Post-Inauguration Turmoil

Our country is at a point in its history where the conversation about freedom of speech seems to be more important than ever. Regardless of political party, one can argue that the recent presidential election was riddled with controversy, unprecedented campaign styles, and radical candidates as a whole. Donald Trump, our newly elected President, ran a campaign with promises to “drain the swamp” that is our corrupt political system. We are living through a dramatic shift in the government of our nation, with little knowledge as to where this journey will take us. Throughout this blog, I will be following the developments in the Trump administration and the responses or implications pertaining to First Amendment rights. I will also consider the preexisting conversation surrounding freedom of speech as it relates to our society today, while reflecting on the effective manners in which political discourse can be carried out.

Protestors gathered in Washington D.C.

As our nation stands in this polemic state, there are conflicting viewpoints as to how social activism and other modes of political expression should be achieved in effective yet respectful ways. Multiple riots and protests have ensued since the inauguration of President Trump just under two weeks ago. Controversy has risen over such demonstrations. The most popular of these protests was the Women’s March on Washington, which took place the day after the inauguration. Hundreds of thousands of women, men, families, and people of all colors and sexual orientations gathered together on Capitol Hill to make their voices heard. Sister marches spread across the nation. “An estimated 2.6 million people [participated in more than 600 marches worldwide.” The movement represented a number of things and was unique to each individual. Overall, the marches were in opposition to the new administration moving into the White House and to the discriminatory remarks made during the campaign trail of the current President. These people exercised their gift of free speech to fight for the rights of women and send a message to the leaders in control. These women and citizens are standing in solidarity to defend their freedoms and prove their intentions to continue progressive movements. Regardless of personal opinions on the validity behind the protests, one cannot refute the fact that the women’s marches were clear examples of largescale civic discourse.

On the other hand, the women’s marches were met with harsh criticism and scrutiny from various peoples. Many Trump supporters, for example, opposed the gatherings altogether. Clearly, people in favor of this new leadership would not take kindly to protests against such leadership directly following the inauguration. Other people as well questioned: What is the purpose of these riots? What good does all of this do? Some people complained about the inconvenience that may have resulted from such a march. Some of those in opposition objected to the idea of discrediting a President before he even had a chance to serve. In certain instances, people condemned the individuals participating in the protests, arguing that the claims were overly sensitive and unsubstantiated. Hateful speech was even directed at protestors. Extreme political activists such as Milo Yiannopoulos and Tomi Lahren have expressed clear thoughts on the issue. Milo claimed that women are now perpetuating a sexist stereotype of men, while Lahren accused protestors of “playing the victim card” and “acting like snowflakes.” Although everyone is entitled to his or her, these comments seem to be unproductive in political discourse. I have been exposed to this myriad of reactions just through my daily encounters or through specific news outlets.

In my opinion, the marches in Washington and throughout the country seem like fair and respectable political expressions. One may not agree with the ideals promoted in these examples of civic duty, but the right to freedom of speech is a right that we must protect and defend as a democratic nation. Generally speaking, the demonstrations seemed orderly and nonviolent. People decided to take the initiative and voice their concerns with a new government. Not only do I respect this initiative, but I believe that these actions should be encouraged of citizens as active participants in a democracy. Voicing our opinions is how we make our perspective known. It is how we foster political dialogue and an overall well-informed society. Not to mention that the ability to speak up hinders the formation of regimes or the existence of corruption. The power is with the people.

The March for Life, which took place on January 27th, is another recent example of political activism and discourse. The values and ideals may differ drastically from those of the Women’s March, but the March for Life is another effective demonstration by citizens. Going out to protest shows interest and investment in the issues, and dialogue occurred in an intelligent and respectful manner. These are the examples of civic engagement that must carry on. These are the productive uses of free speech.

Pro-life supporters gather for the annual March for Life

3 thoughts on “Post-Inauguration Turmoil

  1. Daniel,
    I appreciate your positive perspective on the right to freedom of speech. Often with a topic such as this there is a negative response, criticizing the civic disrupt that may result from protests. I also think it is an important part of our democracy that should be upheld; it is powerful to see so many people take hold of the opportunity that they have to publicly stand behind their beliefs. However, it is always important to keep in mind the fine line between that of a peaceful, just protest and one of violence and out-right hate. I hope that we can continue with respectful demonstrations such as the Women’s March and March for Life as we move forward in this new political climate.

  2. I think the topic you have chosen for this blog is unique, and I am really interested in the angle you are going to pursue—using the lens of the First Amendment to analyze the big picture of the current happenings in Washington. I also thought it was apt that you objectively covered both sides and opinions regarding the Women’s March, offering a holistic view of the situation. I appreciated the opinions you offered in the post as well, and I agree with what you said about the necessity for citizens to continue to participate in exercising their First Amendment rights. Overall, I thought this post offered a great snapshot of the current events in Washington, and their implications.

  3. I can definitely agree with you when you say that the recent presidential election was an unprecedented one. Keeping this in mind, I’m really looking forward in seeing how you approach and analyze the Trump administration’s actions on First Amendment rights and freedoms. I would have to agree with you when you said “the marches in Washington and throughout the country seem like fair and respectable political expressions.” I too believe this as long as these marches remain peaceful and respectful, as to not offend onlookers or destroy private property. If these marches cross that line, however, I believe that the government should take whatever means is necessary to end them. I appreciate your view on free speech and look forward to reading your future blogs!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *