“ The "civic engagement" embodied by the London Women's March represents a deliberate, mass-scale reclamation of that term from the tepid domain of voter information pamphlets and polite town hall meetings. It posits that the most vital form of civic engagement is not just informed voting, but the active, collective, and often disruptive occupation of public space to voice dissent and demand accountability. The march transforms participants from passive citizens, who are merely governed, into active agents of political discourse. This is a pedagogical act of citizenship, teaching that engagement means showing up, being counted, and adding one's body to a collective statement. Politically, this broadens the definition of what it means to participate in a democracy, challenging the notion that civic duty begins and ends at the ballot box every few years. It argues that a healthy democracy requires the constant, noisy, and visible input of its people between elections. However, this form of engagement, while potent, must be seen as a gateway, not a terminus. The political efficacy of the march hinges on its ability to funnel this surge of public engagement into the more sustained, less glamorous channels of lobbying, local organizing, and consistent pressure on representatives. It is a masterclass in awakening civic spirit, but the curriculum must have a second semester focused on the hard graft of political change. ”