[smallerize]

It doesn't work if the opposition is also organized. For example, a March 2003 Gallup poll showed that 5% of the US population had made a public opposition to the Iraq war, but 21% had made a public display to support the war. Small minorities can't go directly against more popular movements.

[rightbyte]

I don't think those happely going with whatever the elite says counts the same way?

In political parties there are always these members that vote with the leadership. You usually need way more than 50% support among members to go against them. Dunno how much. In the long term to share is probably closer to 60% but in the short term it might be like 90%. (Made up numbers)

[smallerize]

Yeah there were way more people on each side who "supported" them and would have voted for them or something. But the demonstrators against the Iraq war were above the 3.5% threshold which the article says "has never failed to bring about change".

[AnotherGoodName]

I agree that's what it's saying but it does make the whole statement a bit meaningless.

Essentially the statement is 3.5% succeed unless there's meaningful opposition.

[xboxnolifes]

It's not meaningless, as there is a difference between opposition and status quo.