I feel impelled to reply to this, but don't really know where to start.
The problem (for me) is that CapK is superficially quite correct, but an understanding of the situation is only arrived at with difficulty. As with most human situations, it is intensely complex, based on a long history, and cannot be adequately dismissed by phrases like ... the sheep-like behaviour of the people who just accept ... (although I have sympathy with your feelings, CapK!)
And, whilst I both understand and agree with the phrase, above, picking the railways as an example is probably the worst one to choose. There are plenty of other examples for which there is no rational explanation, whilst the railway system is in such a mess because of an amalgam of many years of neglect by a government who hated nationalised industry, followed by a privatisation that handed over this neglected infra-structure to firms unable to produce a swift modernisation without ignoringing the just demands of their shareholders, which led to two horrific rail crashes within a few months of each other, causing a most un-ovine public outcry which had to be addressed. Ergo, the tracks are being replaced and the signalling modernised, even in places where they could have been left for another year, throughout the rail system, all at the same time. This means that the railway companies are physically unable to keep to timetables on a frequent, but irregular, basis. (The fact that many of them do not employ enough staff to cover for sickness and absence is hidden by the above!) This is happening because the public have shouted, loud and clear, not because they have accepted.

The things that are accepted with equanimity (and these are legion, as CapK rightly says) are a result of about 1,000 years total, of feudalism leading into capitalism which has always denied the lower classes any rights. Close participation in two world wars in the C20 did not help to improve this situation.
Those who protested received sanctions of one sort or another, and many of them went across to the new colonies (and then to the Empire and later to the Commonwealth) where they found themselves better able to express their individuality. This removed those who might otherise have been leaders of any useful resistance and a focus for the discontent of the masses that has always run as an undercurrent to British Society.

Things have improved considerably since I was a youngster (1940s and '50s). Many more people expect and demand better service, and standards are improving slowly. (which gives you some inkling as to how abysmal they were, CapK!)

Sorry to have made such a long post - I'll shut up now, and let someone else have a rant!