10 ms·

Trudeau announces intention to freeze bank accounts of protestors

76 points by Jimmc414 5y ago

tyleo 5y ago
I’d like to expand on some thoughts I had in another thread that provoked some interesting discussion: If the protests are peaceful, the government should not shut them down. But at what point do the economic impacts of a protest cross a line such that they aren’t peaceful? I personally feel that the slippery slope runs in both directions: * The government expanding its power to block more protests is a slippery slope. * The public expanding their power such that less people can cause more economic damage is a slippery slope. This really seems like a situation with no good options.
- Applejinx 5y ago
  It's not really the public. It's meant to LOOK like 'the public', but it's absolutely not. It's political action, and not just intra-country political action. Maybe Canada watched what happened to the US (something they are wont to do)
- throwawayay02 5y ago
  There is a very simple solution, the government lifts the restrictions and resigns. New elections are held and then the people decide if they want a new government that will punish protesters or not.
  - notpachet 5y ago
    Or, or! The protesters all return home, and promise to make this a hot-button item in the next fairly held democratic election.
    - throwawayay02 5y ago
      That is quite some time away.
      - salamandersauce 5y ago
        We have a minority government right now. It could be 2 months away.
  - tyleo 5y ago
    That is just one side of the slippery slope though. Assuming we took this recommendation as a rule, it seems that a convoy of truckers could organize, shut down an economy, and force an election any time they disagreed with something. This does not seem like a recipe for effective government.
    - throwawayay02 5y ago
      No? It seems a recipe for a perfect government. Whenever X% of the population wants that much to throw down the government, that's probably a good time for a remodel. Might not be as effective as a dictatorship or a oligarchy, sure, must a much better government to live under.
      - rini17 5y ago
        X is how much? 0.1%?
      - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
        This would be ridiculous quickly. Imagine the protestors getting Trump to go to re-election within a week of the 2016 election. Say Hillary won. How long would it take the anti-Hillary side to shut things down long enough to get another election? In a polarised partisan climate, you'd have weekly elections.
      - ben_w 5y ago
        For what value of X?
      - AlexandrB 5y ago
        It's not even a majority % of Canadian truckers in Ottawa. Let alone the population of Canada. This seems like a great way to establish a tyranny. > Might not be as effective as a dictatorship or a oligarchy, sure, must a much better government to live under. Oh, I see. That's what you're advocating for.
      - salamandersauce 5y ago
        How much of the population do you think is actively involved in the protests right now? We should bow down and throw away our government for 1% of angry people? 0.01%? This just sounds like a recipe for chaos. A middle school could topple the government by standing on Ambassador bridge just because they don't like today's lunch menu.
  - NiloCK 5y ago
    Context for non-Canadians: there was a federal election five months ago.
  - NikolaNovak 5y ago
    I feel that's either an external or minority opinion. Not everybody outside of Canada may realize we just HAD an election. I personally don't think it was necessary or useful; in fact I think it was a colossal waste of money; but we did. And Canada tends to have relatively stable governments, our period between elections tends to be reasonably lengthy. Some people may not LIKE the result of elections, but there's nothing that indicates government does not have support of majority of Canadians. Polls tend to indicate most people are Canadians about covid. And elections tend (not always) to be about majority. Second, many outsiders and even many inside Canada don't seem to realize vast vast majority of public health policy and restrictions is done on provincial level. That includes virtually all restrictions that impact majority of citizens. Further, many if not most are done by conservative governments - Alberta and Ontario as obvious examples, as well as conservative municipal governments like Toronto. So I never understand on any level why anybody feels "federal government to resign" is an "obvious solution", let alone what, exactly, is it meant to accomplish when it comes to covid response.
    - pinephoneguy 5y ago
      They're protesting the quarentine when re-entering the country. That's why so many Americans are involved as well. My girlfriend lives there but I can't visit her because of this.
      - pfisch 5y ago
        Of course you can. Just get vaccinated. It is literally safer than taking Tylenol.
  - syki 5y ago
    That’s a seductively simple idea. Using the Emergencies Act to bring to an end of the protests was unprecedented. Without having thought too deeply about it the suggestion to then call for elections seems like a brilliant one. I almost think it should be written into the act. At the surface it makes sense that if the redress of grievances is so disruptive that the Act must be invoked then the cost of invoking it is to call for elections and let the people decide.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
    This would encourages minorities to try and block governments all the time, to force new elections. Why not have the second chamber of parliament made of randomly picked citizen [0] with the responsibility to approve the work of the first chamber (of elected representatives), with the power to cast motions of no confidence? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Selection_by_lot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Selection_b... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_of_no_confidence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_of_no_confidence
  - ben_w 5y ago
    Lifting the restrictions? The ones which are (at least in name, I am not qualified to discuss further than that) about protecting the health of the population? That seems contrary to the best interests of a nation. And I’m expressly not saying the Canadian government picked the right response here — I don’t know if they did or didn’t — but what you’re suggesting is way too far in the other direction. Making it the norm to resign in response to protests makes it very easy for any political opponent on any issue to do a soapbox equivalent of filibustering.
  - phtrivier 5y ago
    You're absolutely right that the "peacemaker" in situations like this should be a secret, anonymous, properly held elections. However, resigning every time there is a protest, even a spectacular one, is obviously not an option for any democraticaly elected governement. Pick a cause you defend, and a right you'd want to preserve ; browse recent history to find out when was the last time a massive protest was held by people with the opposite side of view. Western democracies are warry of calling elections for anything but picking representatives. More direct forms of democracy would clearly help in this case. The current scenario is that the elected governement takes harsh measure, and the people will have to wait and vote them out of office. (Which, I believe, is a fundamental difference between most western democracy and more autocratic regimes - I'm ready to reevaluate that when there is suspense again in a russian / NK / china election.) This is _very_ unfortunate for governements that have been recently elected and have strong parlementary majorities. I wonder if a better "better scenario" in such crisis would be to have different level of population oversight, depending on the time scale of measures. As in: first, the elected governement takes extraordinary measures, with relatively free reign for short period of times (days / weeks.) "Extraordinary time calling for extraordinary measures", etc... Than, parlimentary oversight kicks in, to prolong measures in the "months" scale (I'm one of those annoying people who believe representatives have a role in democracy. Sorry.) Than, referendum / votations need to occur for anything longer than a few months. It would not "solve" the issue - because, a vaccine mandate might very well have been agreed by referendum in Canada, and truckers would _still_ have blocked roads. But in the grand scheme of things, I'd rather have this process.
- verisimi 5y ago
  But why is it ok for governments around the world destroy our economies for the past 2 years? Or rather, to destroy the SMEs, but allow corporations to carry on and even take up the slack?
  - tyleo 5y ago
    I don’t think it is okay. I think protests and elections are great ways to register discontent with a state of affairs. But should the powers of protests go so far that small groups can shut down large parts of an economy? It is my understanding that the convoy is hundreds of trucks. This is already disproportionate power for few people but what if dozens could shut down an economy peacefully? It seems to me that a line has to be drawn somewhere for a society to function.
    - verisimi 5y ago
      So, you are fine with the government shutting down the economy for years, mandating of experimental health treatments to gain access to work, etc, but you are not ok with people protesting against those decisions even when their livelihoods are at stake? Do you realise too that Trudeau got ~30% of the vote, and that his party didn't even receive the most votes but win on account of the electoral system? IE voting every 4 years can only get you so far..
      - tyleo 5y ago
