5 ms·

This… isn’t a good thing. The official stated goal of this protest was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Canada. They put it in writing

This… isn’t a good thing. The official stated goal of this protest was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Canada. They put it in writing on their website. Their protesters have used their trucks to ram counter protesters. Their are literally hundreds of criminal investigations around this, including hate crime investigations. And that is considering that the police have adopted a soft touch. The reason that the courts shut it down is that no one knows where the money is coming from, but it is very clear that a significant percentage of it is coming from outside the country. A commercial vehicle isn’t speech. Money isn’t speech. If you want to wave a swastika flag around, go for it. If you want to use a 10 ton machine to disable infrastructure and threaten people, that’s not free speech. Put another way: do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement?

jdhn 5y ago
>do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement? Yes.
flyingfences 5y ago
> do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement? Yes, we do, because the alternative, no matter how they may try to sugar-coat it, is the establishment choosing their opposition.
- dghlsakjg 5y ago
  The unstated part of what I'm trying to read in good faith is that you are saying that money is speech? I understand that in theory, but I also think that in practice, we have proven that money does not tend to flow evenly to just causes. As an extension of that, look what western governments have funded covertly, and what it has wrought, especially since the start of the 20th century. I really doubt that this will be limited to individuals donating to a populist cause (which to be clear, all three major parties, and a HUGE majority of Canadians don't support). I don't see that being the majority of it. I suspect that intelligence agencies, and corporate interests will be far more likely to be the ones that use the unlimited untraceable money to destabilize social systems.
  - mc32 5y ago
    Is your position that crowdfunding platforms are bad because intelligence agencies and other baddies could use them to funnel destabilizing movements in places with social and political instability? Since when was that a problem they needed to solve? Did you raise this issue during previous mass protest crowdfunding events or do you not like this protest in particular, but others can be okay?
    - dghlsakjg 5y ago
      > Is your position that crowdfunding platforms are bad because intelligence agencies and other baddies could use them to funnel destabilizing movements in places with social and political instability? Since when was that a problem they needed to solve? If they want to stay in compliance with US law, that is absolutely something that cloudsourcing platforms need to solve. Foreign political donations are very much restricted in the US. As for your second question, I think that ALL political causes need to have guardrails about who is funding them, and how they are allowed to disrupt critical infrastructure. Also your question is textbook bad faith what-aboutism
  - mikem170 5y ago
    > The unstated part of what I'm trying to read in good faith is that you are saying that money is speech? The U.S. Supreme Court took that position, in their famous Citizens United ruling: "The court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns" [0] (I'm not the original poster) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
    - dghlsakjg 5y ago
      Notably, the supreme court has never allowed unlimited foreign money to be donated to political causes, which is VERY illegal in the states. So even the US government agrees that there are limits to money as free speech
ipaddr 5y ago
It's nonsense put out by the media and you bought it. This is more peaceful than any protest in the summer. Hundreds of crimminal investigations? The worse crime is carrying gas in a can. The ramming of trucks into other protesters happened at blm protest in the US. The government and media have powerful tools that can shape stories to the masses. Smart people like yourself can easily fall prey. If that's the only information allowed to be heard you may not be getting a 360 view. $And you want to give them total control? Do we want only government supported movements?
- salamandersauce 5y ago
  Is it a peaceful protest when you're harassing citizens of your capital with non-stop honking? Or literally BLOCKADING popular border crossings?
  - Akronymus 5y ago
    Seems peaceful to me, altough certainly breaking some laws. Also known as civil disobedience.
    - mrguyorama 5y ago
      Civil disobedience assumes repercussions usually. I have yet to see anything actually happen to these protestors. I don't want them hurt. I just find it odd to contrast how they are treated vs how other protests are usually treated.
  - lp0_on_fire 5y ago
    > Is it a peaceful protest when you're harassing citizens of your capital with non-stop honking? Would you rather they be burning buildings and assaulting federal buildings? As far as major protests go in the Western Hemisphere over the past few years...this one is about as tame as it gets.
    - dghlsakjg 5y ago
