CHAPTER ONE
1.1 Background Of Study
More than fifty years ago, sociologists viewed protest as an undemocratic invasion of politics and power. After the 1970s, protest is now seen as an important strengthening of democratic political systems and an important factor in the transition from authoritarian to democratic regimes. The study of protest and social movements has grown from a marginalized and nearly dying subspecies of social psychology in the 1960s into a highly specialized field of sociology as such, with significant links to political, organizational, and cultural sociology as well as social psychology. Social movement theorists view protest as “politics by other means,” and it is now well known that non-institutional and institutional politics are interconnected and interrelated. Acts of protest are perhaps the most symbolic embodiment of the social production of this public space. Protest violates the physical integrity of space and establishes a series of social (and sometimes physical) relationships that indirectly (temporarily) change the rules of interaction.
Protest was defined as "an expression or expression of opposition, disagreement, or disagreement, often in contrast to what cannot or cannot be prevented or prevented." (Dictionary of Random Houses, 1967). The protest law contains the following elements: the action expresses a grievance, a conviction of wrong or injustice; the protesters are unable to correct the condition directly by their own efforts; the action is intended to draw attention to the grievances; the action is further meant to provoke ameliorative steps by some target group; and the protesters depend upon some combination of sympathy and fear to move the target group in their behalf. According to Bailey (1962), the protest ranges from the more convincing to the more convincing combination, but always extends to both. Many forms of protest do not involve violence or destruction.
The results of sociological research have shown that there are specific reasons for protest. According to Ritter and Conrad (2016), people are more likely to protest if they are not afraid of revenge on the government. if they are connected to civil society networks that support the organization (Boulding 2014); when there are structures of political options that respond to the will of citizens (Tilly 1978); and if the protest is believed to be effective (van Stekelenburg and Klandermans, 2013). According to Thomas and Louis (2013), people are more likely to take part in a protest if they understand and believe in the specific aims of the protest movement. This all makes a theoretical meaning: people protest when the cost of participation goes down and when the benefits of the success of their movement matter to their personal life. The right to peaceful assembly, association and freedom of expression is enshrined in a number of human rights treaties. Do not believe more than 60 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed that everyone has the right to express an opinion and to meet peacefully? Surprisingly, many people do not consider these rights important or even do not exist. In 2008 Azerbaijan, Egypt, Jordan, Kenya, South Korea and Thailand made up more than 25 percent. Respondents believed that their governments had the right to ban peaceful demonstrations. Less than half of those polled in Russia and Egypt believe that freedom of expression is very important. Even in emerging democracies like Germany and the USA, almost 25 percent of those surveyed did not consider freedom of expression to be important (WorldPublicOpinion.org, 2008).