Quite a lot actually as they started the ball rolling on political reform over 400 years ago!
The Levellers were prominent during the Civil War in the 1600s with the political aim of extending the franchise and achieving manhood suffrage as they believed that everyone had equal rights to the vote.
They were called the 'Levellers', as they wished to level out society (one
wonders if our PM is aware of this!?) They had many ideas on how they thought
society should be and their political and religious objectives were put forward
to Parliament in 'The Agreement of the People' in 1647. This document was much
more radical than those before it. Along with their political aims they wanted
to reform the legal system to give equality to everyone before the law and
achieve recognition of people's fundamental rights and liberties.
They were however not successful primarily because they didn’t gain popular support which
meant that they could easily be ignored. They also
failed to make inroads into the army with only limited rank and file support as soldiers were more interested in their pay
and conditions than in theoretical schemes of government or even the vote! They
also had no support from the officers, the so-called 'Grandees', like Cromwell
and Ireton as their power could have been curbed by the Levellers ideas. This
meant they had little support in Parliament because the rich and wealthy
landowners felt their power base, land and money were threatened. They also
felt there would be a major destruction of the social order.
Interestingly as with the Chartists, some 200 years later, the Levellers
emerged at a time when there was severe economic hardship and this made their
policies attractive to working class people, who would have mostly benefited
from their reforms. However, as the economic situation improved support
for the Levellers started to decline. This was the major reason as to why they lacked
popular support.
Coming right up to date for our agenda to achieve mass support we sadly need
the economic conditions to seriously deteriorate so that the people are forced
to consider how badly the current system of governance in this country has let them down. At that point they should
hopefully focus on the necessary improvements needed to
give them a far greater say in the way they are governed which of course needs to start with a recognition of their inherent
sovereignty.
There is no doubt this government’s troubles are building up what with the inadequate Brexit trade deal including the NI Protocol, Covid, housing shortages, the growth in inflation, immigration, costs of Net Zero and the pending shortages of energy. As things get worse the people would have to be in a complete coma not to realise things need to change.
As Tomasi di Lampedusa wrote in The Leopard “If we want things to stay as they are, everything will have to change.”
"... housing shortages, the growth in inflation, immigration, costs of Net Zero and the pending shortages of energy" You are right of course. Which will it be that finally wakes up the people?
ReplyDeleteMy top 2, at the moment, are an economic crisis or an energy crisis this winter.
Maybe we need a Glasgow, cut off by deep snow, 31 October - 12 November!!! It might happen.
What do you mean, "Wakes people up"?
DeleteMarxism has this as false class consciousness a long time ago.
It's contentious in Marxism, and so it is here too: who are you to say the people aren't awake? It's up to them to choose what they want, isn't it? You can regret what they choose but you can't really say they are not "awake". Especially when the poster here loathes "the woke" so much~??
So, what is meant with all this "wake up the people" stuff? What does it mean? Based on what? It isn't Marxist false class consciousness, so what is it based on? What??
Despite your heart felt comment the fact is that the people are currently NOT awake to political reform of our governance.
DeleteIts an awful thing to say but the worse it gets the more likely the people will awake up and demand change.
ReplyDeleteThing is, you imply that "the people" don't know how bad things are now. But you do.
DeleteAnd you suggest that only if things get considerably worse will "the people" realise things are bad.
Yet if "the people" (whom you venerate so much, and whom you credit with such prescience and insight and justice and all the rest) don't think things are "bad" then who are you to say to them they're wrong?
What they think of things is up to them, isn't it? What you make of their situation is only your opinion. And you're so committed to your opinion --rather than "the people" themselves-- that you want things to get worse, so that your view is somehow vindicated and people get upset, or something?
Not much of this makes sense, Niall.
I do not want things to get worse but I realise from history that the political reform I want only comes from the people demanding it.
DeleteThat they are not protesting now is odf course up to them but the fact remains that they will eventually come to realise they will need to stand up and be counted if they want things to change,
If the people accept things as they are then I would have to accept that.
Coming right up to date for our agenda to achieve mass support we sadly need the economic conditions to seriously deteriorate so that the people are forced to consider how badly the current system of governance in this country has let them down.
ReplyDelete----------------
So you want conditions to get bad so that people can realise things are bad..........
Right.
I'm trying to work out how you can see any such wish in the comments, but cannot see it. Where did anyone say that they " want conditions to get bad"?.
DeleteI feel that the historical facts speak for themselves. History dictates that it is only when people suffer that they begin to revolt. The Romans understood this hence the "Bread and Circuses" approach.
Well put.
DeleteI don't want things to get worse but I believe history teaches us the people react when things get worse.
ReplyDelete