Parliamentary Protests Of The United States

969 Words4 Pages
The threat presented by extra-parliamentary protest in the years 1815-20 was plagued by weak and divided leadership which limited it from driving results that met its full potential. However, there were also other factors that served to undermine progress such as the actions of the government in repressing dissenters and the low level of available logistical resources .

Evan tells us in Source 3 that “the movement lacked coherent leadership.” His view supports the argument for the threat being undermined by the weakness of having “too many orators captivated by the sound of their own voices” of whom “not enough bridged the gap between rhetoric and reality.” Being unable to convey the actions people would be required to take for change within their messages reduced the movement almost to a talking shop of “radical leaders, carried away” without “realistic planning”. We can see the fruits of their failed labours in the way the government had little difficulty in handling any protests and this repeated derailing meant there was rarely a leadership united enough to effectively inspire confidence. On the other hand, Thompson deems radicalism to have “assumed more conscious, organised and sophisticated forms”, going so far as to call it a “heroic age”, which somewhat refutes the criticisms of inadequacy in the power of the speeches made. Indeed, the reality that in addition to Norwich and Sheffield: Nottingham, Coventry and Bolton were also assessed by the authorities as being
Get Access