The mobilisation of rural identities and the failure of the rural protest movement in the UK, 1996–2001

Abstract

This paper uses tools developed in political sociology to analyse social movements and political discourse to examine the rise of rural protest movements in the late 1990s. Drawing on documentary evidence and interviews with participants in localised protests, the paper argues that the movements failed to become established because they were unable to form a common sense of identity amongst those living in rural areas. The paper moves from examining the increased political sophistication of the pro‐hunting movement through to the experience of localised pickets by farmers via the countryside marches and the fuel strike. It argues that, although the protests leaders were able to organise short term protests, they were unable to appropriate or provide explanatory scripts that made protest activity meaningful to many who took part. The paper concludes by considering the difficulties of attempting to organise a collective identity from contemporary understandings of rural life.

Notes

Matt Reed, Centre for Rural Research, Lafrowda House, Exeter University, St German's Road, Exeter EX4 6TL, UK. Fax: [phone]. E‐mail: [email protected]. The author would like to thank the anonymous Space & Polity referees for their insightful and constructive comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Present at the first meeting were Sir David Steel (former leader of the Liberal Democrats), Hugh van Cutsem (businessman and friend of the Prince of Wales), Max Hastings (ex‐editor of the Daily Telegraph), Alan Kilkenny (PR consultant), Sir David Naish (former head of the NFU), John Rennie (former head of MI6), Michael Sissons (journalist), the Earl of Peel and the Duke of Westminster.

There are strong links between the hauliers and farmers; many haulage firms have their roots in a diversified farm business and particularly in rural areas a large proportion of their business is reliant on the agricultural industry. The form of their businesses is also similar in that they are frequently small, capital‐intensive businesses operating on slim margins and identifying themselves as ‘working people’ rather than belong to a managerial class.

The exact role of the oil multinationals within this dispute remains opaque; whether they were genuinely outmanoeuvred by the protestors or if they took the opportunity to remind the government of their power, remains debatable. The protests certainly did not damage their profits.

The protestors in Wales and Plymouth were the first to move away from the blockades. These areas were arguably even more dependent on fuel and with a more restricted range of suppliers; the protest appears to have started to rebound on them.

The British National Party claimed a role in the protest, whether this is the case or if represents opportunism on their part remains unclear (Jeffrey, 2000; Milne, 2000).

All of the farmers' names have been changed.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Matt Reed

Matt Reed, Centre for Rural Research, Lafrowda House, Exeter University, St German's Road, Exeter EX4 6TL, UK. Fax: [phone]. E‐mail: [email protected]. The author would like to thank the anonymous Space & Polity referees for their insightful and constructive comments on an earlier version of this paper.