Does Liberalism Represent the Fall of Democracy?

The Fall of Democracy

How weird this come back full circle.

Anti Trump protestors are literally attacking, egging, and beating up people just attending Trump Ralleys.

The attackers are following the people to their cars, attacking them, burning American Flags, saying "America was never great"

Attacking Trump Supporters

Ugly Bloody Attacks

Now the illegal Mexicans are showing up with their Mexican Flags and saying America doesn't belong to us. Do they not know this will only rally more people to the Trump Nationalist Party?

Well just to answer your thread title.

No it does not.

Shitty people and angry people do stupid stuff, does not invalidate liberal ideas or left wing politics in general.

Another terrible bait thread.

I didn't write the article, another concession from you.

😂

Where is the condemnation of this violence and political culture that is breaking this country apart in many aspects.

This is just a foreshadow of what is to come too.

But really why has Hilary and Sanders not condemned this violence from their supporters.

Why isn't the usual people here staying silent about this, but before they were so quick to judge isolated incidents at rallies.

Originally posted by AlmightyKfish
Well just to answer your thread title.

No it does not.

Shitty people and angry people do stupid stuff, does not invalidate liberal ideas or left wing politics in general.

Its not just the sheep as you trying to frame it👆

Now the leaders of the the never trump movement are laughing at the women assaulted by the violent leftists.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/03/nevertrump-leader-ben-howe-mocks-defenseless-woman-attacked-by-mob-at-trump-rally/

Well the fact that guy tweeting specifies he condemns the violence but doesn't really consider egging violence aside.

It still does not represent the fall of democracy. He is just some guy. Maybe one with a platform but still.

Im talking about an accumulation, democracy is being shut down through the perversion of the 1st amendment. You can't use the first amendment and violence to shut down the rights of others to peacefully assemble.

Meh, if democracy in the US persists after stuff like Kent State in 1970, I'm sure it will survive slightly zealous protests.

People are being seriously hurt, for attending rallies for the political candidates they want to see, why should people have to be worried about their life being hurt because they want to be apart of the democratic process? Do these people deserve this?

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2016/jun/02/donald-trump-san-jose-rally-protesters-clash-supporters

They shouldn't have to, but again, hardly something to blame on liberalism or tout the fall of democracy.

People all across the political spectrum worldwide protest and counter protest and it gets out of hand at times. But most of that is just people being angry etc, not to do with any specific ideology. Like here in the UK we often get far-right Britain First marches, which have been characterized by aggressive behaviour, but also then anti-fascist marches oppose them, and it all escalates into a brawl.

It's also one of those things that's difficult to find a solution to. More police presence? makes people uncomfortable at times and risks terrible escalation. And you can't really put limits on your first amendment as it's meant to apply both ways.

You don't attack people and follow them home or to their cars, to beat them up for attending a peaceful gathering, quit trying to side step.

I never said you should.

In fact I never suggested support for such actions. Protests should 100% remain peaceful, as everyone has the right to express their opinion but also not stop others from doing so.

My point was just it's not liberalism as a cause here, it's something that happens all over the spectrum.

So the point is, this is the shut down of democracy. You said it isn't. I explained why it is liberalism, because its all the liberals leading these groups and starting these fights.

Originally posted by AlmightyKfish
Meh, if democracy in the US persists after stuff like Kent State in 1970, I'm sure it will survive slightly zealous protests.

I don't think it will destroy democracy, but it's given it a stain that needs to be wiped off. In the 60's most of the anti war movement protests were non-violent, but they sent armed guards and shit to them anyways. But now cops won't even interfere with a violent mob? Why did we go from one extreme to the other?

People can say this thread is trying to bait people, but at the root of this is violence and some people in this country are more or less condoning violence. To me, that is more or less what you are doing when you blame Donald Trump for this. I want to note when I say "you" I do not mean you personally. But when someone blames Trump for this to me it says these people in a way had a right to do what they did.

A mob showed up and didn't just throw eggs at people, they threw cans and bottles and rocks as well. Which before you try to say that's not a huge deal please allow me to throw a rock at your head as hard as I can. People were also physically assaulted as well as having their cars damaged, etc. Some Trump supporters were even reportedly chased down by some protesters. To me a slightly zealous protest is when a protester runs up on stage and interrupts the person. Not when a mob shows up and starts committing various acts of violence against innocent people.

Let me ask you something: if one of the supporters had turned out to have a conceal and carry on them and they shot and killed someone who was trying to attack them, would you say they were in the wrong?

Eggs can really hurt someone, these people were throwing debris at police, and bottles at trump attendees.

Yep and all the cops do is tell them to go home. Which the only reason for them to do nothing is if they were specifically ordered not to do anything more than telling them to leave. Which why do I get the feeling the order came from the mayor? I bet he's best friends with the mayor of Baltimore.

Unless there have been recent reports about police actually arresting anyone responsible? At all?

"Tonight at 11: Do leading questions ever produce rational dialogue? Followed by our exclusive expose, 'Does Watching the Big Bang Theory Literally Cause Cancer? And Can You Afford to Risk It?' All this, plus weather and sports, tonight on Action News...Where Your News Matters!"

Originally posted by Digi
"Tonight at 11: Do leading questions ever produce rational dialogue? Followed by our exclusive expose, 'Does Watching the Big Bang Theory Literally Cause Cancer? And Can You Afford to Risk It?' All this, plus weather and sports, tonight on Action News...Where Your News Matters!"

All I can say is I have never watched "The Big Bang Theory" and I do not have cancer. Coincidence?