topum

In this case, it's a simplification - to say that people protest agaist things they "don't like and don't agree with". Things now look a little more complicated.

I still don't like the idea of riots and civil conflicts, and I agreed that Trump should get a nationwide support, and Obama and Clinton behaved impeccably noble in the situation.

But people think they act according to their natural right of revolution. The Independence Declaration says directly in preambula: "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

The problem is only - is there enough reasons to think that their basic rights are in danger, and the principles of their constitution need urgent protection, or it's just emotions?

I don't know, I cannot be the judge of that. But the protesters think that yes, their way of life is in danger. Many basic values are under threat.

And it doesn't matter that Trump was honestly elected. Tyrannies come in the result of elections too (Hitler). So his legal status doesn't cancel the people's right of revolution. It's a real collision.

So, I don't like the idea of riots, but I cannot call the protests hysterical and unfair. (And I always think: what if germans had used their natural right of revolution and stopped Hitler at 1933?)

From:

Well I can. It has been minutes after the free election and there is no evidence of tyranny. So the solutions is: there was free election, I did not like the result, I think might basic rights might be in danger (no evidence but I think what I think) so fuck the results of the free election, It needs to be what I think it needs to be? Cool.

From:

I still don't think that it's that simple. I know about minutes. What about tyranny, there were clear signs of claims of one group (let´s call them "white male traditionalists") to establish its dictatorship over other social groups. There are no signs of a tyranny already established. And I don't take resonsibility to teach americans about the right moment to begin riots against tyranny.

For now, I think, there are legal procedures (courts) to solve problems. So for riots it´s a bit early, indeed. But some grounds for them exist.

From: (Anonymous)

Are you even bloody serious? )

From:

That's me above ).

From:

I am bloody serious in three things:

1. Trump should be accepted and supported, as I said several times.

2. I don't call those protests stupid or hysterical. The situation is very dirrerent fom previous elections.

3. I think that there were dangerous moments in Trumps campaign that could grow into a threat to the very system of american democracy. They require special monitoring by the society.

If I were american, I'd feel rather peaceful than protesting, I'd support Trump. But I have a strong suspicion that Trump's lot don't feel similarly. For them, it might be "time to grab pussies"...

From:

It might also be time to decide that half of the country are 'a bunch of deplorables' though.
Any instances of breaking the law, tyranny or oppression need to be fought and protested against in full force. The results of free election is not one of these things and there is no basis for rioting.

From:

Forgive me, father, for I have sinned - by not expressing clearly enough that I also think that there shouldn't be riots. What about 'a bunch of deplorables' - this is what you call protesters and what I am arguing with (if you didn't notice).

From:

I did not call that anyone, Hillary did call that Trump's supporters though (I wonder if it would be reasonable basis to get scared of discrimination by her if she won (Kill those deplorables!!!) and therefore rioting).
Sorry, you just said 'But some grounds for them exist.' about riots and it was difficult for me to realise that you meant that there shouldn't be any.

From:

Maybe, I wasn't clear enough, but if you see the context: I said it's early to make revolutions, but there are potential grounds for future riots, because Trump did express many dangerous ideas. It should be put under control. And if somebody is being impatient, I can understand them (without supporting their protests). It's NOT PURELY against the results of election, let's be honest. It's rather about antidemocratic "values" that can come with the results (racism, sexism, etc., you know the list).

Edited Date: 2016-11-10 08:38 pm (UTC)

From:

I do not get the potential grounds in the future stuff but oh yeah, protesting that does not question the result of the election per se I am a big supporter of. That has been going on (like BLM) already.

From:

"That has been going on (like BLM) already."

Yes. This is a wider context that helps to see things 3D.

I don't think that even the stupidest of protesters have a real purpose to cancel the election. Together with a direct emotions, this is a form of pressure on the future goverment - to prevent some antidemocratic developments (which look possible after Trump's campaign).

From:

CNN clearly did show protesters protesting against the validity of the election result. As I aid, that I do not get. Other protests, oh yeah, count me in, those are "business as usual" and I am a big fan.

