I want to remind you that when the "Colective" horror happened the government resigned (PSD) but when a similar incident happened in the USA the president or any government official didn't resign.
If you think that we are more advanced than the american democracy then you sir ignore certain facts.
source:http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/12/04/oakland...
I agree with you that the government doesn't have to necessarily resign but the fact that they were democratically elected doesn't give them the right to do anything they want. The people have the full right to voice their disagreement with the actions of the government, and I happen to agree with the demands and sentiment of the overall protests.
Unfortunately the Romanian people have been lagging (on average) when it comes to civic involvement, education, mutual trust, mutual respect etc., which lead to the election of the current populist government. There are signs that this is changing, slowly, and that makes me hopeful.
Since PSD was voted by so many people and is in the right, why isn't there any significant counter-protest?
If PSD would've governed by sticking to their political principles, their proposed agenda and within reason, there would've never been any protests. Sure, people would be upset because they have different political views, but you would've never seen 600k people on the streets.
Democracy is not a blank cheque and your argument of "they won fair and square" does not allow them to send us back into the dark ages ESPECIALLY for their own very specific interests.
If you think there's anything wrong with my logic above, then you're probably a lost case.
Other than the fact that they tried to decriminalize many corruption offenses triggering the largest protests since the fall of communism. As many people are saying: thieves shouldn't be let go just because they've been caught and gave everything back.
1. All such protests, began as a response to some wrong action of the government. However the shills, e.g. "Sylphine", behave as if that action did not exist and say that the protests are instigated by political opponents, foreign corporations and so on, who want to overthrow the innocent government. It is true that the political opponents, e.g. the current Romanian president, always try to use such protests to gain advantages over the target of the protests. However, this has nothing to do with the cause of the protests. No politicians in Romania have enough influence to convince a really large number of people to protest just because they say so.
2. Another frequent lie is that from the message above, which attempts to present the two positions, of those that are pro & contra the government as being two equivalent positions. That is as if one would say that there are 2 equivalent theories, one claiming that 2+2=4 and the other claiming that 2+2=7, and that the truth must be somewhere between these 2 extreme theories.
This is a lie. The counter-protest gathered not even 200 times less people, all who were obviously old and poor. They were unable to explain logically why they protest. It was obvious that someone has scared them with lies, e.g. that the opponents of the government want to decrease their pensions or salaries. Before the government introduced the changes in the penal Code that started the protests, they increased slightly the pensions and the small salaries. They hoped that this will make everybody happy so nobody will protest when they will achieve their main purpose of modifying the penal Code.
While corrupt politicians are everywhere, including in the USA, I am not aware of any other case when they would have been so shameless as to give themselves the permission to steal from the public money, by law, as they tried to do in Romania.
The text of the changes to the penal Code is public, so there is no doubt about their content. It is not possible to argue that any member of the government that voted these changes did not break his/her oath, which said that he/she will observe the Constitution and the Laws and he/she will protect the rights of the citizens (which include the right of property over the public money, which must not be stolen by those hired to administrate it).
So the 2 positions are not equivalent, one is right beyond any reasonable doubt and the other is wrong beyond any reasonable doubt.
This is reflected in the numbers, it is much easier to fool a couple thousand people (counter-protesters) than to fool many hundred thousand people (genuine protesters).
Moving on to important things. "It's a well known fact that Cotroceni protesters are mostly poor and retired old people and they went there because they received some incentives"
You seem to forget that the coalition PSD + ALDE won by a majority and that we live in a representative democracy not a direct democracy.
There were two order of magnitude more people protesting against PSD compared to those against the president. Also, the PSD party is notorious for using bribes during electoral campaigns, especially in the rural areas.
Also, while we're at it, how does winning the majority give any political party the right to do what the fuck they want? If you trusted me with the keys to your house to look after your dog while you're away, does that give me permission to steal your TV? Remember, you gave me those keys!
Oh, boy!
I hope you never get in a managerial position and while you are at it read the ordinance
http://www.dreptonline.ro/legislatie/oug_13_2017_modificare_...
If you find it hard to comprehend that it's out of order to take care of this law (which is selfish to the bone and only serves their own interest) before anything else you promised in your campaign I'm afraid there's not much to discuss here.
Stop promoting that ordinance please, you are outnumbered here.