EDITORIAL: ‘Coups’ is a dangerous term for groups protesting the presidential election

The United States is preparing itself for President Donald Trump’s possible reluctance to leave office peacefully, even if he loses the presidential election. 

This threat has raised concerns for thousands of people who have decided they will fight for our democracy with something we aren’t used to in the U.S.: a coup. 

By definition, a coup is a “sudden, violent overthrow of an existing government by a small group.” However, when looking at the actual intentions of these proposed coups, the groups are  primarily going to participate in non-violent protests and boycotts. 

The word “coup” is an inappropriate term to publicize, as it implies violence. This idea is fueling conservative rhetoric that leftists are trying to burn down the country. Right-wing leaders are already convinced Antifa is attempting to overthrow the government, and using such politically charged terminology does not favor the left’s defense. 

The phrase is too dramatic, inaccurate and effectively undermines their message. These groups must be very clear about their intentions, because as of now, the name is a dog whistle for inciting violence. 

People have also planned protests for the day after Election Day before even knowing the results. This simplifies our election and the current state of our democracy to some vague idea of discontent.

The lack of a specific goal in these cases raises questions around the effectiveness of such premature planning. Any form of protest should be withheld for a few days after the election because we will have panic, chaos and potential violence if we get upset too early.

We know there are things to be angry about, but if we act before we can make a specific argument, then what is the purpose? What signs will these people be holding on Nov. 4? What phrases will they be chanting? Their mission is defeated without clear motivations. 

In an age where it is common to get involved because everyone else is, we must recognize the difference between acting to make a change and acting because you’re upset — one is productive, and the other is not.

Americans will make petitions to stop horrific acts in China. People generated a new wave of social media posts about their anger at Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation as a Supreme Court Justice — after her confirmation. 

These actions, while honorable at times, are not productive toward achieving substantial change. 

On a larger scale, Instagram petitions and infographics are similar to the pre-planned protests and boycotts for Nov. 3. While their intention is to raise awareness of inequities in our country, they probably won’t achieve anything because their efforts have no organized meaning.

These coups will be a display of public sentiment rather than an effort to actually achieve anything. This, however, still sends a powerful message about public opinion, and that is worth acknowledging.

But despite our concerns, Trump knows what he’s doing. He knows he’s inciting fear and worry by refusing to promise a peaceful transition. Albeit, Trump will face legal barriers if he decides to carry this out.

Yet, because he has vocalized such sentiments, those on both the right and left will act out.

Groups who take to the streets next week won’t necessarily be an accurate representation of the country. For the majority, they will be the far-left and far-right radicals who are either upset that former Vice President Joe Biden isn’t progressive enough or ready to “stand by” and protect their beloved leader.

Some groups, such as the Protect the Results coalition, which is organizing peaceful protests after Election Day to ensure all ballots are counted, already have a clear mission. This coalition’s approach has the potential to be more productive and organized, which helps prevent any unnecessary violence.

The upcoming presidential election is incredibly important, and it seems as if we are making the biggest decision of our lifetime. In some ways, we are. The climate is at risk. Social tensions are rising. Human rights are on the line.

But, whichever way the election turns out, we can retain some hope in our right to participate in politics. Elections happen more often, and we are constantly deciding who is running our government at the local, state and federal levels.

Now more than ever, we recognize the importance of carefully choosing who runs our nation. We have the right to protest, boycott and strike, which are all vital to preserving the voice of the people. But, if we begin without a plan, then we have all the chaos without any of the results.