to work, get children to school, attend hospital appointments, or simply go about daily life without being obstructed, shouted at, or intimidated?

I fully support the right to dissent. People should be able to express views that challenge the government, corporations, or any other powerful body. That is a basic part of a free society. Free expression means being allowed to say unpopular things without fear of punishment. It does not mean having a free pass to disrupt other people’s lives or hold them hostage to your cause.

If you believe for example climate change is an emergency and the government should “just stop oil”, fine. Argue your case. Write letters to newspapers. Lobby MPs. Stand in Speaker’s Corner and shout yourself hoarse. Post endlessly on social media. Organise debates, whatever. All of that is legitimate and entirely compatible with democracy. None of it requires blocking roads, gluing yourself to infrastructure, or preventing ordinary people from getting where they need to be.

The idea that making life miserable for strangers somehow advances your cause is absurd. Blocking an ambulance, stopping a parent getting to work, or preventing someone from attending a funeral does not win hearts and minds. It just creates resentment. You are not enlightening people. You are inconveniencing them and expecting applause for it.

This applies to every issue, whether it is climate change, Gaza, housing, or anything else. A cause does not become morally superior simply because the people shouting about it feel very strongly. Once a protest crosses the line into infringing on other people’s civil liberties, it stops being a protest and starts being coercion.

Democracy should protect free speech and peaceful expression. It should also protect the public from disruption imposed by self appointed activists who believe their views trump everyone else’s rights. If exercising a so called right to protest requires trampling over the freedoms of others, then that right needs serious limits. I see no reason why the ability to disrupt daily life should be treated as some untouchable democratic virtue.

I'm curious, you know all the bad parking threads we have on MN. Well imagine the one blocking the driveway or whatever says, 'I'm not a dickhead, I'm protesting climate change.'

Do you think that would make it OK?

The right to protest IS the right to dissent and does not empower you to commit public law offences or block the highway.

Do you mean that you wish a harsher line was taken with the enforcement of public order laws in relation to protest so that there was less inconvenience caused to the public as a whole?

Depends upon who you are tbh. I you are protesting because you want 1000s of undocumented men entering the country illegally, crack on.
If you're protesting against 1000s of the above, you're a far right thug and should never see the light of day ever again 😉

Well, Violence etc is dealt with under existing laws.

Any number of people on the streets, peacefully marching will by its very nature inconvenience people/block roads.... a public nuisance if you like, same as our local 1/2 and Full charity Marathons.

"Inappropriate Protests" who do you think should decide that?

Unfortunately, Governments once in power, tend to want to stay in power and do what they like, protest, even violent protest is one way to ensure they don't forget who really calls the tune...

See how Labour have now cracked down far harder on immigration than the Tories ever did because of protest...

I thought I was clear enough in the OP. I even used chatgpt to make my points clear.

You should absolutely have the right to voice dissenting opinions. You should absolutely not have the right to stop other people going about their daily lives.

It cause should be allowed to block the roads for a rally once maybe twice a year. Similar to the marathon for example. But just like you wouldn't accept a marathon being run every second day and blocking public roads and inconvenience together so it should be illegal to call it a protest and do the same.

Yes. And presumably you won't be blocking any roads or disrupting anyone else. Good luck with not being listened too.

Yes particularly from those on certain protest marches

You are wrong. Yes, sometimes protests inconvenience others but it is very easy for a government to ignore dissent - until it emerges on the streets.

are you the poster that thinks people who are in net tax deficit shouldn't get the vote?

Surely the whole purpose of public dissent is that it is in some way, inconvenient. Why else would the government pay any attention?

Are you thinking of the pro-Palestine marches? I strongly objected to the message they were chanting, but in a free society everyone must have a voice.

Can you imagine a time when you might need to stand up for your rights or for your family or community. Have you never been on the receiving end of an injustice? Are you able to put yourself in someone else’s shoes for a moment?

Well is say any march that has placards calling for the decapitation of women and tories, or to hang women for knowing that you cant change sex would be a start don't you

The right to protest should not give you the right to break other laws. Protest can be done while allowing society to function.

It doesn't.

