By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The National Guard is on standby in several US states, including Washington and Oregon, due to concerns about civil unrest linked to the upcoming presidential election. The measures come after hundreds of ballots were destroyed or damaged when three ballot boxes were set on fire in both states recently. Although the suspected perpetrator has not been identified, the police have released a physical description. Washington Governor Jay Inslee did not disclose the number of troops set to be deployed but assured that they will support law enforcement from Monday to Thursday. In Oregon, the National Guard is also on standby, as Governor Tina Kotek’s office is reportedly coordinating with local, state, and federal agencies to ensure a safe voting environment.
Read the original article here
National Guard troops are on standby in Washington state, Oregon, and Nevada as a precaution against potential election unrest. It’s hard to reconcile this reality with the America I grew up in. Living just blocks away from the state capitol in Washington, I experience an unsettling déjà vu whenever election season rolls around. The tension thickens, the stakes soar, and suddenly, the illusion of normalcy crumbles under the weight of fear. I genuinely hate this time of year; it’s marked by anxiety and anticipation not just for the results but for what might unfold in the streets afterward.
Having witnessed military presence during the riots in Minneapolis, I can’t shake the unsettling feeling it brings. It feels foreign, like an intrusion upon our everyday lives. Calling in the National Guard for election unrest is, in some ways, a euphemism for something much darker—domestic terrorism. It’s become too easy to gloss over the reality of threats, probing the limits of our democracy while settling deeper into a state of societal fracture. The language we use around this unrest, particularly as it pertains to one political side, is telling. Those calling for violence aren’t hiding behind allegories; they’re blatantly fortifying a culture of threats.
Why are authorities preparing for unrest predominantly in states like Washington and Oregon? If these precautions are deemed necessary there, shouldn’t the same vigilance be applied to every corner of the country? It feels like a selective application of concern, further emphasizing a rift that’s only deepening with each cycle. The unrest in Portland has reached the point where businesses are boarding up their windows in preparation, a disappointing tradition that should have no place in a democratic society. This isn’t merely a precaution; it’s a symptom of an environment fostered by extremism and fear.
The conversations surrounding the expected unrest echo a sentiment I cannot ignore: the fear that lies beneath the surface feels disproportionate to the actual statistics on crime. The rhetoric we’ve seen from certain political figures isn’t just alarming; it’s dangerous. It has permeated the fabric of everyday discourse and escalated the stakes to levels we should not accept in a democratic society. Yet here we are, in 2024, eyeing the potential for unrest, grit and confidence muzzled by the looming specter of violence.
As Election Day approaches, the whispers of violence and intimidation grow louder. It’s almost absurd to think we could require election observers from other countries to ensure a fair democratic process. Yet, perhaps we should be relieved; if international observers add a layer of accountability, then at least some faith remains in our electoral system. What a sad state of affairs, that this is deemed essential in America. How did we reach the point where we prepare for violence and treachery amongst ourselves, simply because one political faction refuses to accept the inevitable reality of losing?
The urgency of such measures amplifies the need for a significant re-evaluation of what we deem acceptable political discourse. One has to wonder about the mental landscape of a nation where divisive rhetoric gets a free pass, and those perpetuating it continue to gain followers. The so-called “patriots” justifying their stance in the face of such instability seem to have abandoned reason altogether. This is not patriotism—it’s a perversion of it, and it is confounding to witness how easily some claim to be champions of American values while promoting chaos.
The sense of dread in the air is palpable; individuals feeling they must arm themselves against fellow countrymen speaks volumes. This is not just a political issue; it fundamentally questions our humanity. The extreme polarization witnessed in states like Oregon and Washington offers a glimpse into a broader, festering wound that seems to have no remedy in sight or remedy beyond making sure military readiness is just a call away.
Amid all this, I hold onto the hope that, amidst the fear and division, Americans will come together as a force for good. The time to change the paradigm is long overdue. We cannot slide into a cycle where violence, intimidation, and fear become normalized components of our democratic process. In this pivotal moment, we must do more than prepare for potential unrest—we must actively strive to quash the unrest before it has an opportunity to rear its head. The future should not consist of standing armies anxious to reassess their roles against American citizens. It should foster celebrations of democracy and civic engagement, devoid of the heavy hand of military oversight. This is not the America I want to live in, and I sincerely hope, as we approach the elections, that we can find a way back to a peaceful, democratic future.