Protests Descending into Mob Rule

VaughanJB

Scrappy VIP
SOURCE: Protests descending into mob rule, Rishi Sunak warns police

"Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has warned police chiefs of a "growing consensus that mob rule is replacing democratic rule".
He wants more robust police responses that he says are needed to protect politicians and democratic processes.
This includes an "immediate response" from police to intimidatory protest at MPs' homes.
But human rights group Amnesty International says the PM "wildly exaggerates the issue"
."

I read this story yesterday, and my initial reaction was, "finally, someone is saying it like it is". Which is quite something coming from Sunak. But looking beyond specific political parties or politicians, it does encompass an overall feeling that mirrors my own. Things are getting bad, really bad, and the dive to the bottom isn't over yet, imo.

Politics is simply about different ideas and philosophies, and policies that bring those ideas to fruition. There is a perceived national impact, and then there is the personal. For the vast majority of us, the general direction a country is taking doesn't have a whole lot of impact on us individually. I mean, my own country is currently spending billions to support wars, and yet my every day life hasn't changed a bit. And yes, I know it has to be paid for, but the fact is, governmental finances are so convoluted and abstract, again, it doesn't have a real impact on your every day life.

Saying that, there has always been a extremist factor. Extreme in policy and ambition, but also in the way we treat others with opposing views. Fueled by the internet and our new-found ability to speak out in an anonymous fashion, to find like minded folk with a simple search, and to feed from whatever trough of hatred we choose, we have become increasingly divided. Those political disagreements have become wedges.

Now, more than ever, we should be discussing our differences, learning more about the opposition from an intellectual point of view. Yet that doesn't seem to happen.

Sunak, in this comment, is saying what I've noticed in abundance. I truly believe that democracy is in danger. I truly believe we're moving to a point where a dictatorship would be a preferred outcome, as long as people believe the dictator is their dictator. But allowing those with the most to gain to undermine our diplomacy, our institutions, we're sleepwalking into a world where the only control is control. Where the law gives way to mob rule. We're on that path today. IMO.

Still, fascinating to hear Sunak voice concerns. In the not too distant past, fairly local to me, an MP was murdered at an open house when he was meeting his constituents. Vile abuse for elected officials has become the norm. From threats to physical attacks. Nothing good will come of it.

People worry about a future where the state controls everything, yet time and again I see their actions pushing us closer to it. I'm glad I won't be around when this comes to a head.
 

H.G. Wells had it right. Unfortunately, the marketplace of ideas has been seemingly shuttered and closed these days, with perceptual blinders and cognitive biases firmly in place. Violence has become increasingly resorted to as an intimidating and effective way to impose one’s will on the majority when ideas run thin and fail to stand up to the light of facts and reason. This is certainly a growing problem in the U.S. as well…

IMG_2175.jpeg
 
The murder of a local MP during a constituent meeting is result of this toxic political climate. It's very important that we, both individually and collectively, work to counteract these dangerous trends by having conversations about the issues, and supporting independent journalism. Speak out!!!! :)
 

I believe that people have a hard time viewing things honestly and by insisting on doing so through tinted lenses they aren't doing anything positive for the situation.

There is much monkey-hooting from soapboxes about "the injured majority." Yet both ends of the spectrum tend to make the same claim of "majority" when the axis involved is pretty evenly split between two poles. That leaves a hapless relative few near the center practically voiceless, engendering more discomfort and dissatisfaction.

It doesn't negate legitimate grievances, but that is not the point.

As one extreme pulls away from center, the other does the same in balance. Flip and repeat. This has now gone on so long it has produced the present problem where negotiation and compromise are taken as affronts to pride. Pride goeth before a fall.
 
It's happening all over. The instant gratification act on raw emotion crowd acts out again.

They say mob rule is replacing democratic rule but 'democratic' rule helps facilitate or is a form of mob rule. It leads many to believe if enough people want the samething they should pursue and get it creating a sense of entitlement. When a mob doesn't get their way from any side they are al mad, disappointed and/or in a emotional state.

Manipulative people have learned to exploit that over the centuries. They know how to set off a crowd or encourage individuals to act. Social media turns an incident or mob scene/riot into a cause/movement when it should be just 'an' incident.
 
"For the vast majority of us, the general direction a country is taking doesn't have a whole lot of impact on us individually."

Until it does. Maybe you won't feel it during your lifetime, but your descendants and the society you are now a member of will be impacted by the direction your country takes today.

"governmental finances are so convoluted and abstract, again, it doesn't have a real impact on your every day life."

Yeah, it's designed so that you don't really notice an impact on your every day life, or can't put it together as causality and effect. The convolution and abstractness is intentional. It's also intentional that you are unable to see how your taxes are used and how they are wasted. Your input regarding that was taken from you many decades ago (in the US).

"Now, more than ever, we should be discussing our differences, learning more about the opposition from an intellectual point of view."

Isn't that what Sunak is trying to prevent?

When people's voices are legally silenced, it's because their political leaders don't want to hear them. And when speaking out in a democratic society is actually punishable, what avenues do the people have then?

BTW, I'm not familiar with Sunak and this issue, I'm just asking questions.

edit: Sunak, PM of the UK. So now my Q is WTF?
 
Last edited:
Well, in England so many migrants have been allowed in the country, this is bound to cause serious tension. Don't you think? Same thing is happening all over Europe. Throw in farmers' protests and yes, you do have a lot of angry people letting their voices be heard. But when elected officials disregard their constituents mob rule can be an end result? Of course Mr. Sunak was never ELECTED at all, let's remember. Ultimately that is important.
 
I don't know if we can leave the facts of the matter, alone. Just the actual facts of the matter, not any editorializing of the facts. If the context is important, then present the facts that are known to be true. That is not easy. We want there to be a melodrama around the facts. Maybe it is in our genetic makeup, to make up stories to understand their impact in our own lives ( for survival of the fittest stuff ). I am not sure we know how to ask the right questions, because we have preferred the myths for so long...centuries.
 


Back
Top