It's sort of idea that Reform or the further right of the Tory party would come up with recently. If you feel you're pigeon holed that's your problem.

It's bad enough that the current government are trying to dictate who can protest and who can't but banning things just because it inconveniences you ? 🥴

There are far too many posters on here complaining that protesters shouldn't be allowed to break the law. Let's be clear. No-one is allowed to break the law because they are protesting. If they are breaking the law whilst protesting they can be arrested and/or prosecuted.

You call us wheelchair warriors, cause we dare to kick up a fuss,
And we'll keep on inconveniencing you, ‘til you let us on the bus!"

Polite protests got us nowhere. Rights and equality bills got buried or talked out of time in parliament.

We couldn't travel by buses, coaches or tube trains and could only travel by mainline trains by giving several days notice, and in the guards van (without toilet access) IF there was considered enough space, and at the guards discretion.

Ramps and accessible transport would just be too difficult to create and expensive, and even if they did, we wouldn't get far once we got off public transport, they said.

We stopped being helpless cripples asking nicely, and became an actual issue and problem for some who could access the public transport all our taxes paid for.

Chaining ourselves to public transport that we couldn't get on and had no legal right to use, and bringing trains and Westminster Bridge to a standstill by civil disobedience, finally got a spotlight shined on our futile attempts at asking nicely.

It lead to the Conservative Minister for the Disabled, Sir Nicholas Scott, having to admit to and apologise for misleading MPs over the government’s underhand attempts to kill a (Labour) private members bill, to give disabled people equal rights.

That's what it took. No one cared until we made it as inconvenient and problematic for them as it was for us. I wish it wasn't the case. I wish we could have just been treated as fellow human beings, but society preferred platitudes and to ignore us.

What do we want? What you've got!
When do we want it? Now!

It also brought into focus that few police vans could take us, very few cells could accommodate us, and we couldn't get into many courts either. We had to be manhandled out of chairs to be taken anywhere. We where expected to stay home, pay our taxes and put up with it.

What we did was illegal, and inconvenienced many for short periods of time, (a secondary result) what was being done to us wasn't at all illegal, and inconvenienced us all day every day, but we weren't counted, until we made ourselves count and got the law changed.

It was only changed because the inconvenience we caused and the optics of people like us using our wonky bodies to demand the rights everyone else had, was too uncomfortable for many.

It took serious numbers of wheelchairs blocking celebrities cars at the 'Piss on Pity' protest to make celebrities realize we where sick of 'look at the poor things' telethons and being forced to beg charity for wheelchairs and that what they did perpetuated it.
We'd been telling them nicely for years. But was the optics that made them hear us.

I don't agree with many protests but I daresay they wouldn't have agreed with ours, so generally I'll support the freedom to take things to the streets.

You’re not wrong exactly, but you are viewing this only with an individualistic lens… The logic behind the right to protest doesn’t hinge on that, so it’s different mechanism behind it.

Whilst it is annoying to be inconvenienced, the future effect of global heating are going to be more so. I don’t wish to make this about that, but that is very much in the direction we are heading.

Protests act as a small scale actions which make up social change, individually they don’t do much but they do connect others and create a ‘chain’ so to speak.

The reason why it’s considered an important right in democratic society is simply because it hasn’t always been that way. And in many cases it still isn’t - pushing for laws around the right to protest is a slippery slope.

I’m curious if the OP is against all protesting (anti-racism, women’s rights etc) or just against Gaza and climate change?

Of course wheelchairs are still not able to get on buses where prams have occupied the spaces..

Democracy means being allowed to protest, even if you don't agree with the cause.

The alternative is not good.

The alternative, eventually, is Iran.

I think the right to protest is sacred but there must be limits, people harassing that Jewish restaurant crossed a line imo. Protest the war in Gaza by all means but as soon as you shout “globalise the intifada” you are inciting violence and should be in the back of the police van.

If your protest is designed to intimidate people, like the protests in predominantly muslim/jewish areas they should be asked to go elsewhere. If anyone incites violence, straight in a police car, damage to property, straight in a police car. Also people shouldn’t be able to cover their faces.