Wednesday didn’t happen in a vacuum: it happened in a context of rising right-wing terrorism, aimed at their adversaries in the elite (pipe bombs mailed to Obama, Biden, Clinton, DNC) and among the public (Charlottesville, El Paso, Pittsburgh, Charleston).
A word of caution: many aspects of the social, political and informational mess that led to extremists storming the US Capitol are present in Western Europe too. (1)

Wednesday didn’t happen in a vacuum: it happened in a context of rising right-wing terrorism, aimed at their adversaries in the elite (pipe bombs mailed to Obama, Biden, Clinton, DNC) and among the public (Charlottesville, El Paso, Pittsburgh, Charleston).
Against parliamentarians: Jo Cox, Labour Party MP, and Walter Lübke (CDU politician in Hesse) have been assassinated. Plots against other politicians, in Germany and the UK, led to further convictions. (3)
Even more worryingly, the radical right in the institutions has inched closer to legitimising political violence against its adversaries. Nothing like the lionisation of Kyle Rittenhouse in the US, but still a significant trend. (6)
Salvini deflected the blame from the Macerata terrorist:
(8)
The US right's radicalisation happened in a media environment that *needs* a chunk of the electorate to have their own facts. Much blame is laid at the door of sm/internet, but the contribution of ‘traditional’ right-wing media cannot be overstated. (11)
Most worryingly, grand scale spin-offs of the Fox News model are in the works (15)
According to surveys few Western European countries, most notably France and Italy, have similar levels of distrust in elections as the US, but the norm is still a degree of trust. It’s not as common a strategy to delegitimise opponents as in the US. (17)

The extent of police complicity or sympathy for the rioters in the US Capitol is still to be established. But there are worrying areas of overlap between security forces, the radical right, and political violence - in the US, but in Europe too. (21)
More from Government
How does a government put a legislation on 'hold'? Is there any constitutional mechanism for the executive to 'pause' a validly passed legislation? Genuine Koshan.
So a committee of 'wise men/women' selected by the SC will stand in judgement over the law passed by
Here is the thing - a law can be stayed based on usual methods, it can be held unconstitutional based on violation of the Constitution. There is no shortcut to this based on the say so of even a large number of people, merely because they are loud.
Tomorrow can all the income tax payers also gather up at whichever maidan and ask for repealing the income tax law? It hurts us and we can protest quite loudly.
How can a law be stayed or over-turned based on the nuisance value of the protestors? It is anarchy to allow that.
CJI: our intention is to see if we can bring about an amicable resolution to the problem. That is why we asked you why don't you put the #FarmBills on hold. You want time for negotiation. If there is some sense of responsibility showing that you will not implement the laws
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) January 11, 2021
So a committee of 'wise men/women' selected by the SC will stand in judgement over the law passed by
CJI: .....then we can form a committee with ICAR members to look into this. Till then you can continue to put the law on hold. Why will you insist on continuing the law anyhow
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) January 11, 2021
Here is the thing - a law can be stayed based on usual methods, it can be held unconstitutional based on violation of the Constitution. There is no shortcut to this based on the say so of even a large number of people, merely because they are loud.
AG Venugopal: none of the petitions point to any provision of three farm acts stating that it is unconstitutional
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) January 11, 2021
CJI: we are not declaring it unconstitutional
AG: laws cannot be stayed. This is drastic
Tomorrow can all the income tax payers also gather up at whichever maidan and ask for repealing the income tax law? It hurts us and we can protest quite loudly.
How can a law be stayed or over-turned based on the nuisance value of the protestors? It is anarchy to allow that.