Last week I was in the U.K. Arriving on May 7, I followed the election results as they unfolded. I watched as friends on Facebook and WhatsApp registered their dismay, horror and finally shock at the results. Those who had been rooting for the winning side were quiet, perhaps smugly quiet, but quiet nonetheless.The polls had all predicted a close race, with perhaps a narrow Labour win or a hung parliament.However, the result was a clear Conservative (Tory) win, with no need to form a coalition. This is the first time the Tories have won an election outright since 1992. In fact, the 1992 election is comparable to this year's election, being another in which the polls predicted a narrow Labour win or a hung parliament, but the Tories won the largest majority in electoral history to date – one that was slightly less than their win last week.Many people asked why the polls got it so wrong. Some have blamed the press with fingers firmly pointed at the News Corp group, owned by Rupert Murdoch, which includes The Sun, The Times and The Sunday Times. Echoing The Sun's claim in 1992 that "it was The Sun wot won it," the right-wing press took the credit – or the blame – for the outcome in this election. Photographs of the former Labour leader Ed Miliband "ineptly" trying to eat a bacon sandwich and failing to do so were put forward as evidence that not only was Miliband out of touch with the British public, but that he would make a "pig's ear" out of running the country. Many people are of the opinion that this attack on the Labour leader had a negative effect on many undecided voters, leading them to not vote for Labour.According to The Guardian, a left-leaning newspaper, 57.7 percent of the British press backed the Conservative Party in the run up to the elections, while 11.7 percent backed Labour. It would not be unfair then to say the press played an important role in the outcome of the election. It would also not be unfair to say the British press is not objective. This indicates a worrying state of affairs. Was the media really used to turn an election? A responsible media should be objective and not take sides. People use the media to get information and to form opinions about parties and leaders. They are seeking objective, well-balanced information so they can form their own opinion. In the U.K., the left-wing press is no more objective than the right; they are virulently anti-Tory.Whatever the reason, the fact is the Conservatives won. This was the result of a democratic process. Objections that the first past the post system is unfair rang a bit false. The first past the post system indicates the party that gets the most votes, even if it is by one vote, wins. In Turkey, proportional representation is criticized, as this system requires a threshold. With proportional representation, a party has to have a certain percentage of votes to be represented in parliament, while in the first past the post system, any party can be represented. Thus, fairness is not an issue here – both systems are as fair as they can be and both systems work. Blaming loss on the system is simply indicative of being a sore loser.Losing an election is sad, but it should not be a problem. The British have always been good losers – the phenomenon of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party is a good demonstration of this. Although this party has won seats, the idea behind the establishment of the Monster Raving Loony Party was to satirize the process. Winning was not the ultimate aim, it was taking part and being able to make one's point that was important. The British pride themselves on the idea that winning or losing is not important, it is taking part that matters. Another example is Eddie the Eagle, the first British ski jumper to compete in the Olympics. Although he came last in both events he competed in, he was a hero for his perseverance and good spirits in the face of defeat. This was the British way.Typically, after British elections, the party leaders who fail resign and a new leader is ushered in, giving the party a breath of fresh air. This is how politics works – the people have made their decision and the politicians now have to get on with running the country.Losing is not a problem if you can lose graciously. But what happened over the weekend was not a gracious loss. As I was leaving the U.K. on a Monday morning, I found an abandoned Daily Mail while sitting in the airport lounge. Not having ever really read The Daily Mail, I flipped through the pages and scanned the pages that spoke of scandals and the advance of "Tory Women" – one-third of British Prime Minister David Cameron's cabinet is composed of women. I came to a screeching halt, however, when I reached the double spread on pages 8 and 9. "Anarchist mob plotting a summer of thuggery," screamed the headlines. Here was a new word – thuggery – but the sentiment seemed to be nothing more than a typical reaction of this newspaper. Anarchists had formed a mob and anarchists were plotting, but as I read the article, the scenes described seemed familiar, yet threatening. As a result, I began paying more attention.The paper reported how left-wing protestors had turned out on the weekend to protest the Conservative victory. Some of the protestors were demonstrating in an attempt to bring public attention to the danger now faced by the welfare state – the Conservatives are not fond of the National Health Service (NHS) or any other bastions of the welfare state.Personally, I am not a supporter of the Tories, and do not look forward to seeing Britain become a country in which the welfare state is dismantled or