      I would rather that neither happens. If it isn’t right when one protest group does it, it doesn’t make it right for another to do it. This is literally the rules we teach in kindergarten
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mc32 5y ago
>"The official stated goal of this protest was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Canada." Where does it say that and what does that mean? Overthrow is a violent usurpation of power. Getting a government to capitulate is not an overthrow. In the US we had plenty people who during the previous administration made exaggerated claims about what they wanted to achieve as well. I didn't see Gofundme shut down donations or freeze funds.
- dghlsakjg 5y ago
  > Where does it say that and what does that mean? Overthrow is a violent usurpation of power. Getting a government to capitulate is not an overthrow. It was on their website. Here's the link to the original https://canada-unity.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Combined-MOU-Dec03.pdf https://canada-unity.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Combined...? It called for the all elected representatives in disagreement to step down, and for the organizers of the protest to be installed as a ruling committee for the country until such time as they saw fit. Here is a good quote showing the battiness of this document: > The matter to be discussed and agreed upon is this; The Senate of Canada and the Governor General, combined referred to as the Federal Government are to uphold and enforce all Canadian and International Human Rights Laws that are clearly laid out in the MOU or “RESIGN their lawful positions of authority Immediately”. > In the US we had plenty people who during the previous administration made exaggerated claims about what they wanted to achieve as well. I didn't see Gofundme shut down donations or freeze funds. What aboutism.... I think that money is not free speech in those cases either. But they also weren't actively asking for the government to agree to all of their demands or else step down. And that is what I mean by overthrow. Their explicit ask as quoted above was that all government reps do what they say or else resign, and that they be given a committee to rule the country.
  - mc32 5y ago
    Fair comment, but I don't think that amounts to "overthrow". If that were the case, many mass protests could be categorized as wanting to "overthrow" some government (official, local, state, national). Pussyhat, YellowVest, BLM, someone wanting the sheriff to resign, etc., depending on how you interpret their demands. I think that is unfair and I disagree. Making demands of and petitioning the government is a basic right of the electorate in democratic governments.
magicjosh 5y ago
I encourage you to push your question further. The tech exists, some people want it according to this article. "Do we really want the ability"....if your answer is "no", it sounds like the window is closing for you to do something about it.
Jayschwa 5y ago
> Their protesters have used their trucks to ram counter protesters. Got a source for that? I'll believe it when I see it. I have only been made aware of one car attack so far, and it was perpetrated by a left-wing individual against protesters. https://nypost.com/2022/02/08/canada-trucker-protest-hit-and-run-suspect-is-antifa-punk-rocker-david-zegarac/ https://nypost.com/2022/02/08/canada-trucker-protest-hit-and...
- mc32 5y ago
  With these kinds of protests you always have to worry about infiltrators --like the Greek austerity protests where confederates committed violence while dressed as protesters to make the movement look violent for the news audience.
- dghlsakjg 5y ago
  https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/02/07/vancouver-police-convoy-counter-protest/ https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/02/07/vancouver-police-co... https://globalnews.ca/news/8603842/trucker-fired-vancouver-convoy-protest-video/ https://globalnews.ca/news/8603842/trucker-fired-vancouver-c... It literally took me less than a minute. The video is in the article. You can find other incidents if you bother to look. As to the reply to this: if you are slowly and carefully crushed under the wheels of a truck. It doesn’t matter how slowly and carefully it happens. Having driven vehicles this big I can promise you that at the point the driver made contact he could no longer see the cyclist that he knew was in front of him. If the cyclist had tripped he would have only known about it when he felt the bump under his tires. Regardless using a 10 ton machine to move people you disagree with is no way to go through life.
  - jevoten 5y ago
    'Ram' implies some degree of speed. That truck very slowly and carefully pushed the cyclist, who was blocking traffic, aside, without injuring them.
  - tanseydavid 5y ago
    You post two links to the same incident in *Vancouver*? Not Ottawa? Not Windsor? Not Coutts, AB? And then turn and castigate the person you are replying to with a dismissive "...if you bother to look."
Aurelius3 5y ago
>do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement? Like how western nations fund color revolutions and ideological shifts in countries where the majority of citizens are against such funding? Either accept that true liberal (free) democracy means foreign influence to the point of possibly destroying the democracy, or accept that both sides do it relentlessly in a game of power.

