The thing is, if a movement's participants cannot offer clear expression of reasonable demand, how does the society justify or condone it, especially given the

The thing is, if a movement's participants cannot offer clear expression of reasonable demand, how does the society justify or condone it, especially given the rampage it caused against the civil rights of OTHER civilians? So far the protesters' main demand has been "five demands, not one less", and they are: - Full withdrawal of the extradition bill from the legislative process: already done. - Retraction of the characterisation of the 12 June 2019 protests as "riots": such wording has no legal implication at all. There is no point in retracting a said word for that matter. - Release and exoneration of arrested protesters: how is that fair to the victims who have been personally harmed, disabled, abused, and whose properties have been damaged? - Establishment of an independent commission of inquiry into police behaviour: How is it fair to investigate only police behavior but not rioter behavior, esp foreign funding and assistance? - Universal suffrage for the Legislative Council and the chief executive elections: the protesters demand universal voting with no strings attached, ignoring the stakes of all other stakeholders than themselves. If we analyze these demands it becomes clear that at least one of them is clearly impossible in any society based on rule of law. Other demands may either be self-contradictory or impossible without proper political bargaining process.