Politics : Why do people PROTEST against america so much ?

[Wikiy]

If tomorrow the government abolishes civil rights in the United States, that doesn't mean American don't have human rights. It means that the American government no longer respects the inalienable human rights of its citizens.

Or perhaps it means Americans' rights were taken away from them and that they should be returned to them because of the widely-held opinion of humanity that all humans should have specific rights?

Only because you tried to redefine the whole concept.

I'll admit, I'm not very knowledgeable about the specific technical definitions of the 2 concepts.

---------- Post added 2013-02-17 at 05:51 PM ----------

The concept of natural rights is what tells us the infringement is wrong. Because, you know, it's stepping on inalienable human rights.

How about we have the collective morality of humanity decide whether it's right or wrong that the government took away the rights?

[semaphore]

Or perhaps it means Americans' rights were taken away from them and that they should be returned to them because of the widely-held opinion of humanity that all humans should have specific rights?

A difference without a distinction.

How about we have the collective morality of humanity decide whether it's right or wrong that the government took away the rights?

You mean like using the collective morality of humanity to decide what rights all humans should have regardless of what their government says?

Gee, if only we have a shorter name for those rights. Like, I don't know, natural rights?

[skrump]

Or perhaps it means Americans' rights were taken away from them and that they should be returned to them because of the widely-held opinion of humanity that all humans should have specific rights?



I'll admit, I'm not very knowledgeable about the specific technical definitions of the 2 concepts.

---------- Post added 2013-02-17 at 05:51 PM ----------



How about we have the collective morality of humanity decide whether it's right or wrong that the government took away the rights?

Rights mean jack squat if you are unwilling to risk your life to protect them, most Americans won't and our government takes advantage of it, I highly doubt we are the only civilized country that has this issue though.

[Kraenen]

The only people you see protesting america are terrorists/muslim fascists or masochists.

[Speedlance]

I support USA because we need them to protect us, I don't want to get into details but I'd be as bold as to say that we'd not be living in relatively safe world right now if it wasn't for the USA.

[oblivionx]

I do understand that the first amendment say * freedom of speech * but protestor take it to who new level every times and you know what is get really annoying and old fast, Do they really think denouncing this govt as a terrorist or facist will do any thing

Is will not at all but they still do it and they are protected like everyone else !

My guess is because they can.

Try the same shit in Russia and China and you end up imprisoned or dead, Just ask Gary Kasparov.

[Kalyyn]

I think South Park put it best.
“People have it so good in America that they get bored very easily. And when people get bored they start protesting things.”

[Cybran]

“People have it so good in America that they get bored very easily. And when people get bored they start protesting things.”

Today I went to protest against the jacked up electricity prices in my country. Some old people received bills bigger than their pensions. People protest when they are sick of being walked over.

[Jackmoves]

Happens in most countries I think(that allow it). Look at France for example, their farmers are (in?)famous for it!

[Deleted]

Because the majority in the US and their mother has a mindset of ''rightwing or gtfo dirty commie''

---------- Post added 2013-02-17 at 10:20 PM ----------

My guess is because they can.

Try the same shit in Russia and China and you end up imprisoned or dead, Just ask Gary Kasparov.

Recently the French human rights organization Reporters Without Borders unveiled new press freedom ratings, which showed Russia sinking to 148th place globally. This finding is consistent with the yearly ratings of the American organization Freedom House, which deems the Russian media to be “not free.” In contrast, Western countries, as we might expect, are the world’s freest and most democratic and ahead of everyone else.

Does this correlate to reality? As a regular reader of the mass media from both sides of the Information Curtain, I have long been under the strong impression that the Western public intelligentsia – including the creators of all these ratings – often consider that the only “free” and “independent” media outlets in Russia are those which support their own ideas and prejudices. At the same time, those Russian media outlets that take a pro-Kremlin or even neutral position are inevitably painted as Kremlin stooges – disregarding that the majority of the Russian mass media audience approve of Putin.

(By the way, those approval ratings are created by polling ordinary Russians, whereas the ratings of organizations such as Freedom House and Reporters Without Borders are compiled using opaque methodologies by anonymous “experts.”)

As evidence of their position, their argue that Russia apparently has no freedom of speech, and that the “bloody regime” crushes the voices of “democratic journalists.” Yes, these things sometimes happen. For instance, after the Presidential elections, Kommersant Vlast printed a photograph of a election ballot saying, “Putin, go fuck yourself.” The paper’s editors cheekily captioned it thus: “Correctly filled out ballot, ruled spoiled.” The paper’s owner Alisher Usmanov quickly fired them.

Harsh? Maybe, but there is a wealth of similar examples in the West. For insulting Romney, accidentally caught on open mic, the journalist David Chalian was fired from Yahoo News. One can compile an entire list of journalists who were fired for criticizing the state of Israel: Sunni Khalid, Helen Thomas, Octavia Nasr, etc. Likewise there is another substantial list of journalists fired for attending Occupy Wall Street protests. The most famous journalist-whistleblower in the world, Julian Assange, today lives in the Ecuadoran Embassy in London to avoid arrest the moment he walks out onto the street.

Regardless of all this, “professors of democracy” continue to harangue us with the idea that the Russian media are controlled and toe the Kremlin line. These claims would seem absurd to any Russian who cares to leaf through the pages of Vedomosti, Novaya Gazeta, Echo of Moscow, or an array of other publications. If you wish to find a glaring example of mass media parroting a single narrative, one need look no further than Western coverage of the 2008 war in South Ossetia. In that fairytale, evil Russian orcs cravenly attacked flourishing, democratic Georgia, ushering in all kinds of savagery and destruction in their wake. At the same time, the American news channel FOX interrupted its interview with an Ossetian-American schoolgirl, at the time resident in Tskhinvali, when it became clear that her account did not square with Washington’s party line. The Polish journalist Wiktor Bater was fired after he started saying “politically incorrect” facts about the Georgian bombing of Tskhinvali and Saakashvili’s lies. Needless to say, these episodes did not in the slightest impact the press freedom ratings of either the US or Poland.

This is not to idealize the state of Russian press freedoms, which has a huge number of its own problems. For instance, writing about Putin’s private life (but not his policies!) is something of a taboo in Russia, just as is criticism of Israel in the US. And the situation as regards unsolved murders of journalists is far worse than in the West, albeit in statistical terms it is comparable to or even better than in many widely acknowledged democracies such as Brazil, Mexico, India, Colombia, and Turkey.

That said, there are some things Russia can be “proud” of. American “dissidents” such as Hearst Newspapers journalist Helen Thomas and former professor Normal Finkelstein are not only fired, but also put on blacklists which complicate their chances of finding another job and getting access to high-ranking officials. Meanwhile, in stupid and naive Russia, the American journalist Masha Gessen can publish a book about Putin titled “The Man Without a Face” and get a personal interview with the Russian President as a reward. She is then free to repay his consideration by practically calling him an idiot in an account of their meeting in the journal Bolshoi Gorod – and to then go on to head the Russian service of Radio Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, headquartered minutes away from the walls of the Kremlin.

So in some sense Russia still has many, many steps still to climb up the stairs of the press freedom ratings…

[smelltheglove]

I think South Park put it best.
“People have it so good in America that they get bored very easily. And when people get bored they start protesting things.”

i honestly thought you were going to quote the other episode - the one that concluded that hippies and hawks were both needed. one to kick ass, and the other to protest the kicking of ass so we didnt look like total douches, lol