        Please reread what I said. I don’t think it’s okay. It’s the very first sentence in my reply to you. I’m open to discussion but only if you are replying to what I'm saying.
        verisimi 5y ago
        What I understood is that you were saying a line needed to be drawn, and presumably that the truck protests had crossed that line. They shouldn't be able to stop the economy. That would be a fine argument to me, except that all the concern about the economy does not ring true, coming from a government that has shut down the economy (allowing for large corporations to continue, of course) for 2 years! This is pretty much the first protest against those actions against the economy, but now the concern is that these protesters are acting harmfully. Honestly, it sounds so upside-down to me! The government structure has caused huge economic harm to everyone, and then when people finally complain the government accuses them of causing economic harm! It really is perverse.
- stuob 5y ago
  > This really seems like a situation with no good options. Removing the mandates is a pretty simple option. Actually, just that fact makes this invocation of the emergency act illegal. This president has gone crazy.
- thereddaikon 5y ago
  To further complicate the matter, protests are completely ineffectual if they do not impact others in some way. Its easy to say that protesters should be considerate and not get in the way. But if they do that then their message is easy to ignore. Protest by nature must be civil disobedience to have any real effect. What troubles me in this regard is that the Canadian government in general, and Trudeau in particular, seem bent on meeting the protesters with a disproportionate response. This can only lead to an escalation, not de-escalation. And has the potential to galvanize support for them. The opposite of what the Canadian government wants. Not to mention how makes them look like tyrants who trample on civil rights. Regardless of whether or not they care about that, they should care about the optics.
  - Overtonwindow 5y ago
    I disagree, the riots in America perpetrated by antifa had a significant policy shift and public opinion impact. The burning of Kenosha and other cities, was probably the only time a protest in modern history has had an effect on public policy.
    - thereddaikon 5y ago
      I'm sorry I don't see what you are disagreeing with.
    - Chris2048 5y ago
      But, didn't it (the actions of BLM/antifa) have a negative effect on public opinion?
  - dennis_jeeves 5y ago
- mimikatz 5y ago
  Protestors should protest legally. They shouldn't block roads. They shouldn't break windows. They shouldn't burn buildings. When they don't they should be broken up/arrested/charged with the crimes they break. This goes for all sides.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    As a general statement I agree, but there can be exceptions. I absolutely don’t believe any of the exception I would list actually apply in this case — and even if I did I would still apply the “arrest people who break the law” part because of how fundamentally important I regard rule of law — but there are some occasions (most civil rights battles, wars for independence) where facing a conviction is worth it because the system won’t even take you seriously otherwise.
- smoyer 5y ago
  I don't believe that peaceful protests EVER automatically cease to be peaceful due to economic impacts - if a peaceful protest becomes more effective due to be expensive, that's one good way to get and keep attention. Using the terrorist act's provisions for peaceful protests is a sign that the oligarchs are worried about maintaining their positions. Normal citizens in other industries should be worried. "When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out." - Niemöller
- michaelt 5y ago
  > If the protests are peaceful, the government should not shut them down. But at what point do the economic impacts of a protest cross a line such that they aren’t peaceful? If it's not violent, it's peaceful. Perhaps you're trying to redefine "peaceful" because you've come to the realisation that it's sometimes legitimate to shut down peaceful protests? If someone parks their vehicle blocking the street as a protest or makes noise day and night, that's clearly nonviolent. If the state wants the protesters moved on, why can't they apply parking law or nuisance noise law? Every protest has economic impacts, that doesn't mean it's not peaceful. I boycott Nestle in the privacy of my own home, which I hope will have a negative economic impact on them. Giving government the power to stop protests because they have economic impact would give the government the power to stop all protests.
  - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
    Because protest of any sort breaks laws of some sort. You can't even explain your argument on the street corner without breaking the laws against public nuisance, in the eyes of some.
- dennis_jeeves1 5y ago
  >This really seems like a situation with no good options. I think several fundamentals are wrong to start with, for example a simple definition of democracy appears to be that 51% gets to dictate the other 49%. With so many fundamental flaws even the concept of a typical protest is surreal where the person protesting is supposed to stand in harsh weather in front of a building to do so. This is not my idea of a civilized society.
cryptica 5y ago
I've been saying that this type of thing would be happening increasingly often. The government wants to control people's money. In the future, you will need a license to sell company shares and other private property and only the top 0.01% elite will be able to get such a license... The media will gaslight the public into thinking this is normal and 'for the public good' or to protect investors from making bad decisions. For any law, there will always be a group of richer people just above the victimized group who will support it to protect their wealth at the expense of the poorer group. They will trick/coerce people from the lower classes into playing along. The bottom class will keep getting destroyed, one layer at a time until only the 0.01% richest people have all of what little remains of the nation's wealth... The numbers will be bigger and more concentrated than ever but the real economic value underlying those numbers will be smaller than ever because almost everyone else will be unemployed and living in the metaverse using as little energy as possible. Maybe in the longer term, the economy won't be able to afford letting people unplug themselves from the metaverse and disconnecting their Soylent feeding tubes... The media will demonize the anti-feeding-tubers as selfish terrorists. Heck, they won't even be against feeding tubes, they will be demonized for being against the feeding tube mandates. The best escape I can see are cryptocurrencies but it will take some time to make a transition to the extent that people are creating real value around them. It's not really the case now IMO.
- pfisch 5y ago
  Can we allow a small minority to shut down an economy indefinitely? That seems like a big problem. It is also hard to gauge just how small of a minority of Canadians this is though. It feels pretty small but it is hard to tell. If 80% of Canadians are vaxxed that means this is just 5-10% of people at most.
  - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
    There are vaccinated people there too. Don't fall for the "team sport" false dichotomy - there are many who are rational enough to get vaccinated but still largely side with the "less / less broad restrictions" side of the debate. (For instance, I am vaxxed, extremely pro-vax, and quite anti-restriction. Give everyone a chance to get vaxxed, even make it free - but then let them manage their risk from there. Even the most effective restrictions, from a case load perspective, such as here in Australia, just left us completely naive when Omicron arrived. Shortly thereafter we had world record cases per capita.)
InsomniacL 5y ago
At what point does peaceful protest become none-peaceful through the consequences of the protesters actions? I.e Gluing yourself to the road could be considered peaceful however if you're doing it outside the A&E Ambulance entrance to a hospital is it still peaceful? That's an extreme example however in this case can it still be considered peaceful considering the economic,.. etc impact on peoples lives?
- Hnus 5y ago
  The whole point of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable. Activists take that discomfort w/the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes…To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable…that’s the point.
  - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
    While I don't disagree, "that's the point" is not a great argument. It's simply an explanation. If someone is caught in the act of cheating, it doesn't help if they say "he just wanted some action on the side!" The problem is the cheating, the reason for cheating doesn't make it acceptable. You have effectively just stated that "oh don't worry he meant to cheat."
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    The post you are responding too never used the term "uncomfortable" which is a pretty watered-down term to describe someone unable to get medical service because ambulances can't get through. Would you describe murder as "uncomfortable"?
pinephoneguy 5y ago
This might all be a distraction from a bank run.
- chinathrow 5y ago
  Context?
grej 5y ago
“With no need for court orders, banks can freeze personal accounts of anyone linked with the protests.” The politics of this particular situation aside, this feels like a terrifying development for future protests, and public discourse in general.
- verisimi 5y ago
  Apparently it also includes people who donated to their cause. A peaceful, non-violent cause. Wow. North Korea, look out!