From:

I didn't see that sort. Well, with these I can't agree, as I said many times. Trump's presidency is out of discussion. I saw other sort of pictures. Then, we just discuss different things. Peace!

From:

It always take us a while to figure that out ).
I mostly saw that sort when I wrote the entry.

From:

I still haven't seen people insisting that the results aren't valid, but of course I trust you. Just no time to search. I"ve seen stuff about hate, racism, and "not my president" (which is different: T. says "I'll be president for all of you", they answer "with your values, you are not, fuck off" but it's not "results aren't valid, cancel it all"). Anyways, it doesn't matter. In your main point (results are out of discussion) we agreed from the very beginning. I just asked not to judge protesters... But OK. Peace, Cristmas, and Beer! (I am not an ardent drinker, but anyways).

From:

Oh no there were plenty reported by CNN. I am not OK with non-acceptance of the results of the free elections obviously not all protesting. I do not understand though why the protesters cannot be judged. People are free to protest and people are free to judge people protesting and their protests as far as I am concerned.

From:

Well, technically under the outdated and absurd thing called the Electoral College, they are actually saying "fuck the results of the free election" and putting the person that didn't actually win the popular vote into the White House. The Electoral College is antithetical to democracy.

But, alas, I don't think people are actually protesting that. That is really the only thing to be angry about, but they didn't fix it after 2000. There is irony that Hillary, who was in a position to do something about it, sort of forgot her quote from 2000 and now it's come back to bite her: “I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people, and to me that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.”

From:

Protesting against the electoral college should have happened not on the day when the results of the election are announced, yes. Everyone new the rules of the game going into it, nobody protested them then.

From:

Change is often reactionary, not pre-emptive.

I think people do not want to go quietly into the night because the fear is real and well-placed. Incidents of violence and threats against minorities have risen, and in many of the cases, the perpetrators of the violence were open that they were Trump supporters. There is a small but dangerous segment that thinks his election has given free reign to oppress others. Minorities have a reason to be afraid.

Also, the right to protest is firmly grounded in the American constitution and to say people should not be allowed to do so contradicts the very foundation of the country. I don't think rioting is appropriate, but peaceful protest HAS changed things in the nation's past.

From:

I think that pretending that these are riots against electoral college is insincere. Rioting and protesting against the result of free election is wrong. The whole thing about oppressors of minorities that apparently have been ravaging the country in the last 24 hours I consider to be complete bullshit, sorry. America has the police, working courts, etc. All of that works. Any of these crimes can be dealt with and have been for ages. Any instances where this is not the case should protested against in full force. But being afraid is not a reason to overturn the results of free election and replace it with something that would make you be afraid. Peaceful protesting, oh yes by all means, peaceful protesting to overturn the result of free elections and replace with something we want is going to be interesting to watch.

From:

I think you might be mistaken on what many of the protestors are actually intending to do. I don't think the majority expect the election to be overturned. (I also never said that the riots were about the Electoral College - that is a very small percentage.) It is more about a voice to the incoming government that if they follow through on many of the promises they are made, people are not going to stand idly by. I really don't understand why that is offensive, but it could also be my mindset as an American that thinks it's ok to speak up. In a best case scenario, it will make the new administration think about the impacts of their policies and proceed more moderately, which would be in the best interest of the nation. No one needs a radical government. It has never worked, and it definitely won't work in a nation so painfully divided.

As for oppression not having a chance to occur, that is silly because oppression was going on long before this and will go on long after this. There are certain groups with very real reasons to fear - Muslims, for example. As i mentioned before, there have already been incidents across the country of some really scary behavior by supporters that think the election has given them the right to hurt or frighten others. They are a minority, but a frightening and dangerous one.

