If those who do not win a cause feel the process is undemocratic, what can be done to make it be democratic, or will it always feel undemocratic to folks who don’t get their way?
In regards to your inquiry: I also wonder if the “orange shirts” would ever proactively demonstrate their views on public policy again, since they seemed to find the process “undemocratic.” It reminds me of children who do not get their way who say “that’s not fair”.
Tying our notion of being perturbed, I think if the members of the “orange” shirts were perturbed or emotionally invested again, then they would demonstrate their public policy. I think there are some who would become discouraged, but I think what separates those individuals are grit and perseverance, something as educators we are greatly striving to impart on our students.
From my understanding, what will always be deemed as undesirable and unjust is harm to the innocent-(children, physically/mentally ill-although this is debatable with our stigmas and treatment of the mental health) otherwise, difference in morals make it hard for democratic rhetorics to finally determine what constitutes “right” from “wrong.”
Rai mentions the pursuit of the ideal city, well just as there will not ever be the perfect city, there will be no such thing as perfect democracy when it is made up of imperfect humans; however because we do have successful “acts of democracy” to point to changes in our society, there will continue to be the “promised ideals reflected within the [democratic] model” that will continue to provide “many with the courage […] to continually dream up and work toward new worlds,” and continue the hope. Although democracy and equality may be elusive, the belief of hope is not (107).