Hints for those commenting on invocation of Canada's emergency legislation:
1) This law was passed relatively recently, 1988. It is explicitly subordinate to Canada's charter of rights. It replaced the much more draconian emergency laws that were invoked in 1914, 1939, and 1970
2) The legislation allows for a *range* of actions by authorities, proportionate to the civil disturbance. Proportionately is the thing that the courts will probably examine most closely when they review any actions taken.
3) It's not "fascist" for an elected government to invoke duly enacted emergency laws, reviewable by courts, to deal with disturbances. What is a lot more fascist-y, on the other hand, are extremist groups who blockade commerce in hopes of coercing the state to yield to demands
4) In a free society, citizens can expect many rights. But there's no "right" to obstruct traffic indefinitely. There's no right to "self-defense" against police enforcing traffic laws. Shooting cops as they enforce traffic laws is strongly frowned upon in any working democracy.
5) Protest is a precious right. Democracy is built on the principle of majority rule, but majorities aren't always right. Sometimes a passionate 20% has something to say that the indifferent 80% needs to hear. Protest enables the 20% to force attention and prove their commitment.
6) But Canadian governments have given this truck protest a *lot* of leeway. Governments allowed protesters to blockade the downtown of the national capital for weeks! To break all kinds of laws along the way! They were allowed to make a spectacular point, they got their hearing
7) At some point, the passionate 20% need to play by the rules of democracy too. Fortunately, it seems that most participants in the blockades do deep-down understand that truth. If arrested, most of them will go peacefully. Any who don't ... they cease to be "protesters." END
... ProportionaLITY ... sorry
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A word to everybody writing, "The Democrats have nobody to blame but themselves" takes ...
The fundamental reason we're in this crisis this morning is that the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Reagan is about to nominate for president a dictator-loving criminal against the Constitution. That disgrace and shame is theirs.
If President Biden had posted an equally poor performance against presumptive GOP nominee Nikki Haley, then in that case yes, the Democrats would have nobody to blame but themselves - too bad for them, but the Constitution would not be in danger.
Half a point to Trump on Smoot Hawley. The tariffs that put the world on the path to the Great Depression were the US tariffs of 1922, which doomed hopes for an export-led recovery from WW1. War-ravaged Europe was obliged to borrow dollars it needed rather than earn them ...
Because the 1922 tariffs were followed by a short-lived financial/consumer boom in the United States, Americans were -and remain - blind to their catastrophic effect on the world economy (and also on the US farm sector, which had a terrible 1920s). ...
And because many free-market-minded people want to defend the record of the tax-cutting Harding and Coolidge administrations, free-traders have preferred to concentrate their ire on the Smoot Hawley tariffs signed by President Hoover.
Lincoln Alexander Law School is Canada's newest. It opened its doors to its first students in September 2020. To distinguish itself from more established competitors, it early identified progressive activism as its reason for being. . (Thread)lsac.org/choosing-law-s…
An institutional commitment to progressive activism may have seemed a good idea in 2020. Three years later, it resulted in almost half the full-time student body signing an open letter endorsing and defending the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Israel. thestar.com/news/investiga…
The letter was dated October 20, 2023, seven days before Israeli ground troops entered Gaza. It was not a reaction to Israel's retaliation, which had barely begun. It was an immediate endorsement of Hamas terrorism and sexual violence. thestar.com/news/investiga…
If Americans had chosen free trade and collective security in 1924, their sons would not have had to storm the beaches of Normandy in 1944. "America First" is the path to isolation, depression, and war.
Germany was a democracy in 1924. To survive, that democracy needed to export to pay for food and fuel and service its war debts. When the United States imposed heavy tariffs under Presidents Harding and Coolidge, it doomed German democracy - and Japan's too.
This brilliantly revisionist book published in 2017 will transform your thinking about the Canadian role in D-Day. kansaspress.ku.edu/9780700625246/
The story as most of us know it: Canadians landed on the most easterly of the D-Day beaches, made the deepest inland penetration on Day 1, cut a crucial road ... but then stalled. That anticlimatic story, argues "Stopping the Panzers," completely misconceives the Canadian role.
The Canadian division that landed at Juno Beach was the heaviest of any of the Allied units in tanks and guns. Its job was not to penetrate, but to thwart the only thing that could have defeated D-Day: a successful German counter-attack by the 550 tanks east of the D-Day zone.