Yes, there are police and courts in place to combat discrimination, but relying on that is not going to get you very far. In many cases, as we have seen over and over again, the police themselves are carrying out the abuse. There are many places where certain crimes are not even investigated, much less prosecuted fully. The judicial system is not colorblind. That is a fact that is so well-known that it's almost taken for granted until some event happens to remind the national conscience of it. As for the tools in place to combat abuses, the primary body to investigate and curb broad patterns of discrimination or hate crimes is the Justice Department, and under previous Republican leadership, the funding for prosecution and investigation of these things was dramatically cut. So, yes, there are tools to combat problems, but I think it's incorrect to say that it all works all of the time, and it might even be incorrect to say it all works some of the time.

From:

Oh yeah, the part of the protests that is not questioning the outcome of the election I am very much not against and even would support. CNN clearly showed protesters with "Trump should leave", "Elections not valid" message and those I do not get. Normal protesting against the oppression that has been going on way before Trump and will keep going on after him, like BLM protests etc, yes, I fully agree with. Voicing that you guys will fight any specific attempts (not "I know he will do evil stuff and I am afraid") of oppression by Trump such as specific oppressive laws or policies or lack of enforcement of existing policies or specific cases of injustice in courts and by protesting is something we sincerely hope for and we assumed it goes without saying (it has been happening before not sure why we would expect it to be different with Trump). As long as it is not questioning the outcome of the elections I am all for it.

From:

Also, protests about impending laws or promised legislation has occurred in many countries. Sometimes it has actually affected the legislation. Since there are promises to take away the healthcare law that so much time and energy has gone into - and has resulted in insurance coverage for so many - people are very concerned. I suppose they could wait until after it's been taken away, but I think many believe they can make enough noise that it will make the leaders reconsider their plans.

From:

As I said, all for it as long as it is not about the acceptance of the result of free election as can be inferred from my post. The rest I would be the first supporter of. I really hope that you guys will monitor every move by this guy and nip any attempt at oppressive legislation or policies via courts and protest and whatever it takes. But the result of the free election is what it is. The protesters questioning it that CNN showed I don't get.

From:

livejournal.livejournal.com

Hello! Your entry got to top-25 of the most popular entries in LiveJournal!
Learn more about LiveJournal Ratings in FAQ (https://www.dreamwidth.org/support/faqbrowse?faqid=303).

From:

beautesauvage13.livejournal.com

I don't get it either. They should just suck it up and deal with it or leave the country.

Athena

From:

I don't think leaving the country is a viable suggestion. Emigration is both expensive and complicated - and likely foreclosed to a vast majority of the people that are most affected. I am not saying that there isn't a time and place to accept the inevitable, but "leave the country" is borderline absurd to tell anyone.

From:

I agree that "I will leave the country" or "you leave the country" is just hysterics that people will be just ashamed of in a couple of days. It is a complete over-reaction, haha.

From:

beautesauvage13.livejournal.com

It's stupid to protest what was democratically decided by the majority of the people.

Not that I care as I'm Canadian.

So moving on to pot smoking Trudeau.

Athena

From:

Well, that is not actually true. The majority of the people (who did vote) did not vote for Donald Trump. That is one of the problems that makes the entire thing complicated.

But people are not necessarily protesting the election as being false, but rather standing up for their rights. The majority has not been kind to the minorities, and the nation is built on a tradition of peaceful protest that HAS accomplished things: suffragettes, the Civil Rights movement, etc. So, there is something to do the concept of taking to the streets in a desperate attempt to protect their rights.

Also, with all due respect, it is very unwise for any other nation - especially Canada - to pretend things in the US doesn't affect them.

From:

beautesauvage13.livejournal.com

I'm done discussing it.

Athena

From:

dorispossum.livejournal.com

Alternatively, one could accept the results with the same grace and respect the right accorded Obama's - far more decisive - electoral mandate. Tea party anyone?

From:

bichoose.livejournal.com

As a labour voter here in England..i can tell you it is a seriously big Bitch...but hey ho...i follow an old ladies advice keep smiling and drink the wine...

From:

mallorys-camera.livejournal.com

Well, technically, HRC won the election. :-)

But I understand what you are saying. And basically, I agree with you. They're behaving like sore losers. Suck it up! I say. And work to make sure that situations like this do not reoccur in the future.

From: