3 ms·

When a group of Americans were mad that their preferred candidate didn't win and stormed the Capitol, were they heroes or traitors? When a group of Ukrainians

When a group of Americans were mad that their preferred candidate didn't win and stormed the Capitol, were they heroes or traitors? When a group of Ukrainians did the same, why does your answer flip?

jxjnskkzxxhx 2y ago
Trump lost fairly, so storming the capitol is treason. Yanukovich didn't win fairly, so removing him is warranted. The answer flips because the situations are the opposite.
- riehwvfbk 2y ago
  The people who stormed the Capitol didn't think Trump lost fairly. So the real difference is whether they succeeded. Had the Capitol protesters succeeded, they would have made the media feed people like you and I their narrative and make sure we saw them as freedom fighters. I'm sure you'll disagree with the above, so here's a thought experiment. What would the Euromaidan protesters be called if they had lost?
  - koonsolo 2y ago
    To be clear, Yanukovych was fairly elected in 2010 and there are no claims that this was somehow rigged or undemocratic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_election#Conduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_el...). The protests started when he switched his stance on getting closer to EU. The protesters got him out and had a new election. How can you compare that to not accepting an election result? Edit: To answer your question: if the Euromaidan protest didn't succeed, it was just a protest like it was now. They would have had another election a bit later, possibly pissing off Russia again (In 2004 Russia poisoned a pro-EU candidate).
  - jxjnskkzxxhx 2y ago
    They didn't think that Trump lost fairly, but what they think doesn't matter. The law takes it's course.
koonsolo 2y ago
Euromaidan was a protests because Yanukovych didn't act on his promise to integrate Ukraine with the EU. Protesters were upset because that was not what he promised during his campaign. The storming of the capital in US was under false claims that the elections were stolen. There is both evidence that the elections were not stolen, and evidence what Yanukovuch said during his election campaign were not his actions. You can't tell the difference between the two? Plenty of protests ended in the fall of a government and electing a new one. Why would that be the same as the US storming of the Capital? If you would have said to compare it to the Georgian protests that don't accept the election results, that would be more difficult. But Euromaidan? That's easy.

When a group of Americans were mad that their preferred candidate didn't win and stormed the Capitol, were they heroes or traitors? When a group of Ukrainians did the same, why does your answer flip?

jxjnskkzxxhx 2y ago

Trump lost fairly, so storming the capitol is treason. Yanukovich didn't win fairly, so removing him is warranted. The answer flips because the situations are the opposite.

riehwvfbk 2y ago
The people who stormed the Capitol didn't think Trump lost fairly. So the real difference is whether they succeeded. Had the Capitol protesters succeeded, they would have made the media feed people like you and I their narrative and make sure we saw them as freedom fighters. I'm sure you'll disagree with the above, so here's a thought experiment. What would the Euromaidan protesters be called if they had lost?
- koonsolo 2y ago
  To be clear, Yanukovych was fairly elected in 2010 and there are no claims that this was somehow rigged or undemocratic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_election#Conduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Ukrainian_presidential_el...). The protests started when he switched his stance on getting closer to EU. The protesters got him out and had a new election. How can you compare that to not accepting an election result? Edit: To answer your question: if the Euromaidan protest didn't succeed, it was just a protest like it was now. They would have had another election a bit later, possibly pissing off Russia again (In 2004 Russia poisoned a pro-EU candidate).
- jxjnskkzxxhx 2y ago
  They didn't think that Trump lost fairly, but what they think doesn't matter. The law takes it's course.

koonsolo 2y ago

Euromaidan was a protests because Yanukovych didn't act on his promise to integrate Ukraine with the EU. Protesters were upset because that was not what he promised during his campaign. The storming of the capital in US was under false claims that the elections were stolen. There is both evidence that the elections were not stolen, and evidence what Yanukovuch said during his election campaign were not his actions. You can't tell the difference between the two? Plenty of protests ended in the fall of a government and electing a new one. Why would that be the same as the US storming of the Capital? If you would have said to compare it to the Georgian protests that don't accept the election results, that would be more difficult. But Euromaidan? That's easy.