jdhn 5y ago

>do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement? Yes.

flyingfences 5y ago

> do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement? Yes, we do, because the alternative, no matter how they may try to sugar-coat it, is the establishment choosing their opposition.

dghlsakjg 5y ago
The unstated part of what I'm trying to read in good faith is that you are saying that money is speech? I understand that in theory, but I also think that in practice, we have proven that money does not tend to flow evenly to just causes. As an extension of that, look what western governments have funded covertly, and what it has wrought, especially since the start of the 20th century. I really doubt that this will be limited to individuals donating to a populist cause (which to be clear, all three major parties, and a HUGE majority of Canadians don't support). I don't see that being the majority of it. I suspect that intelligence agencies, and corporate interests will be far more likely to be the ones that use the unlimited untraceable money to destabilize social systems.
- mc32 5y ago
  Is your position that crowdfunding platforms are bad because intelligence agencies and other baddies could use them to funnel destabilizing movements in places with social and political instability? Since when was that a problem they needed to solve? Did you raise this issue during previous mass protest crowdfunding events or do you not like this protest in particular, but others can be okay?
  - dghlsakjg 5y ago
    > Is your position that crowdfunding platforms are bad because intelligence agencies and other baddies could use them to funnel destabilizing movements in places with social and political instability? Since when was that a problem they needed to solve? If they want to stay in compliance with US law, that is absolutely something that cloudsourcing platforms need to solve. Foreign political donations are very much restricted in the US. As for your second question, I think that ALL political causes need to have guardrails about who is funding them, and how they are allowed to disrupt critical infrastructure. Also your question is textbook bad faith what-aboutism
- mikem170 5y ago
  > The unstated part of what I'm trying to read in good faith is that you are saying that money is speech? The U.S. Supreme Court took that position, in their famous Citizens United ruling: "The court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns" [0] (I'm not the original poster) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
  - dghlsakjg 5y ago
    Notably, the supreme court has never allowed unlimited foreign money to be donated to political causes, which is VERY illegal in the states. So even the US government agrees that there are limits to money as free speech

ipaddr 5y ago

It's nonsense put out by the media and you bought it. This is more peaceful than any protest in the summer. Hundreds of crimminal investigations? The worse crime is carrying gas in a can. The ramming of trucks into other protesters happened at blm protest in the US. The government and media have powerful tools that can shape stories to the masses. Smart people like yourself can easily fall prey. If that's the only information allowed to be heard you may not be getting a 360 view. $And you want to give them total control? Do we want only government supported movements?

salamandersauce 5y ago
Is it a peaceful protest when you're harassing citizens of your capital with non-stop honking? Or literally BLOCKADING popular border crossings?
- Akronymus 5y ago
  Seems peaceful to me, altough certainly breaking some laws. Also known as civil disobedience.
  - mrguyorama 5y ago
    Civil disobedience assumes repercussions usually. I have yet to see anything actually happen to these protestors. I don't want them hurt. I just find it odd to contrast how they are treated vs how other protests are usually treated.
- lp0_on_fire 5y ago
  > Is it a peaceful protest when you're harassing citizens of your capital with non-stop honking? Would you rather they be burning buildings and assaulting federal buildings? As far as major protests go in the Western Hemisphere over the past few years...this one is about as tame as it gets.
  - dghlsakjg 5y ago
    I would rather that neither happens. If it isn’t right when one protest group does it, it doesn’t make it right for another to do it. This is literally the rules we teach in kindergarten

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mc32 5y ago

>"The official stated goal of this protest was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Canada." Where does it say that and what does that mean? Overthrow is a violent usurpation of power. Getting a government to capitulate is not an overthrow. In the US we had plenty people who during the previous administration made exaggerated claims about what they wanted to achieve as well. I didn't see Gofundme shut down donations or freeze funds.

