After witnessing a few mass protest awareness-raising type movements in my country, I agree that they’re not usually helpful. Though at least one of those here was apparently able to effect major government policy.
I do have a couple questions:
“Peace, not war”. Well, yes. It would be nice if moving in a straight line, leading by example were the way to get there, and I don’t know that it isn’t, but trying it is very hazardous.
Why do you think it’s hazardous?
[E]xposing the emergency backup plan for post-apocalyptic UK government. Which seems pretty bad!
Naively, UK disarmament in 1980 would have done one of two things 1) given the Soviets under Brezhnev much more power, lengthening the cold war and producing unknown effects on reform; or 2) forced even more US nuclear deployment in European bases, forcing a response from the Soviets, and so destabilising the world. (As I say, there’s a chance that it could instead have lead to a better equilibrium, but I can’t see why anyone would think this was the most likely outcome.)
If the locations of your post-nuke decentralised government are known, then they can be targeted by nukes.
After witnessing a few mass protest awareness-raising type movements in my country, I agree that they’re not usually helpful. Though at least one of those here was apparently able to effect major government policy.
I do have a couple questions:
Why do you think it’s hazardous?
Why is it bad?
Naively, UK disarmament in 1980 would have done one of two things 1) given the Soviets under Brezhnev much more power, lengthening the cold war and producing unknown effects on reform; or 2) forced even more US nuclear deployment in European bases, forcing a response from the Soviets, and so destabilising the world. (As I say, there’s a chance that it could instead have lead to a better equilibrium, but I can’t see why anyone would think this was the most likely outcome.)
If the locations of your post-nuke decentralised government are known, then they can be targeted by nukes.