Yes, protesting should still be a right, but . . .
The first amendment of the American constitution gives these words:
. . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
It’s important to understand the context when these words were written. Most of the founding fathers had a disdain for political parties. They only allowed 5% of the population to vote. But they allowed the right for peaceful protest. They thought citizens petitioning government in this way could force the elected representatives to take citizens’ concerns more seriously.
By 1820, the political parties were firmly entrenched in American politics. So the dynamic changed. When a protest occurred, it was easy for many elected representatives to say: “Well, these people are not voting for me anyways. I will just ignore them.” Only the votes of the rich, white men were sought.
Regardless, peaceful protests were allowed. Maybe it gave the protesters a feeling that they were doing something to better the world, even if results seemed slow in coming. Maybe the founding fathers know about social relief valves.
As voting suffrage increased, protests became a signal to elected representatives and aspiring representatives as to where the votes were. By not understanding the times they were living in sometimes meant some elected representatives becoming unelected. We could argue that protesting was a useful political tool for the people, better than mobs and guillotines.
What is really happening
At a superficial level, protesting is seen as a tool to change the minds of elected representatives. Or at least change enough minds to effect the deliberations in the legislature.
However, sociologists have identified a different approach to how protests actually work. A protest gets the attention of the media. The media report on it. More citizens become aware of the intent of the protesters. A few more citizens agree with that intent. Public sentiment has been changed a little. Protests get bigger. More media coverage. More changes toward the intention. Eventually the public sentiment can no longer be ignored.
In other words, one protest has an indirect effect on changing society. It takes time and consistent exposure and repeated pressure to effect that kind of change with protests.
The Mechanics of the TDG
My alternative democracy — Tiered Democratic Governance — has a different mechanism for citizens to let their voices be heard.
Electoral units are about 200 residents. Each unit elects its own representative, who is a neighbor to his or her voters.
Let’s imagine a neighborhood known as “Waskada.” Fred is the current neighborhood representative. He is often chatting with his neighbors. He sets up a town hall meeting twice a year. Fred’s neighbors keep electing him back into the TDG.
Let’s imagine this issue. The ministry in charge of unemployment insurance has become more strict about newly unemployed people getting their benefits. Five residents of Waskada have been turned down in their application. They complain to Fred.
Fred does not have much influence in decisions regarding unemployment insurance. So there is not much he can do directly. But when he hears that five neighbors having this problem, Fred feels he needs to send this message higher.
Once a month, Fred attends a meeting of his district, which consists of eight neighborhoods close to Waskada. When Fred reports that five of his residents have a problem with unemployment insurance, four of the other neighborhood representatives mention the same issue in their neighborhood. The district then makes a formal report to the next highest tier about this source of citizen dissatisfaction.
When the highest tier gets enough of these kinds of reports from the lower tiers, it would be obligated to do some investigation. Why did the ministry of unemployment insurance change its ways? Was it too lax before? Is it too strict now? How well is it following the current rules? Has this ministry gone a little rogue? Has something happened in the economy to create this dissatisfaction? Maybe this social program needs some adjustment. The TDG workings of Fred and other neighborhood representatives have spawned an investigation.
If a repair is needed, the highest tier will make the change.
Would not this TDG mechanism be more proactive than assembling a series of protests to convince the power brokers that something might be wrong with our unemployment insurance program?
The future TDG could still allow the right of peaceful protest. But I think this right will be seldom used.
Published on Medium and Substack 2025