  - verelo 5y ago
    Except it’s really not that anymore. Constant noise disruptions, gridlocking the city…it’s causing harm and the protests have damaged property, businesses and even gone as far to dance on the war memorials. These are not our best people.
    - edot 5y ago
      You could describe MLK’s protests as disruptive, causing gridlock, damaging to businesses, etc. BLM protestors danced on and destroyed statues as well. The whole point of protest is to be disruptive. Being anti-vax is super stupid but protesting government mandates (or systemic racism, or anything) should be allowed.
      - bryanlarsen 5y ago
        The whole point of an escalated protest is being willing to accept the consequences. If you park illegally, you expect to get a parking ticket, protest or no. You expect your vehicle to get towed. If you defy a court injunction, you expect to spend the night in jail. The people chaining themselves to trees expect to get arrested and spend time in jail. They also expect that their time in jail will help their cause. Being part of a protest is not a "get out of jail free" card. Rather the opposite, spending some time in jail is part of the point.
kragen 5y ago
Another day, another answer to "what is Bitcoin good for?"
- f001 5y ago
  That only applies if you can pay everything in btc. According to coindesk, the same AML laws now apply to crypto (at least temporarily), and can be used to stop transactions from/to groups that are undesirable. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/02/15/canadas-trudeau-enacts-emergencies-act-and-crypto-is-included https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/02/15/canadas-trudeau-e...
  - kragen 5y ago
    As we saw with WikiLeaks, one thing is what the law says, and something else is what the government can actually do. In the case of WikiLeaks the government did a lot of things that the law clearly didn't permit; Bitcoin, by contrast, keeps authoritarian governments from doing undesirable things even if they pass laws that permit them. To "freeze" my Bitcoin "account" you'd have to steal my phone and then bruteforce the PIN before I used the seed phrase to sweep the coins into a different wallet on a new phone. Not impossible by any means, but of similar difficulty to imprisoning me. I have other coins that are stored under a different seed phrase that isn't on my phone, and there are people with safer storage than that. If the government was in a position to imprison all the protestors they wouldn't be trying to target their bank accounts. Of course centralized crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers aren't any safer than centralized banks, whether they use Bitcoin, dollars, or yuan. But your Bitcoin wallet is definitely a lot safer than your bank account from being frozen out from under you, unless it's something like a Binance account or a Coinbase account. Generally people don't "pay everything in btc", both because of the transaction costs (33¢ in my most recent transaction, but often as high as US$8) and because not many sellers accept BTC; instead they exchange the BTC for local currencies that are more widely accepted and have lower transaction costs.
- Hnus 5y ago
  For not having to dox contributors and have their past and future transactions public from the start instead? https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/02/11/1045281/ottawa-antivax-protests-doxxing/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/02/11/1045281/ottawa-a...
Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
Well that...seems tyrannical. Imagine if Trump did this to the BLM protestors, using the same argument (which would've been before vaccines, too).
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jrochkind1 5y ago
Anyone on the left should be aware they are going to use any new powers of control or punishment against the left in the the future (and more often and more significantly and increasingly so over time).
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  Too late[1]. Let me know when armored RCMP officers are dragging truckers from their rigs and throwing them in jail[2]. [1] https://rabble.ca/indigenous/land-defenders-in-court/ https://rabble.ca/indigenous/land-defenders-in-court/ [2] https://thenarwhal.ca/rcmp-arrests-wetsuweten-media-photos/ https://thenarwhal.ca/rcmp-arrests-wetsuweten-media-photos/
  - jrochkind1 5y ago
    Of course. I am saying if they aren't yet freezing land defender's bank accounts, without even the need for a court order, under the Emergency Act, as per this article -- be sure they will use this precedent to do so, once they have set it, many more times against the left than the right. It sounds like you would probably agree, since you are aware they are generally much harsher against left protests/disruptions than right.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
young_unixer 5y ago
Is there some point at which people will start rejecting this arbitrary and excessive exercise of power? This sets a dangerous precedent for a country that until now we considered a liberal democracy with freedom and respect for individual rights. I wonder if we're all headed to a point where state control and erosion of freedom are widely accepted by the public in our western democracies.
- verisimi 5y ago
  How do you reject the excessive exercise of power? Its very hard to say. If all it takes is the declaration of an emergency and then people accept that declaration, I don't think you can. " Is there some point at which people will start rejecting this arbitrary and excessive exercise of power?" Well, the truckers are trying, no?
  - Overtonwindow 5y ago
    For some reason your comment reminded me of the Reichstag fire decree. It’s worth reading on, how the government used an emergency protection order to go full throat to a dictatorship.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire#:~:text=The%20Reichstag%20Fire%20Decree%20suspended,not%20reinstated%20during%20Nazi%20reign https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire#:~:text=The%2....
- failedengineer 5y ago
  The Ontario government told people in Ontario that they'd need papers and a reason to travel in January 2021. The police refused to enforce the policy restricting municipal travel. The government walked it back shortly after. That was only at a municipal level. Inter-provincial travel was limited to people with valid reasons at the same time, and that was enforced. If you went from Ontario to Manitoba to check out the moose, you'd get sent home by the police at the border. I guess "papers, please, and where are you going?" is where the line is currently.
- jagger27 5y ago
  Name a single “liberal democracy” where any group would be permitted to occupy a capital city for three weeks uncontested. People really aren’t grasping how weak it makes Canada look that it allowed its own capital to be held in a chokehold so easily. There are people on the streets (and in this thread) demanding that elected officials resign while a strong majority of Canadians disagree with the “protest”.
weruiojkl24 5y ago
Bitcoin fixes this.
- Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
  No it doesn't - they're authorised to crack down on funders, including via crypo and crowdfunding.
  - ajkdhcb2 5y ago
    Authorisation does not equal capability. Bitcoin has no privacy so I see how use of it could be trivially tracked and punished. With a private cryptocurrency like Monero it may be feasible to do anonymous crowdfunding; recipients have various ways to cash out into usable currency albeit with significant inconvenience
  - kragen 5y ago
    While your premise is true (they're authorized to crack down on funders via crypto) your conclusion (Bitcoin doesn't fix this) doesn't follow from it. Please see my discussion in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30346082 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30346082.
- Hnus 5y ago
  How?
pupppet 5y ago
This was never a protest, it was a blockade. If they were actually protesting public opinion wouldn’t have turned on them.
- verisimi 5y ago
  Just because the corporate-owned media reports their cause in a negative light, doesn't mean public opinion has turned on them. In fact people were lining the streets as they made their way to Ottawa.
  - pupppet 5y ago
    That recent hack gave light to only 29% of total donations coming from Canadians, they are not widely supported no matter what the HN Libertarian slant wants you to believe.
    - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
      Which recent hack? A news article shared in this thread suggested 51% came from Canada. The foreign donations are small amounts spread across many donors. It doesn't exactly appear like Uncle Vlad is sending them billions of rubles or something.
  - AlexandrB 5y ago
    Most people I know think they are assholes and should go away. Also check out r/Ottawa on Reddit where the sentiment is solidly against them. I think you're right about one thing though. Opinion hasn't "turned" on them because it was never with them in the first place.
    - iamricks 5y ago
      Subreddits are group think bubbles, i wouldn't consider that a good source of public opinion. That is like saying everyone wants Trump to be president, head over to r/thedonald.
    - 5y ago
sinyug 5y ago
