Protest improves conditions by forcing majority recognition of minority grievances

Evidence

The fact that consent to a form of interference is not sufficient as a guard against arbitrariness means that no one who is concerned about domination can be happy about two developments that gathered momentum about the turn of the nineteenth century. One development was the growth of the populist idea, as we described it in the last chapter, that provided the majority rules, all is well. Majority rule may seem to be blessed by its consensual character, but it can clearly involve the domination of minority groups, and no one who resists domination can endorse unconstrained majoritarianism. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 321 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Defeated minorities accept majority rule through continued discursive hope, not conviction change — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 95; An armed minority inside a protest can veto settlement deals for the whole country — Vincent Bevins, If We Burn: The Mass Protest Decade and…, 513; Mass protest can move US majorities toward anti-racist structural politics. (+13 more)

Broader Connections

• Majority rule can dominate minorities and so fails as a guard against arbitrariness #complicates (0.80) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 321
• Democracy can function on recognition by only a minority #complicates (0.78)
• The demand that minorities speak for their whole community reinforces their marginality #complicates (0.74)
• Invoking individual creative freedom obscures the social hierarchies behind minority protest #complicates (0.73)
• Gaining assertive identity can make minority groups disparage other minorities #complicates (0.72) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2751