the Tories have removed the safety valves one by one. Does it really go anywhere good though?
It depends a lot on unforeseeable circumstances I think. The government logic is clearly to get in early to nip burgeoning cultures of revolt in the bud before it becomes a more serious problem, but as we know historically that sort of attitude often backfires by, as you say, removing the release valve of softer protest.
I agree that the "movement" is currently too small/ineffective to transfer the situation into more radical activity other than via the spectacle of semi-culty non-violent groupings around climate change. "The Left" at this stage is imv most useful as a repository/circulator of info, ideas and history whenever such movements re-emerge organically in any case, rather than aiming to become such movements' leading recruiters and organisers.
If Alex Callinicos (SWP), Rob Griffiths (CPB) or even my own lot in Solfed become the de facto strategists of social rebellion in Britain I'd probably consider it a failure in the making. None of us are numerically or structurally capable of directing that sort of mass wave even if we had a serious program to work with. Which we don't, because in the former two cases they're small cadres of aging political LARPers with tactics barely updated from the early 20th century, and in the latter we're enthusiastic amateurs with a similar headcount to the number of paid government ministers. Meaning we simply can't intelligently address every issue/attack put out via the collective brainpower of the relatively united, resourced, structured and full time dedicated forces of State and Capital, let alone be present in every place where those issues/attacks hit home. The Left (certainly in its "organised" forms) is thus likely not going to be involved with sparking of revolt, and even if it is, at best some of its more relevant warnings, ideas and comments will sink in when that revolt occurs mostly beyond reach.
So the question becomes whether the public is well enough divided and the threat of reprisal so pronounced that it'll stop
organic (ie grassroots, self-evolving) revolt from getting out of hand. Our rulers seem to be worried that it isn't, hence all the pre-emptive legislation, and I share their uncertainty in that sense. They've pulled out all the stops, their technology of propaganda, surveillance and deterrence is more pervasive and powerful than ever before, but the public are unpredictable, and ultimately so much more numerous than them. There's simply not enough eyes even to read through the data they now have, let alone attempt to parse it all in the event of a rapidly-changing revolt scenario. Especially given how many of the workers in their own house have been impoverished by their actions over the years.
The pressure on their ability to retain the loyalty of the public, including their direct underlings, is only going to get higher as the situation worsens in Britain (and it
will continue to as is), which puts everything up for grabs. Even though they can, ultimately, crush any challenger in this era, the cost if they've got it wrong, in terms of stability and the resurrection of the idea that their hegemony may not be a given, a moral right, is potentially very real.