> Critics have noted that the prime minister voiced support for farmers in India who blocked major highways to New Delhi for a year in 2021, saying at the time: "Canada will always be there to defend the right of peaceful protest." And we will keep bringing this up. > Trudeau’s party is believed to lend passive support to the Khalistanis who have been using Canada as a strong base for decades now. > The Canadian PM has repeatedly failed to take into account the sensitivities in India regarding support to Sikh terror groups in Canada. > His visit to India earlier this year had made the Khalistan movement a talking point once again. During his meeting with Trudeau, Punjab Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh said he had raised the issue of Khalistan. In an incident that caused further embarrassment to the Canadian premiere, Trudeau’s wife was clicked with Jaspal Atwal, a member of an illegal Sikh separatist group, who was invited to an event hosted by the Canadian High Commission.[1] And he is concerned about "terrorist financing?" [1] https://indianexpress.com/article/world/justin-trudeau-canada-lists-khalistani-extremism-as-threat-5492519/ https://indianexpress.com/article/world/justin-trudeau-canad...
egberts1 5y ago
Authoritarians are gonna authoritarian. Meanwhile US media are ignoring this because … it doesn’t fit with the elites’ current goal of dumbing down the audience to a compliant masses of their own choosing.
- xnx 5y ago
  US media is definitely not ignoring this: "Right-wing media offers fawning coverage of Canadian truckers as it encourages similar protest in US" https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/09/media/right-wing-media-canadian-truckers-reliable-sources/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/09/media/right-wing-media-canadi...
causi 5y ago
Not that the trucker protestors are right, but watching the Right and Left do a complete 180 and copy/paste each others' comments from the 2020 BLM protests is either the funniest or the saddest thing I've ever seen. It seems more and more that people only pretend to have principals so long as they can use them to advocate for their own side.
- pinephoneguy 5y ago
  These people are moderate libertarians, not the right. If it was the right and if they were copy/pasting from BLM it would be a violent White supremacy movement. That's just not going to happen.
- kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
  Maybe it's the difference between protesting and rioting? Did the truckers burn stuff down and loot shops?
  - bluetonium 5y ago
    If we're being honest with ourselves blocking major trade routes has at least as much economic impact, though it's harder to see/measure.
    - kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
      I don't think they can simply block the trade routes - surely people can route around it. In any case they protest against not being allowed into the country with their trucks, so either way the trucks wouldn't be running?
      - EForEndeavour 5y ago
        "They" just blocked The Ambassador Bridge for six days. This bridge transports 25% of the value of all Canada-US trade, coming out to roughly $360 million (presumably USD) per day: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/truckers-ambassador-bridge-perfect-spot-threaten-us-canada-trade-2022-02-11/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/truckers-ambassador-b... The Ambassador Bridge links Detroit to Windsor across the Detroit River at the southern tip of the Ontario Peninsula. The closest US-Canada land crossing is the Blue Water Bridge between Sarnia, ON and Port Huron, MI, 2 hours' drive north.
s5300 5y ago
US has civil forfeiture but we never see much uproar about that, & it’s much more rampant & discriminatory
stewx 5y ago
None of it would be happening if the local police in Ottawa actually enforced the law. It's against the law to blockade public roads. The police leaders have not instructed front-line officers to arrest the blockaders or to tow the trucks away. They should have never been allowed to park their big rigs in the road and set up camps, hot tubs, and a concert stage in the first place.
Overtonwindow 5y ago
“Do what we say or we will make your lives miserable.” This seems to be the tacit mantra of governments in the era of COVID. Alongside a willingness to entrench at the slightest pushback, in my humble opinion governments across the world have gone too far. I completely support the right of the truckers to protest, and it would seem that the protest is upsetting the very people that it is meant to upset. I Sympathize with the people of Ottawa, and hope maybe they will come together with the truckers, but I doubt it. The government cannot budge, the government cannot back down. Like the American government, the Canadian government knows it must fight any question to its authority because if it doesn’t, it runs the risk of losing that authority. The truckers are going to have to break the Canadian government to win, and frankly I hope they do.
loceng 5y ago
I hope people see this: Tamara Lich (one of the convoy protest organizers) and Brian Peckford (the last living First Minister/premiere of a province, retired in 1984 I believe, and directly helped draft our Charter of Rights and Freedoms) did a press conference yesterday - which helps explain the situation. Facebook original link: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=2883409135138326 https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=2883409135138326 YouTube copy (poor quality): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoMyyXRmR8U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoMyyXRmR8U The convoy organizers and protestors are vast majority peaceful, and not the myriad of other lies used by Trudeau to promote hate and mislead Canadians and the world. Edit to add: This is the 1st time Emergency Act (War Measures Act) has been invoked in Canadian history, this 100% should allowed to stay up and allow discussion on - else HN is just another place for ideological bubbles to stay coddled/sheltered - and for people to not hear the truth.
lordxp 5y ago
Enabling laws are dangerous. The German chancellor had less than 50% of the seats and needed more power: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933
loudtieblahblah 5y ago
BLM riots were ok But honk honk honk is terrorism
- TMWNN 5y ago
  Yes, I've been struck by how often the "constant honking = terrorism" claim has been made. It indicates that there is seemingly no better argument against what the truckers are doing; if there were, it would be cited instead.
  - fortuna86 5y ago
    I'm assuming you have never had an 18-wheeler parked outside your window honking non-stop. Terrorism isn't the right word, but that is disruptive beyond a protest. Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them.
    - TMWNN 5y ago
      >Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them. Oh, good grief. I'd sarcastically say "Yeah, right, whatever" with an OK hand sign to you, except you'd claim that that is also a "far right"/"alt right"/"Nazi"/[insert epithet here] symbol, too.
      - fortuna86 5y ago
        Prefect example. The Ok hand sign signals everyone it has to, remains deniable for everyone else. Don't know if you are willingly playing along with this game, but others are.
davidg109 5y ago
As a Canadian, I think this is shameful and a despicable act by the "leader" of our country. But let me get one thing straight, Justin Trudeau is no leader. His actions throughout his leadership have played off as one of legacy and self-preservation. This is the same person who corrected someone from saying "mankind" with "peoplekind" while extending dinner invitations to extremists. Four Premiers (nearly half of them) have dismissed Justin's invoking of the Act that permits him to do such things as seize personal bank accounts. The opposition parties have essentially shat all over his lack of leadership and handling of this whole mess. The Convoy is refusing to even speak to Justin and have asked for other leaders to step into his place. That in itself should say it all. The Emergency Act itself is being invoked inappropriately, and is essentially Justin throwing his hands up in the air saying "I don't know what I'm doing, so let's try this!" Really the way forward is for Justin to hang his head in shame and resign, and have a more capable leader installed without resorting to the "Emergencies" Act. Sources: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/caution-must-be-taken-against-overreach-premiers-react-to-trudeaus-call-for-emergencies-act https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/caution-must-be-taken-a... https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2002879555581 https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2002879555581
jrochkind1 5y ago
From https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/15/world/canada-protests-news https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/15/world/canada-protest... > While the government has yet to present detailed orders, Chrystia Freeland, the deputy prime minister and finance minister, said on Monday that all online fund-raising services operating in Canada, regardless of where they are based, will have to register with Canada’s financial intelligence agency, which analyzes transactions for signs of money laundering or terrorist related activity. > Not all of them, however, are likely to comply. After the protesters were cut off by GoFundMe, they moved their appeal to GiveSendGo. When an Ontario judge last week ordered the seizure of several million dollars raised through that platform, the online service defiantly posted on Twitter that “Canada has absolutely ZERO jurisdiction over how we manage our funds.” > But Vanessa Iafolla, a criminologist and financial crime consultant in Halifax, Nova Scotia, who studies money laundering, said that the government has a way around that. There is a long chain of companies that process the payments for all fund-raising sites. That chain, she said, eventually leads to banks and other financial institutions in Canada that are, since the emergency declaration, now required to cut off any payments to and from crowdfunding sites that choose not to follow the new emergency regulations.

