The point, you still missed it.
If a company follows all the rules they have done nothing wrong.
Your position is that rules are necessarily just? Are you sure?
You are willfully missing the point at this point.
If you set the rules. You, not some vague government entity. You completely control the rules in every way and can make companies do ANYTHING you want. Anything. Just you.
You canât then say the company following the rules is doing something wrong. If there is an issue YOU failed to write good rules. The company did nothing wrong.
Are you suggesting I hypothetically protest myself?
It is deeply unsettling to see people arranging protest actions through Facebook.
This governmentâs failure to act, one way or another, is going to get people hurt.
This started with a pipeline protest on indigenous lands. Now we have a couple hundred people holding the GDP of a country at ransom blocking private railway companies.
Via rail laid off 1000 people yesterday. The trickle down of these protests, and the halting of freight being moved by rail in this country is going to lead to more layoffs for more workers across many industries.
People are already starting to go the vigilante route. Truckers have driven through protests. Just yesterday in Edmonton Counter-Protesters dismantled a blockade. Weâre going to see a lot more of that if this country doesnât see some leadership very soon.
Oka was only 30 years ago. I understand this is a very touchy and political subject.
Disclaimer: I both work for the railway, and voted for Trudeau.
I largely agree with your observations. This is an incredibly thorny issue and, in my opinion, Trudeau is likely to continue to fail on this. The problems are densely layered:
-
Trudeau has been trying to have it both ways for a long time on climate change vs. the oil/gas industry. He sold the public on talking climate change seriously, and used language so strong that virtually any approval of any pipeline seems like a contradiction. How can you take climate change seriously and still approve commercial interests that ask to pump more carbon into the air?
-
Trudeau has been trying to have it both ways for a long time on indigenous issues. He sold the public on a very progressive truth and reconciliation mandate, but when push comes to shove the government more or less tells native Canadians âWe said sorry, that should be enoughâ.
He got punished for some of this in the last election but the Conservatives (and NDP) dropped the ball. His brand of tepid centrism that blends strong words with meek actions is ineffective in a real crisis.
Iâm personally somewhat torn on this issue.
I very much support peopleâs rights to peaceful protest, up to an including some civil disobedience.
Some of these support protests seem misplaced. Theyâre directed at a pipeline (and at the RCMP) and theyâre using other private businesses and holding the Canadian economy at ransom to do so. That crosses a line for me personally, but I also recognize I have a personal stake in that opinion due to my employment.
The idea that protests should never inconvenience anybody completely misses the point of what a protest is. Itâs not about politely waving a sign in the designated location according to the sanctioned schedule. Theyâre supposed to be disruptive.
Thatâs true, but protestors also should be thoughtful about the intended vs. actual impact of their protesting. Severely disruptive protests might pressure a government into action, or it might turn public opinion against your cause.
In this case I think the disruptive protests are an effective strategy because hardly anyone has any sympathy for big oil companies. If you asked most Canadians if they would accept a reversal of the pipeline project they would probably say yes. No one likes being bullied, but on the other hand to hell with oil companies.
Canadians support pipelines by a decent margin
The issue with these protests is they are disrupting the wrong things. This is how you lose support. Targeting rail lines seems like a really bad PR move.
Most Canadians disagree with this tactic and want police to break it up. See below link.
âMajority Disagrees with Protest Tacticsâ has been a headline for every single protest in recorded history.
5 Likes
1 Like
Thatâs the exception that proves the rule.
1 Like
1 Like
If they marched on Ottawa over the Indian Act or conditions on reserves I would happily join them. Block roads to the capital building or INAC.
It seems like no matter how many times this conversation is had on this site, thereâs always going to be people that are proud to be part of the white moderates.
I assume you are referring to me but I have no idea what you mean. Iâm the last thing from a moderate. I have been working with First Nations for more than 20 years. Iâd guess Iâve spent thousands of hours lifetime working directly with First Nations people and/or working on reserves.
Iâve got to see the Sundance ceremony twice.
1 Like
I can cherry pick polls too if I want.
But more importantly, you moved the goalposts. I said there are always headlines about people disagreeing with protestersâ tactics. Note the distinction below:
You support the generic idea of protest therefore you seem to think that means you must support all protest.
There are good and bad protests and good and bad tactics. Because I disagree with this one protest doesnât make me anti-protest or anti-First Nation.
I support the larger political goals but think they are going about it in a bad way to achieve those goals.