Can protests truly improve society?
Protestors often think of themselves an agent of change and take pride in it. I’d like to examine that claim.
For any consistent change in humans or societies, first the idea of change needs to take root in the hearts and minds of a people. For real change persistent change, change needs to start and complete internally in a vast majority of individuals. Not by social pressure, coercion or by force. If individuals don’t change sincerely or completely, the societal change would not be complete either.
Protests are an expression of energy for several underlying reasons, some declared and some undeclared. Each protestor driven by their motives. So solutions are difficult to interpret.
Also, protests do not inherently help in clarifying, debating and finding the best means for the said change. Nor would protests help in understanding the shortcomings of the changed state.
If changes are to be made without this, that change may even be detrimental. If we insist on change for the sake of change and not for the sake of making specific improvements, it would be like running around in circles, which societies and humans often do. Or people may attribute motives other then what’s publicly declared by the agents of change.
Once significant people have wholeheartedly agreed that the change is necessary, the alternative is well understood and agreed, protests can then precipitate a confirmation of that agreement and even a force against inertia & inaction.
Without significant portions of society agreeing that change is necessary, without the alternative being thoroughly analysed and agreed upon, change will not be for the better not will it be permanent.
Therefore, the first and the most important responsibility for the agent of change is not to speak to the government, but to speak to fellow citizens. Debate with them, educate them and enrol them.