76 points by Jimmc414 5y ago

I’d like to expand on some thoughts I had in another thread that provoked some interesting discussion: If the protests are peaceful, the government should not shut them down. But at what point do the economic impacts of a protest cross a line such that they aren’t peaceful? I personally feel that the slippery slope runs in both directions: * The government expanding its power to block more protests is a slippery slope. * The public expanding their power such that less people can cause more economic damage is a slippery slope. This really seems like a situation with no good options.

Applejinx 5y ago
It's not really the public. It's meant to LOOK like 'the public', but it's absolutely not. It's political action, and not just intra-country political action. Maybe Canada watched what happened to the US (something they are wont to do)
throwawayay02 5y ago
There is a very simple solution, the government lifts the restrictions and resigns. New elections are held and then the people decide if they want a new government that will punish protesters or not.
- notpachet 5y ago
  Or, or! The protesters all return home, and promise to make this a hot-button item in the next fairly held democratic election.
  - throwawayay02 5y ago
    That is quite some time away.
    - salamandersauce 5y ago
      We have a minority government right now. It could be 2 months away.
- tyleo 5y ago
  That is just one side of the slippery slope though. Assuming we took this recommendation as a rule, it seems that a convoy of truckers could organize, shut down an economy, and force an election any time they disagreed with something. This does not seem like a recipe for effective government.
  - throwawayay02 5y ago
    No? It seems a recipe for a perfect government. Whenever X% of the population wants that much to throw down the government, that's probably a good time for a remodel. Might not be as effective as a dictatorship or a oligarchy, sure, must a much better government to live under.
    - rini17 5y ago
      X is how much? 0.1%?
    - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
      This would be ridiculous quickly. Imagine the protestors getting Trump to go to re-election within a week of the 2016 election. Say Hillary won. How long would it take the anti-Hillary side to shut things down long enough to get another election? In a polarised partisan climate, you'd have weekly elections.
    - ben_w 5y ago
      For what value of X?
    - AlexandrB 5y ago
      It's not even a majority % of Canadian truckers in Ottawa. Let alone the population of Canada. This seems like a great way to establish a tyranny. > Might not be as effective as a dictatorship or a oligarchy, sure, must a much better government to live under. Oh, I see. That's what you're advocating for.
    - salamandersauce 5y ago
      How much of the population do you think is actively involved in the protests right now? We should bow down and throw away our government for 1% of angry people? 0.01%? This just sounds like a recipe for chaos. A middle school could topple the government by standing on Ambassador bridge just because they don't like today's lunch menu.
- NiloCK 5y ago
  Context for non-Canadians: there was a federal election five months ago.
- NikolaNovak 5y ago
  I feel that's either an external or minority opinion. Not everybody outside of Canada may realize we just HAD an election. I personally don't think it was necessary or useful; in fact I think it was a colossal waste of money; but we did. And Canada tends to have relatively stable governments, our period between elections tends to be reasonably lengthy. Some people may not LIKE the result of elections, but there's nothing that indicates government does not have support of majority of Canadians. Polls tend to indicate most people are Canadians about covid. And elections tend (not always) to be about majority. Second, many outsiders and even many inside Canada don't seem to realize vast vast majority of public health policy and restrictions is done on provincial level. That includes virtually all restrictions that impact majority of citizens. Further, many if not most are done by conservative governments - Alberta and Ontario as obvious examples, as well as conservative municipal governments like Toronto. So I never understand on any level why anybody feels "federal government to resign" is an "obvious solution", let alone what, exactly, is it meant to accomplish when it comes to covid response.
  - pinephoneguy 5y ago
    They're protesting the quarentine when re-entering the country. That's why so many Americans are involved as well. My girlfriend lives there but I can't visit her because of this.
    - pfisch 5y ago
      Of course you can. Just get vaccinated. It is literally safer than taking Tylenol.
- syki 5y ago
  That’s a seductively simple idea. Using the Emergencies Act to bring to an end of the protests was unprecedented. Without having thought too deeply about it the suggestion to then call for elections seems like a brilliant one. I almost think it should be written into the act. At the surface it makes sense that if the redress of grievances is so disruptive that the Act must be invoked then the cost of invoking it is to call for elections and let the people decide.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
  This would encourages minorities to try and block governments all the time, to force new elections. Why not have the second chamber of parliament made of randomly picked citizen [0] with the responsibility to approve the work of the first chamber (of elected representatives), with the power to cast motions of no confidence? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Selection_by_lot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracy#Selection_b... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_of_no_confidence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_of_no_confidence
- ben_w 5y ago
  Lifting the restrictions? The ones which are (at least in name, I am not qualified to discuss further than that) about protecting the health of the population? That seems contrary to the best interests of a nation. And I’m expressly not saying the Canadian government picked the right response here — I don’t know if they did or didn’t — but what you’re suggesting is way too far in the other direction. Making it the norm to resign in response to protests makes it very easy for any political opponent on any issue to do a soapbox equivalent of filibustering.
- phtrivier 5y ago
  You're absolutely right that the "peacemaker" in situations like this should be a secret, anonymous, properly held elections. However, resigning every time there is a protest, even a spectacular one, is obviously not an option for any democraticaly elected governement. Pick a cause you defend, and a right you'd want to preserve ; browse recent history to find out when was the last time a massive protest was held by people with the opposite side of view. Western democracies are warry of calling elections for anything but picking representatives. More direct forms of democracy would clearly help in this case. The current scenario is that the elected governement takes harsh measure, and the people will have to wait and vote them out of office. (Which, I believe, is a fundamental difference between most western democracy and more autocratic regimes - I'm ready to reevaluate that when there is suspense again in a russian / NK / china election.) This is _very_ unfortunate for governements that have been recently elected and have strong parlementary majorities. I wonder if a better "better scenario" in such crisis would be to have different level of population oversight, depending on the time scale of measures. As in: first, the elected governement takes extraordinary measures, with relatively free reign for short period of times (days / weeks.) "Extraordinary time calling for extraordinary measures", etc... Than, parlimentary oversight kicks in, to prolong measures in the "months" scale (I'm one of those annoying people who believe representatives have a role in democracy. Sorry.) Than, referendum / votations need to occur for anything longer than a few months. It would not "solve" the issue - because, a vaccine mandate might very well have been agreed by referendum in Canada, and truckers would _still_ have blocked roads. But in the grand scheme of things, I'd rather have this process.
