Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>None of this is a surprise to anyone who has been watching. I could characterize it in a number of ways, but there is nobody left to persuade.

Not even a planck length of surprise to anyone.

>Given some obvious inevatabilities that flow downstream of this, what's the smart thing to do as an individual?

What a great question. Staying neutral? Join the protests on some side? At least try to understand what's happening?

>If you are aligned to the official narrative, the incentives are to double down to make sure nobody suspects you of disloyalty if it prevails.

I think when folks like Bill Maher call Trudeau out as sounding like Hitler... that was before he declared this last night. Even those on the left are seeing this as way too far. Something the convoy seems to have done is show how detached from reality Trudeau has become. He used to be a guy who would stand up in town halls and talk to anyone.

>f you are on the side of revolt, the official narrative is so increasingly divorced from reality as a means to signal it doesn't have to care about it - because this is how it says it is powerful - that it is impossible to sustain the dissonance to find any common ground or agreement in principle.

The mandates are falling around the world. Trudeau introduced new restrictions in January sparking this protest. It's clearly the wrong direction. The 'covid conspiracy theory' that this isn't about health. There hasnt been an emergency in quite some time. Trudeau's hand got laid down last night. This is no longer a conspiracy theory.

>I just don't see reconciliation as a result of this emergencies act process.

The Ottawa police have been unable to end the protests because they are legal peaceful protests. This emergencies act explicitly says you cant remove their internationally recognized human rights. Trudeau will find out shortly that the protesters are still not going anywhere, but worse force his hand. I will be quite surprised if the military doesnt get involved.

>My bets would be on a ratcheting up of controls over internet services, hyper aggressive financial services and tax enforcement, over the top surveillance exampples as threats, a miasma of staged and real "random" violence, escalating hit jobs and cancellations of the reasonable and principled, an official pivot to "fighting hate/terror" as a permanent emergency, etc.

No crystal ball needed to make these predictions. That's going to happen for sure.

>The only question to me is whether a new class of plausible leaders emerges to replace the terrible ones responsible for this nonsense, or decades of low level conflict with a radicalized populace vs. a state that has more international support than national legitimacy. The only out is removing internal passport controls and mandates. The alterative is clear. Such interesting times.

I have such respect for Liberal MP Joel Lightbound. A week ago he came out and said exactly this. Talk to the protesters, give them a reasonable roadmap to no restrictions. Stop the inflammatory attacks.

Nobody is saying you must drop the mandates tomorrow. But the reason Trudeau has gone this far is because there is no roadmap to no restrictions. Restrictions are staying. The protesters forced hishand and revealed this reality.



I don't think your assessment reflects the current attitudes in Canada. With such a polarizing topic, it's easy to fall into a bubble. I think this is true (and fairly normal) for any political in-group--we tend to overestimate our public support.

In this case, though, it's really just not there.

> Even those on the left are seeing this as way too far.

Generally, people are [sympathetic](https://globalnews.ca/news/8610727/ipsos-poll-trucker-convoy...) to the occupiers, but I wouldn't read too much into that--I'm in the large minority that have "sympathy" for them, but I want them gone as soon as possible.

Canadians say their opinion is unchanged, or that they're more likely to support vaccine mandates because of the occupations and blockades. A small majority want mass arrests and criminal charges, and significant majority want it to be ended by force. [source](https://angusreid.org/trudeau-convoy-trucker-protest-vaccine...).

Indeed, rather than this being "way too far," for most Canadians, it's not far enough.

> The Ottawa police have been unable to end the protests because they are legal peaceful protests.

The occupation is in violation of several court injunctions, which makes it illegal. As for peaceful? I'd disagree--there's been too many incidents of violence for me to characterize it that way, but frankly that's secondary when you're in systematic violation of court orders (without even considering all of the civil violations like parking, noise, public defecation, etc.)

> the reason Trudeau has gone this far is because there is no roadmap to no restrictions. Restrictions are staying. The protesters forced hishand and revealed this reality.

Every single province had a pre-existing deconfinement plan. They've been accelerated as the hospital situation continues to improve.


>I don't think your assessment reflects the current attitudes in Canada. With such a polarizing topic, it's easy to fall into a bubble. I think this is true (and fairly normal) for any political in-group--we tend to overestimate our public support.

I love reading /r/ontario and /r/canada. Obviously cant comment like I do here without getting banned from those subreddits. So their bubble literally sees the truckers as a military occupation that needs to military to violently remove them. That's certainly not a misrepresentation of the general consensus there.

The threads about people killing and driving into protestors got applauds.

So certainly very polarized.

>Generally, people are [sympathetic](https://globalnews.ca/news/8610727/ipsos-poll-trucker-convoy...) to the occupiers, but I wouldn't read too much into that--I'm in the large minority that have "sympathy" for them, but I want them gone as soon as possible.

People generally support what they represent. They look at the global trend of everyone dropping restrictions and they want the same. However, how many Canadians believe these protesters are also racists, sexists, and white supremacists? The smearing is going to have an effect.

>Indeed, rather than this being "way too far," for most Canadians, it's not far enough.

Yes, it seems very polar. Trudeau's in the tanks polls wise because the people who believe the smears think this is a military occupation that needs violence to solve.

>The occupation is in violation of several court injunctions, which makes it illegal.

