Economic affluence and prosperity are likely to reduce the scope and necessity of social protest which is a common phenomenon in many of the developing nations. Though the proposition is not always true and failed to pass the test of time in many countries and many societies, governments in some developing countries nowadays strongly uphold the concept. That's why they have concentrated their focuses, resources and efforts to economic growth to turn their countries affluent and prosperous. The growth-centric or growth-obsessed drive towards prosperity mostly sidelines the distributive aspects which is a major factor of different social protests.
Theoretically, social protest is defined (by Oxford Bibliographies) as a "form of political expression that seeks to bring about a social or political change by influencing the knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of the public or the policies of an organisation or institution." These protests generally take the form of overt public displays, demonstrations, civil disobedience and may also include covert activities like petitions, boycotts, lobbying, and even different online activities. In today's world, online activities have become a popular form of social protest, thanks to proliferation of social media and other virtual platforms.
Social protest is also considered a strong tool to air the grievances and sometimes compel the government and relevant authorities to address the problems or fix the flaws. In Bangladesh, different kinds of social protests have been observed in last couple of years when economy registered an unrelenting growth. The country reached lower-middle-income status in 2015 from low-income status and also on the track to graduating to the developing country status in 2026. The country is one of the fastest growing economies in the world and has had an annual growth rate of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) over 7.0 per cent since 2016. After achieving above 7.0 per cent growth for three consecutive years, Bangladesh has registered 8.15 per cent growth in 2019. The pandemic, however, forced to decelerate it to 3.51 per cent in 2020, which recovered partially to 5.47 per cent in 2021.
Nevertheless, the unprecedented economic growth did not significantly reduce the necessity of social protest. From the road-safety movements by the youth and students to the latest protest against communal attack on Hindus and other religious minorities are good example. Almost all the protests have valid grounds although in some cases the authorities became too tough on the protestors instead of rightly addressing the reasons. Usually social protests mostly ended within a period of time and mostly never linger unless those are serious issues. Those who participate in the protests do not come for any revolutionary change overnight. They mostly want to draw the attention of the policymakers and authorities to rectify the defects within a reasonable timeframe.
The policymakers have, however, gradually become uncomfortable with the idea of social protest. They are now guided by an approach that different social protests are intended to destabilise the country and decelerate the economic growth drives. This kind of approach is one-sided and misleading. In a democratic country which is growing economically needs to accommodate more space to air any social grievance. It will help make the growth reasonably balanced and the distribution less discriminatory, ultimately reducing the need for social protest.