verisimi 5y ago
But why is it ok for governments around the world destroy our economies for the past 2 years? Or rather, to destroy the SMEs, but allow corporations to carry on and even take up the slack?
- tyleo 5y ago
  I don’t think it is okay. I think protests and elections are great ways to register discontent with a state of affairs. But should the powers of protests go so far that small groups can shut down large parts of an economy? It is my understanding that the convoy is hundreds of trucks. This is already disproportionate power for few people but what if dozens could shut down an economy peacefully? It seems to me that a line has to be drawn somewhere for a society to function.
  - verisimi 5y ago
    So, you are fine with the government shutting down the economy for years, mandating of experimental health treatments to gain access to work, etc, but you are not ok with people protesting against those decisions even when their livelihoods are at stake? Do you realise too that Trudeau got ~30% of the vote, and that his party didn't even receive the most votes but win on account of the electoral system? IE voting every 4 years can only get you so far..
    - tyleo 5y ago
      Please reread what I said. I don’t think it’s okay. It’s the very first sentence in my reply to you. I’m open to discussion but only if you are replying to what I'm saying.
      - verisimi 5y ago
        What I understood is that you were saying a line needed to be drawn, and presumably that the truck protests had crossed that line. They shouldn't be able to stop the economy. That would be a fine argument to me, except that all the concern about the economy does not ring true, coming from a government that has shut down the economy (allowing for large corporations to continue, of course) for 2 years! This is pretty much the first protest against those actions against the economy, but now the concern is that these protesters are acting harmfully. Honestly, it sounds so upside-down to me! The government structure has caused huge economic harm to everyone, and then when people finally complain the government accuses them of causing economic harm! It really is perverse.
stuob 5y ago
> This really seems like a situation with no good options. Removing the mandates is a pretty simple option. Actually, just that fact makes this invocation of the emergency act illegal. This president has gone crazy.
thereddaikon 5y ago
To further complicate the matter, protests are completely ineffectual if they do not impact others in some way. Its easy to say that protesters should be considerate and not get in the way. But if they do that then their message is easy to ignore. Protest by nature must be civil disobedience to have any real effect. What troubles me in this regard is that the Canadian government in general, and Trudeau in particular, seem bent on meeting the protesters with a disproportionate response. This can only lead to an escalation, not de-escalation. And has the potential to galvanize support for them. The opposite of what the Canadian government wants. Not to mention how makes them look like tyrants who trample on civil rights. Regardless of whether or not they care about that, they should care about the optics.
- Overtonwindow 5y ago
  I disagree, the riots in America perpetrated by antifa had a significant policy shift and public opinion impact. The burning of Kenosha and other cities, was probably the only time a protest in modern history has had an effect on public policy.
  - thereddaikon 5y ago
    I'm sorry I don't see what you are disagreeing with.
  - Chris2048 5y ago
    But, didn't it (the actions of BLM/antifa) have a negative effect on public opinion?
- dennis_jeeves 5y ago
mimikatz 5y ago
Protestors should protest legally. They shouldn't block roads. They shouldn't break windows. They shouldn't burn buildings. When they don't they should be broken up/arrested/charged with the crimes they break. This goes for all sides.
- ben_w 5y ago
  As a general statement I agree, but there can be exceptions. I absolutely don’t believe any of the exception I would list actually apply in this case — and even if I did I would still apply the “arrest people who break the law” part because of how fundamentally important I regard rule of law — but there are some occasions (most civil rights battles, wars for independence) where facing a conviction is worth it because the system won’t even take you seriously otherwise.
smoyer 5y ago
I don't believe that peaceful protests EVER automatically cease to be peaceful due to economic impacts - if a peaceful protest becomes more effective due to be expensive, that's one good way to get and keep attention. Using the terrorist act's provisions for peaceful protests is a sign that the oligarchs are worried about maintaining their positions. Normal citizens in other industries should be worried. "When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out." - Niemöller
michaelt 5y ago
> If the protests are peaceful, the government should not shut them down. But at what point do the economic impacts of a protest cross a line such that they aren’t peaceful? If it's not violent, it's peaceful. Perhaps you're trying to redefine "peaceful" because you've come to the realisation that it's sometimes legitimate to shut down peaceful protests? If someone parks their vehicle blocking the street as a protest or makes noise day and night, that's clearly nonviolent. If the state wants the protesters moved on, why can't they apply parking law or nuisance noise law? Every protest has economic impacts, that doesn't mean it's not peaceful. I boycott Nestle in the privacy of my own home, which I hope will have a negative economic impact on them. Giving government the power to stop protests because they have economic impact would give the government the power to stop all protests.
- Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
  Because protest of any sort breaks laws of some sort. You can't even explain your argument on the street corner without breaking the laws against public nuisance, in the eyes of some.
dennis_jeeves1 5y ago
>This really seems like a situation with no good options. I think several fundamentals are wrong to start with, for example a simple definition of democracy appears to be that 51% gets to dictate the other 49%. With so many fundamental flaws even the concept of a typical protest is surreal where the person protesting is supposed to stand in harsh weather in front of a building to do so. This is not my idea of a civilized society.

cryptica 5y ago

I've been saying that this type of thing would be happening increasingly often. The government wants to control people's money. In the future, you will need a license to sell company shares and other private property and only the top 0.01% elite will be able to get such a license... The media will gaslight the public into thinking this is normal and 'for the public good' or to protect investors from making bad decisions. For any law, there will always be a group of richer people just above the victimized group who will support it to protect their wealth at the expense of the poorer group. They will trick/coerce people from the lower classes into playing along. The bottom class will keep getting destroyed, one layer at a time until only the 0.01% richest people have all of what little remains of the nation's wealth... The numbers will be bigger and more concentrated than ever but the real economic value underlying those numbers will be smaller than ever because almost everyone else will be unemployed and living in the metaverse using as little energy as possible. Maybe in the longer term, the economy won't be able to afford letting people unplug themselves from the metaverse and disconnecting their Soylent feeding tubes... The media will demonize the anti-feeding-tubers as selfish terrorists. Heck, they won't even be against feeding tubes, they will be demonized for being against the feeding tube mandates. The best escape I can see are cryptocurrencies but it will take some time to make a transition to the extent that people are creating real value around them. It's not really the case now IMO.

pfisch 5y ago
Can we allow a small minority to shut down an economy indefinitely? That seems like a big problem. It is also hard to gauge just how small of a minority of Canadians this is though. It feels pretty small but it is hard to tell. If 80% of Canadians are vaxxed that means this is just 5-10% of people at most.
- Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
  There are vaccinated people there too. Don't fall for the "team sport" false dichotomy - there are many who are rational enough to get vaccinated but still largely side with the "less / less broad restrictions" side of the debate. (For instance, I am vaxxed, extremely pro-vax, and quite anti-restriction. Give everyone a chance to get vaxxed, even make it free - but then let them manage their risk from there. Even the most effective restrictions, from a case load perspective, such as here in Australia, just left us completely naive when Omicron arrived. Shortly thereafter we had world record cases per capita.)

InsomniacL 5y ago

At what point does peaceful protest become none-peaceful through the consequences of the protesters actions? I.e Gluing yourself to the road could be considered peaceful however if you're doing it outside the A&E Ambulance entrance to a hospital is it still peaceful? That's an extreme example however in this case can it still be considered peaceful considering the economic,.. etc impact on peoples lives?

Hnus 5y ago
The whole point of protesting is to make ppl uncomfortable. Activists take that discomfort w/the status quo & advocate for concrete policy changes…To folks who complain protest demands make others uncomfortable…that’s the point.
- Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
  While I don't disagree, "that's the point" is not a great argument. It's simply an explanation. If someone is caught in the act of cheating, it doesn't help if they say "he just wanted some action on the side!" The problem is the cheating, the reason for cheating doesn't make it acceptable. You have effectively just stated that "oh don't worry he meant to cheat."
- Chris2048 5y ago
  The post you are responding too never used the term "uncomfortable" which is a pretty watered-down term to describe someone unable to get medical service because ambulances can't get through. Would you describe murder as "uncomfortable"?

pinephoneguy 5y ago

This might all be a distraction from a bank run.

chinathrow 5y ago
Context?

grej 5y ago

“With no need for court orders, banks can freeze personal accounts of anyone linked with the protests.” The politics of this particular situation aside, this feels like a terrifying development for future protests, and public discourse in general.

verisimi 5y ago
Apparently it also includes people who donated to their cause. A peaceful, non-violent cause. Wow. North Korea, look out!
- verelo 5y ago
  Except it’s really not that anymore. Constant noise disruptions, gridlocking the city…it’s causing harm and the protests have damaged property, businesses and even gone as far to dance on the war memorials. These are not our best people.
  - edot 5y ago
    You could describe MLK’s protests as disruptive, causing gridlock, damaging to businesses, etc. BLM protestors danced on and destroyed statues as well. The whole point of protest is to be disruptive. Being anti-vax is super stupid but protesting government mandates (or systemic racism, or anything) should be allowed.
    - bryanlarsen 5y ago
      The whole point of an escalated protest is being willing to accept the consequences. If you park illegally, you expect to get a parking ticket, protest or no. You expect your vehicle to get towed. If you defy a court injunction, you expect to spend the night in jail. The people chaining themselves to trees expect to get arrested and spend time in jail. They also expect that their time in jail will help their cause. Being part of a protest is not a "get out of jail free" card. Rather the opposite, spending some time in jail is part of the point.