where Theresa May's new counter-terrorism measures will be introduced. The measures proposed force schools and universities to prevent radicalization, allow authorities to force suspects to relocate to another part of the country, lower the burden of proof for Terror Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs) from reasonable belief to balance of probabilities, cancel passports, issue exclusion orders to prevent British citizens from returning to the U.K. and force companies to give details to the police of who is using a computer or mobile phone at a given time.If one examines the photographs of the protests over the weekend, the image of grim-faced police pushing back smiling young people is striking. These young people turned out to protest because their wishes had not been reflected by the election victory.So, while it is possible to understand the disappointment of some people – that a government who cares nothing for the people, one that will dismantle the welfare state, will probably hike educational fees and reward the wealthy with tax cuts while putting greater burdens on the poor and erode civil liberties – the vandalism and extreme reaction of the protesters over the weekend are harder to fathom. Below are some of the quotes given on this matter:On Radio 4's "The Moral Maze," a panelist said: "Right now I feel … ashamed to belong to a country that has clearly identified itself as insular, self-absorbed and apparently caring so little for the most vulnerable people among us … why do the poor vote when they merely give legitimacy to a system that connives with their oppression and alienation?'And this quote from some of the protestors: 'A Tory majority is a declaration of war!"On Facebook, someone posted: "We are a hate mob. We hate the ****** rich, the Tories and the cops. Get the Tories out!"Polly Toynbee, a journalist for The Guardian, wrote: "Discord starts now and the sun sets on a shrunken little England."What seems to be happening here is that well-educated young people have become disenchanted with the democratic system. They feel their voices and their concerns are not reflected in the election results. But hasn't this always been the way? Is that not what a democracy is? The majority wins while the minority has to work harder to get their voices heard. Perhaps this is not fair, but this is how the system works all over the world.To ask why the poor vote when they merely give legitimacy to a system that connives with their oppression and alienation seems to be tantamount to saying people should only have the right to vote if they vote the way someone or some institution wants them to vote – something that was quite often expressed in Turkey not so long ago.The violent clashes with police and the vandalism of a monument to a woman who fought in World War II all speak of a society at odds with itself. The vandalism of the war monument just before the commemoration of the 70th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day shocked and upset many, even those who were supporting the protests.There seems to be a new and frightening spirit taking over the world. Democracy is being ignored or it is being claimed that democracy no longer works. Why? Because some sectors of society do not approve of the results. In some countries, democratically elected leaders are deposed by military coups while in other countries they are removed by foreign invasion. Now it seems that a small sector of society feels that it is OK to stand up and talk about war and about how the "poor" do not know how to vote. But this is not the way our society works. There is an existing agreement between the people and their governing powers. The people vote and the winner takes up the reins of power. If the people do not like what the government does, they will vote it out when the term is up and give someone else a chance. This is not a perfect system, but it is one that has worked. If someone develops a more just and fair system, let's try it. But a more just and fair system cannot be introduced by vandalism and unrest. It cannot be achieved by protesting on the grounds that "the elected government does not represent me and thus, I will not heed it."The minority seems no longer willing to keep up their end of the contract. However, such a selfish and childish reaction – what the British might call "throwing your toys out of the pram," is neither justified nor dignified.These young people, instead of insulting the memory of women who died to protect the democracy that they so callously disregard, instead of threatening a revolution, instead of fighting police who are only trying to fulfill the orders they have been given, who are only doing their job should find an alternative way to change things. Where have violent revolutions gotten us today? Every one that has taken place has created great hardships and most have brought about unfathomable cruelty and injustice. And in the end, everything returns to how it was.The only just and fair way to change the system is to work within the system. Work to change it. Use one's vote and if the people vote differently from you, try to educate them as to why they should vote like you. And try to understand why they are voting as they are. The hubris that you, as an educated, young person know better than the people, is surely outdated, and if you will allow me not to mince words, vile. So, if the people have voted Tory, try to figure out why they trust Cameron and not Miliband. People are not stupid, and it is time that young, educated people focus their energy and imagination towards positive change and not destruction.