Yay, some doom

[conned tractor]

Can you use all this clever stuff to answer my original question about how many people must commit to subversion?

I thought subversion control can be switched off by the user. lol.

[AlfredJPruffock]

Absolutely. And the right to protest has been curtailed in Parliament Square - indeed, I believe that Parliament created an Act recently specifically to get rid of their very own Banquos ghost, Brian Haw.

Yes it was Blair himself who created this odious legiislation targeted at Mr Haws protest over civilan death in Iraq - only for the weasel Blair to have it knocked back by the LawLords as it was poorly conceived (see extract below) - Horray !

Have you noticed how much evil Mr Blair has created - oh I forgot hes being touted for a position as President of Euopre - despite the fact that nobody voted him - now theres some doom for ya !

Here an extract from Brave Mr Haws site http://www.parliament-square.org.uk/

In 29 July 2005, shortly before the SOCPA protest restrictions came into force, a High Court hearing ruled that Brian's protest is not covered by the legislation because prior authorisation was only necessary for demonstrations that 'started' before 1 August 2005, whereas Brian started his protest in June 2001.

So, Brian was temporarily exempt from the very law that was brought in to evict him. But on 8 May 2006 the Home Office won an appeal against that decision and Brian's protest was brought under the new restriction

[conned tractor]

Can you use all this clever stuff to answer my original question about how many people must commit to subversion?

Wouldn't you need to know the dynamics of the plant first. i.e. know how people react to the input. And be able to to model/ calculate this accurately.

[PM-Junkie]

As a country we're mortgaged up to our eyeballs, the family silver is sold off, we're maxed out on all our credit cards...and these dingbats still want to spend billions on an ID card scheme nobody wants and nobody needs.

I am beginning to wonder if nuliebore are actually tory infiltrators on a mission to destroy the labour party for the next 50 years. If so, they are succeeding beyond their wildest dreams.

[minestrone]

The cards will always be voluntary but they will push through some anti Money laundering legislation that means that you cannot get a financial product or open a bank account unless you have a card.

You heard it here first.

[Menelaus]

Can you use all this clever stuff to answer my original question about how many people must commit to subversion?

It'd be an educated guess but I'd say a critical mass of as little as 12% - 15% of the electorate might be sufficient. Unfortunately, that's still a range of 5.76m - 7.2m, given a UK electorate of 48m.

That having been said, a conservative estimate of the Czechoslovak population suggests that ~200,000 people came out for the Velvet Revolution (1989) and this represented ~1.67% of the population of the country.

In the interests of balance, the 2003 anti-Iraq War marches in London had membership of 750,000 - 2,000,000 (1.56% - 4.16%) and had zero effect on UK government policy.

The demographics for a protest group would have to be carefully balanced or in some other way controlled. If not, the mendacious government could claim that the group was not representative of the population as a whole.

[Menelaus]

Wouldn't you need to know the dynamics of the plant first. i.e. know how people react to the input. And be able to to model/ calculate this accurately.

Absolutely - hence my question earlier about the likely reaction of government action against "subversives" and how to keep people committed.

[Mich the Tester]

Wouldn't you need to know the dynamics of the plant first. i.e. know how people react to the input. And be able to to model/ calculate this accurately.

Yes. Perhaps there is historical data that can help. We'd perhaps need to categorize people's level of subversive potential (likeliness to take part in subversion) into, for example;

1 active rebels who will subvert for the hell of it anyway
2 leaders who will under certain circumstances organise subversion
3 armchair-angry types who will talk tough but act like sheep unless stimulated by group 2 to get into action
4 conformist gits who will do as the state tells them under any circumstances (the 'nothing to fear if you've nothing to hide' brigade)
5 Nu Labour

Obviously this list would need refinement, but would need to be kept to a manageable number of categories.

[EternalOptimist]

Yes. Perhaps there is historical data that can help. We'd perhaps need to categorize people's level of subversive potential (likeliness to take part in subversion) into, for example;

1 active rebels who will subvert for the hell of it anyway
2 leaders who will under certain circumstances organise subversion
3 armchair-angry types who will talk tough but act like sheep unless stimulated by group 2 to get into action
4 conformist gits who will do as the state tells them under any circumstances (the 'nothing to fear if you've nothing to hide' brigade)
5 Nu Labour

Obviously this list would need refinement, but would need to be kept to a manageable number of categories.

good categories

[AlfredJPruffock]

I am beginning to wonder if nuliebore are actually tory infiltrators on a mission to destroy the labour party for the next 50 years. If so, they are succeeding beyond their wildest dreams.

Bah - cant be true ! Youve been reading too may of them conspriacy thingies !

Next thing you know you;ll be saying Darling was a former Marxist !

I like Marxists - you know - a Night at the Opera ! Wasnt that a laugh and a half !

Groucho Marx !

What - Darling was really a Marxist ? And hes nationalised the Banks ???

Crumbs ...