Like what? That's the thing about peaceful assembly charter right. There's virtually no case law. Which means you can't really injunct against it. You can go after them for bylaw violations that dont involve people. You can ticket a car that is parked illegally. An illegally parked car is not something that makes it a military occupation or even for that matter illegal.

>As for peaceful? I'd disagree--there's been too many incidents of violence for me to characterize it that way, but frankly that's secondary when you're in systematic violation of court orders (without even considering all of the civil violations like parking, noise, public defecation, etc.)

That's the problem with fundamental human rights. I have a right to peacefully protest. Someone else showing up and being violent doesn't remove my right. That's what fuels counter protesters to be violent. City bylaws also have absolutely no bering here.

>Every single province had a pre-existing deconfinement plan. They've been accelerated as the hospital situation continues to improve.

Which will certainly appease many of the protesters to go home. Not all will go home. This legislation that Trudeau just engaged is specifically designed not to stop peaceful protesters. This means Trudeau has to pull the trigger on military eventually.


> People generally support what they represent.[...] The smearing is going to have an effect.

It's not smearing to accurately describe them based on their actions and words. We have a free press in Canada and they're right to report on the backgrounds of the organizers. They're holding press conferences demanding the dissolution of the government that we just elected, the organizers (not just participants) have documented white supremacist rants. This isn't popular, and I'm not surprised most Canadians haven't fallen for what some people on the internet are trying to represent them as.

> Like what? That's the thing about peaceful assembly charter right

Repeating "peaceful assembly" over and over again doesn't change the nature of the occupation. Constant 150 decibel noise is damaging to health and well being. Stockpiling illegal arms is not legal. Threats to bodily harm are not peaceful. Attempted arson is not peaceful. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "city bylaws have no [bearing]", we're all subject to the same laws.

Re injunctions:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/protesters-violate-cou...

https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/judge-hears-argument...

https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/judge-grants-injunction-against-no...

You can disagree, but the courts have decided, and they are the authority on legality.

I think the most interesting point is this:

> I have a right to peacefully protest. Someone else showing up and being violent doesn't remove my right.

That's absolutely correct. If you're not violating noise limits, not parked illegally, and comply with the same laws as everyone else, you can ABSOLUTELY continue demonstrating. The Emergencies Act doesn't change that.


>That's absolutely correct. If you're not violating noise limits, not parked illegally, and comply with the same laws as everyone else, you can ABSOLUTELY continue demonstrating. The Emergencies Act doesn't change that.

We seem to consume different news sources. It's remarkable to read responses today. Shock from the far-left to the far-right. This isn't political anymore. Here's a Libertarian socialist antifascist with 190k followers on twitter: https://twitter.com/VaushV/status/1493511896351211520

As you are aware, the emergencies act doesn't allow the government to really do anything different than what has already happened to this peaceful protest. It doesn't allow them to remove any charter rights.

What's about to happen will infringe the rights of the protesters. Under the act...

Compensation

48 (1) Subject to subsection (2) and the regulations made under section 49, the Minister shall award reasonable compensation to any person who suffers loss, injury or damage as a result of any thing done, or purported to be done, under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.

When Trudeau finally orders the protest to end and infringes their rights. The Crown will be paying significant compensation to the protesters.


I'm not sure what more proof I can provide that the blockades and occupation are both an unpopular and illegal.

These responses are non-sequitors and proclaim with confidence what will happen in the future (as though we have a crystal ball). This seems like a good time to stop engaging.


>I'm not sure what more proof I can provide that the blockades and occupation are both an unpopular and illegal.

Well you jumped into this conversation providing a link saying people are sympathetic to the freedom convoy but 'not to read into it'. I believe I have been fair in my discussion.

Popularity is fairly irrelevant. It was extremely popular to imprison japanese canadians during world war 2. The point of your right to peaceful protest is to ensure your grievances are heard. If the government wishes to ignore the protest and not respond, that's fine, you can keep on protesting. This convoy has been tremendously successful in their protest thus far. Their grievances are being heard.

As for the legality of the military occupation. I don't believe you have provided sufficient argument to justify qualifying it as a military occupation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_occupation If you would like to justify this I am willing to listen. I would agree that a military occupation would be illegal.

Trying to suggest that some municipal bylaws make it 'illegal' is certainly not something even in the realm of being able to remove your charter right to peaceful assembly.

>These responses are non-sequitors and proclaim with confidence what will happen in the future (as though we have a crystal ball).

Lets be realistic here. My predictions are hardly crystal ball worthy. The more practical response to this declaration by Trudeau. This act or equivalent was deployed during the world wars. Which is appropriate. Trudeau's father deployed it during the october crisis but there was bombs and death occurring. There's reasonableness that can be debated with Pierre Trudeau's use. This misuse by Trudeau is what got them to remove that legislation and replace it enshrining the requirement to maintain human rights.

>This seems like a good time to stop engaging.

Here's the thing. Bill Maher got to associating Trudeau with Hitler and what Hitler did. There's an awful lot of those predictions today from the left and right wings. I haven't gone there. I have been trying to be reasonable.

If you think I am wrong with my predictions, I bet you think those predictions are even more wrong? Frankly, if my predictions are wrong, I'm headed that direction comparing Trudeau to Hitler.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: