The Power of Protest: Shaping the Governments’ Policies

In modern democratic settings protest is a familiar manifestation of political behaviour. Some time ago, scholars coined the term “modular” to refer to its use by a couple of constituencies with diverse objectives. While protesters in most democracies these days may not must fear for their non-public integrity (political imprisonment, torture, disappearance, or extrajudicial killing), many new democracies do now not live as much as their complete ability within the areas of representativeness, duty, equality, and participation. Social protest contributes to institutional reforms in both new and set up democracies. Less has been expounded on what dissent means for a vote-based system.

While social dissent is connected with proportions of good administration little is known about unequivocally how fight action brings about institutional changes. It is at this point deeply grounded those social developments can change their current circumstance in three ways: by hoisting the situation with challengers versus outsiders and specialists; by catalysing changes in arrangement; and by achieving changes in the public eye, the political framework, as well as common convictions. 

Eighteenth century the rise of current period is set apart as rebel against the shortcomings of the states in giving essential necessities to individuals. With different fights a portion of the upheavals and fights have been for human qualities like the option to instruct, right to cast a ballot, not being affront and a great deal of different qualities. The vast majority of the fights which are coordinated to holds back are disparity among various occupants of a solitary nation, and inadequate exercises of the public authority. Although the impact of these protests is up to some extents not all the protests made it to end up in the favour of those protesting. While in case some protests do not meet their aims, while government should be made accountable towards what they did to the protesters. 

Moreover, there are some splendid protests in the history with worldwide prominence. Among those protests, the protest run by Mahatma Gandhi, which resulted the independence of India from the British Empire. Meanwhile the protest of Martin Luther King Jr for the rights of black citizens of the US while the Arab spring protest which results in overthrowing of many presidents who did not act accountable towards their people. In the recent decade between 2010 and 2014, protests erupted in hundreds of cities in over one hundred countries around the globe.

From the Arab Spring to Spanish indignados to ant austerity protests in Greece, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to demand political change in their respective countries. Recent protests have been some of the biggest in history. In 2013, as an instance, more than a hundred million Indians took to the streets to protest low living standards and high levels of inequality. In the identical year, 17 million Egyptians protested in opposition to, and in the long run toppled President Hosni Mubarak’s authoritarian regime.

Therefore, this paper makes sense of how the fights in India by Gandhi, in the US by Martin Luther King Jr and In Egypt by Egyptian youth ended up changing policies of the governments of the times.  

 This article has systematically examined the contribution of social protest to institutional reforms in democratic countries. As expected, other variables seem to matter for the quality of democracy around the world. Nevertheless, in at least two areas, social protest is having profound effects on the quality of democracy: respect for human rights and executive constraints.

Strikes are pressuring countries to increase respect for workers’ rights, and nonviolent protests are forcing executives to behave less heavy-handedly, predominantly in democracies with more interconnected governments. General strikes also seem to be spurring countries to uphold the rights of women in the political arena, particularly in countries with independent judiciaries. Unexpectedly, riots can sometimes reduce the quality of democratic governance by encouraging executives to be more heavy-handed. The upside is that partisan autonomy can significantly constrain executives in the presence of riots.

In the year 1930s nonviolence protest in India influenced the policy of British Empire that sought to maintain an Empire with the ruthlessness and racial intolerance. The British Empire was exploiting and expanding the policies of racial discrimination by differentiating the black and white people.  To protest against British Empire Indian people organized a large gathering. The monopoly of the salt by the British Empire was the main cause.

Anguishing from this condition, Indians decided to act against the policies of salt. They named their march as Salt as they started to demonstrate for salt crisis. Mahatma Gandhi a middle-class Indian who was the pioneer of this protest, he witnessed the racial discrimination in South Africa where he had been working as a lawyer.  Being exasperated by a discriminated act of being thrown from a bus which was said to be for the white people. The British Empire has not come to help the people Gandhi felt that, while to make them feel worse than whites. Gandhi believes that a nonviolent protest could reach out their goal of having freedom, so he started the protest against British Empire. 

Through his struggle, commitment and political conciseness, majority of the people join him in this protest and civil disobedience had disseminated around the world. Along the way to freedom many people got killed and imprisoned, with uniformity and determination, they could reach out their goal of having independence.  By giving the incentive that freedom is the key to improvement of a country Gandhi encouraged the people of India. People supported Gandhi and participating in the protests which resulted the independence of India and ended on the withdrawal of British Empire. 

  Martin Luther King Jr against the inequalities started a protest with a massive mobilization. The main purpose of his protest was the inequalities with the African Americans and to have the same life opportunities as the white. He states that “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” by which he means that the violation of human rights as in Africa and inside America, at the hands of white, is the violation of every human being on earth.

