Donald J. Trump wasn’t the favourite choice as the president of the United States of America, as the crowds gathered across the nation in Election Day, to protest the election of Donald J. Trump. These weren’t the only sociopolitical movements we’ve seen in recent years, nor are they without historical precedent. Sarah J. Jackson, an assistant professor of Communication Studies and an expert in the framework of Social and Political Identities at Northeastern University, debated in the public sphere about these recent social and political movements and their potential impact on these protests.
When asked about her perspective on the motive of the protestors, Sarah explained, “In snapshots of political and social emergency, protests fill in as one type of deliberative majority rules system”. Indeed, a solid media can feature consultations between and among residents, and truly, casting a ballot and backing of strategy may be the consequence of pondering, in any case, fight is the most grassroots and normally happening type of deliberative majority rules system since residents can take part in it without the gift of strategies for political and media organizations and elites. Fights eject, indeed, when residents feel like different roads of discussion have been dispossessed to them.
So when we consider one of the absolute first fights in American history—the dumping of tea into Boston Harbor by who the British viewed as an uncontrollable crowd—we see a type of deliberative popular government that permitted residents to make a significant emblematic point to both people with significant influence who tried to quiet them and to different residents despite everything choosing which side to take in the unrest. However, she doesn’t feel that the current movement is the initiation for the new era of activism as so much as a reflection of the reality that progress in every society ebbs and flows and that social movements face inevitable backlash.