dghlsakjg 5y ago
> Where does it say that and what does that mean? Overthrow is a violent usurpation of power. Getting a government to capitulate is not an overthrow. It was on their website. Here's the link to the original https://canada-unity.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Combined-MOU-Dec03.pdf https://canada-unity.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Combined...? It called for the all elected representatives in disagreement to step down, and for the organizers of the protest to be installed as a ruling committee for the country until such time as they saw fit. Here is a good quote showing the battiness of this document: > The matter to be discussed and agreed upon is this; The Senate of Canada and the Governor General, combined referred to as the Federal Government are to uphold and enforce all Canadian and International Human Rights Laws that are clearly laid out in the MOU or “RESIGN their lawful positions of authority Immediately”. > In the US we had plenty people who during the previous administration made exaggerated claims about what they wanted to achieve as well. I didn't see Gofundme shut down donations or freeze funds. What aboutism.... I think that money is not free speech in those cases either. But they also weren't actively asking for the government to agree to all of their demands or else step down. And that is what I mean by overthrow. Their explicit ask as quoted above was that all government reps do what they say or else resign, and that they be given a committee to rule the country.
- mc32 5y ago
  Fair comment, but I don't think that amounts to "overthrow". If that were the case, many mass protests could be categorized as wanting to "overthrow" some government (official, local, state, national). Pussyhat, YellowVest, BLM, someone wanting the sheriff to resign, etc., depending on how you interpret their demands. I think that is unfair and I disagree. Making demands of and petitioning the government is a basic right of the electorate in democratic governments.

magicjosh 5y ago

I encourage you to push your question further. The tech exists, some people want it according to this article. "Do we really want the ability"....if your answer is "no", it sounds like the window is closing for you to do something about it.

Jayschwa 5y ago

> Their protesters have used their trucks to ram counter protesters. Got a source for that? I'll believe it when I see it. I have only been made aware of one car attack so far, and it was perpetrated by a left-wing individual against protesters. https://nypost.com/2022/02/08/canada-trucker-protest-hit-and-run-suspect-is-antifa-punk-rocker-david-zegarac/ https://nypost.com/2022/02/08/canada-trucker-protest-hit-and...

mc32 5y ago
With these kinds of protests you always have to worry about infiltrators --like the Greek austerity protests where confederates committed violence while dressed as protesters to make the movement look violent for the news audience.
dghlsakjg 5y ago
https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/02/07/vancouver-police-convoy-counter-protest/ https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/02/07/vancouver-police-co... https://globalnews.ca/news/8603842/trucker-fired-vancouver-convoy-protest-video/ https://globalnews.ca/news/8603842/trucker-fired-vancouver-c... It literally took me less than a minute. The video is in the article. You can find other incidents if you bother to look. As to the reply to this: if you are slowly and carefully crushed under the wheels of a truck. It doesn’t matter how slowly and carefully it happens. Having driven vehicles this big I can promise you that at the point the driver made contact he could no longer see the cyclist that he knew was in front of him. If the cyclist had tripped he would have only known about it when he felt the bump under his tires. Regardless using a 10 ton machine to move people you disagree with is no way to go through life.
- jevoten 5y ago
  'Ram' implies some degree of speed. That truck very slowly and carefully pushed the cyclist, who was blocking traffic, aside, without injuring them.
- tanseydavid 5y ago
  You post two links to the same incident in *Vancouver*? Not Ottawa? Not Windsor? Not Coutts, AB? And then turn and castigate the person you are replying to with a dismissive "...if you bother to look."

Aurelius3 5y ago

>do we really want the ability for anyone anywhere to anonymously fund any political movement? Like how western nations fund color revolutions and ideological shifts in countries where the majority of citizens are against such funding? Either accept that true liberal (free) democracy means foreign influence to the point of possibly destroying the democracy, or accept that both sides do it relentlessly in a game of power.