Luther seeks to promote harmony and brotherhood through “universal Love” as he said that love “does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs” and that “love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth”. So, it could be argued that Martin Luther King Jr., called it upon his followers to break the law at the right time to put an end to the white, black dichotomy. The African Americans were treated as the second-class citizens, there were numerous other differences in the treatment of the government between African American and white people. The people started to march against the racial segregation policy of government after the speech of king. 

In 1960s a protest for equal rights in US resulted on a massive change on the policies of the government. The African American were given the rights to vote and grew other important concessions. Since governments are residence mostly on the people’s support, by uprising majority of the people against the government, the government loses one of its sources of fairness. Hereby, the final decision about brining changes in policies of a government would be the decision of majority which was proven by the protest that King headed.

The only proper way through which people will achieve their civil rights is to act nonviolently. Meanwhile, the core and predominant reason for the success of Martin Luther King’s protest alongside non-violence nature of his protest was the readiness for any brutality or mistreatment since the people at this movement were committed to altering the segregated policies to lawful policies as majority of the people were underestimated under those policies. With all those efforts, it ultimately occurred for the African Americans to enjoy a brand-new segment of their lives, brighter and more favourable than it turned into inside the past.  Protest deepens the notion of democracy among the humans. One of the main and biggest examples of those protests is the civil rights act 1964, while the rights to vote 1965 is the main instances of King. Protest is one of the pillars of democracy, some protests have been politically manipulated, while the result of these protests has mostly in the favour of majority.  

In January 2011, Egypt erupted in protests towards the stifling rule of long time President Hosni Mubarak. Beginning in December 2010, extraordinary mass demonstrations against poverty, corruption, and political repression broke out in several Arab countries, difficult the authority of some of the most entrenched regimes in the Middle East and North Africa. Such become the case in Egypt, wherein in 2011 a famous uprising pressured one of the area’s longest-serving and maximum influential leaders, Pres. Hosni Mubarak, from power. 

Additionally, the inevitable elements of the protests, especially the case of Egypt in 2011, has been the role of media that had given the opportunity to the people to face for his or her citizenship right of having an accountable government. The causes of the eruption were the corruption and poverty, by means of confirming the circumstances it turned into clean as reflect that the government should be accountable for the setup and expressed its inability. With this, human beings gathered in Tahrir square till their voices are heard. By each passing day the popular turned into becoming higher and it turned into a mobilized photo of Egyptian people. T

he principal point of these protests was every protest was broadcasted with the aid of media and to some extent it got an embroidered. For different human beings it was an invoking protest which suffered from the exact state of affairs in their country.  Egyptian human beings took maximum from the social media for the fulfillment of their protest at that time. The resignation of the President Hosni Mubarak tweets degree changed in to massive protest, meanwhile the Tv swelling of the protest become also brilliant.  By a notable function of media and mobilization of people serve pressure and finally the protest ended up by overthrowing the president of Egypt Hosni Mubarak. In addition, the scenario modified negatively afterward, but the impact of protest was immediate in the shape of overthrowing the government.

The main reason for predominant protest would be having an independent judiciary in the government. The intervention of the executive prohibits the independence of judiciary so that what the laws are about. An independent judiciary guarantee that a law through which countries can smoothly reach their goal and it would not manipulate the result of protest.

In a nut shell this article has methodically inspected the commitment of social dissent to institutional changes in democratic nations. True to form, different factors appear to issue for the nature of a majority rule government all over the globe. By the by, in no less than two regions, social dissent is significantly affecting the nature of a majority rule government: regard for basic liberties and leader requirements. Strikes are inciting nations to increment regard for laborers’ privileges, and serene fights are compelling chiefs to act less awkwardly, especially in majority rules systems with additional firm state run administrations.

General strikes additionally appear to be prodding nations to maintain the privileges of ladies in the political field, especially in nations with autonomous legal authorities. The potential gain is that hardliner nonalignment can essentially compel leaders within the sight of mobs. In bringing change the thinkers in their periods played a critical role concerning issues on injustice. Inequality, segregation, or it might be any other challenge that the community faces. 

The man who fought against the cruelty and saved the nation from a life time of suffering his named as Gandhi, yet placed himself as a role model of freedom in history. Being a great change maker in his society Martin Luther King Jr, with almost the same energy, encouragement, motivation, likewise Gandhi, has taught the world that until one does not stand for his right, he will not earn it.

While on the other side the decision maker of the country is their young generation; for crucial change in their country the Egyptian youth had proved it that by engaging in a widely populated march in Tahrir square. There is no protest wit out any influence on the government policies one can assert that while observing all the events mentioned above. There would be a remarkable influence on the reforms of some policies of the government if the result of the protest were not favourable­­­­.