kragen 5y ago

Another day, another answer to "what is Bitcoin good for?"

f001 5y ago
That only applies if you can pay everything in btc. According to coindesk, the same AML laws now apply to crypto (at least temporarily), and can be used to stop transactions from/to groups that are undesirable. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/02/15/canadas-trudeau-enacts-emergencies-act-and-crypto-is-included https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/02/15/canadas-trudeau-e...
- kragen 5y ago
  As we saw with WikiLeaks, one thing is what the law says, and something else is what the government can actually do. In the case of WikiLeaks the government did a lot of things that the law clearly didn't permit; Bitcoin, by contrast, keeps authoritarian governments from doing undesirable things even if they pass laws that permit them. To "freeze" my Bitcoin "account" you'd have to steal my phone and then bruteforce the PIN before I used the seed phrase to sweep the coins into a different wallet on a new phone. Not impossible by any means, but of similar difficulty to imprisoning me. I have other coins that are stored under a different seed phrase that isn't on my phone, and there are people with safer storage than that. If the government was in a position to imprison all the protestors they wouldn't be trying to target their bank accounts. Of course centralized crowdfunding platforms and payment service providers aren't any safer than centralized banks, whether they use Bitcoin, dollars, or yuan. But your Bitcoin wallet is definitely a lot safer than your bank account from being frozen out from under you, unless it's something like a Binance account or a Coinbase account. Generally people don't "pay everything in btc", both because of the transaction costs (33¢ in my most recent transaction, but often as high as US$8) and because not many sellers accept BTC; instead they exchange the BTC for local currencies that are more widely accepted and have lower transaction costs.
Hnus 5y ago
For not having to dox contributors and have their past and future transactions public from the start instead? https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/02/11/1045281/ottawa-antivax-protests-doxxing/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/02/11/1045281/ottawa-a...

Wolfenstein98k 5y ago

Well that...seems tyrannical. Imagine if Trump did this to the BLM protestors, using the same argument (which would've been before vaccines, too).

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jrochkind1 5y ago

Anyone on the left should be aware they are going to use any new powers of control or punishment against the left in the the future (and more often and more significantly and increasingly so over time).

AlexandrB 5y ago
Too late[1]. Let me know when armored RCMP officers are dragging truckers from their rigs and throwing them in jail[2]. [1] https://rabble.ca/indigenous/land-defenders-in-court/ https://rabble.ca/indigenous/land-defenders-in-court/ [2] https://thenarwhal.ca/rcmp-arrests-wetsuweten-media-photos/ https://thenarwhal.ca/rcmp-arrests-wetsuweten-media-photos/
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  Of course. I am saying if they aren't yet freezing land defender's bank accounts, without even the need for a court order, under the Emergency Act, as per this article -- be sure they will use this precedent to do so, once they have set it, many more times against the left than the right. It sounds like you would probably agree, since you are aware they are generally much harsher against left protests/disruptions than right.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

young_unixer 5y ago

Is there some point at which people will start rejecting this arbitrary and excessive exercise of power? This sets a dangerous precedent for a country that until now we considered a liberal democracy with freedom and respect for individual rights. I wonder if we're all headed to a point where state control and erosion of freedom are widely accepted by the public in our western democracies.

verisimi 5y ago
How do you reject the excessive exercise of power? Its very hard to say. If all it takes is the declaration of an emergency and then people accept that declaration, I don't think you can. " Is there some point at which people will start rejecting this arbitrary and excessive exercise of power?" Well, the truckers are trying, no?
- Overtonwindow 5y ago
  For some reason your comment reminded me of the Reichstag fire decree. It’s worth reading on, how the government used an emergency protection order to go full throat to a dictatorship.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire#:~:text=The%20Reichstag%20Fire%20Decree%20suspended,not%20reinstated%20during%20Nazi%20reign https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire#:~:text=The%2....
failedengineer 5y ago
The Ontario government told people in Ontario that they'd need papers and a reason to travel in January 2021. The police refused to enforce the policy restricting municipal travel. The government walked it back shortly after. That was only at a municipal level. Inter-provincial travel was limited to people with valid reasons at the same time, and that was enforced. If you went from Ontario to Manitoba to check out the moose, you'd get sent home by the police at the border. I guess "papers, please, and where are you going?" is where the line is currently.
jagger27 5y ago
Name a single “liberal democracy” where any group would be permitted to occupy a capital city for three weeks uncontested. People really aren’t grasping how weak it makes Canada look that it allowed its own capital to be held in a chokehold so easily. There are people on the streets (and in this thread) demanding that elected officials resign while a strong majority of Canadians disagree with the “protest”.

weruiojkl24 5y ago

Bitcoin fixes this.

Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
No it doesn't - they're authorised to crack down on funders, including via crypo and crowdfunding.
- ajkdhcb2 5y ago
  Authorisation does not equal capability. Bitcoin has no privacy so I see how use of it could be trivially tracked and punished. With a private cryptocurrency like Monero it may be feasible to do anonymous crowdfunding; recipients have various ways to cash out into usable currency albeit with significant inconvenience
- kragen 5y ago
  While your premise is true (they're authorized to crack down on funders via crypto) your conclusion (Bitcoin doesn't fix this) doesn't follow from it. Please see my discussion in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30346082 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30346082.
Hnus 5y ago
How?

pupppet 5y ago

This was never a protest, it was a blockade. If they were actually protesting public opinion wouldn’t have turned on them.

verisimi 5y ago
Just because the corporate-owned media reports their cause in a negative light, doesn't mean public opinion has turned on them. In fact people were lining the streets as they made their way to Ottawa.
- pupppet 5y ago
  That recent hack gave light to only 29% of total donations coming from Canadians, they are not widely supported no matter what the HN Libertarian slant wants you to believe.
  - Wolfenstein98k 5y ago
    Which recent hack? A news article shared in this thread suggested 51% came from Canada. The foreign donations are small amounts spread across many donors. It doesn't exactly appear like Uncle Vlad is sending them billions of rubles or something.
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  Most people I know think they are assholes and should go away. Also check out r/Ottawa on Reddit where the sentiment is solidly against them. I think you're right about one thing though. Opinion hasn't "turned" on them because it was never with them in the first place.
  - iamricks 5y ago
    Subreddits are group think bubbles, i wouldn't consider that a good source of public opinion. That is like saying everyone wants Trump to be president, head over to r/thedonald.
  - 5y ago

sinyug 5y ago

> Critics have noted that the prime minister voiced support for farmers in India who blocked major highways to New Delhi for a year in 2021, saying at the time: "Canada will always be there to defend the right of peaceful protest." And we will keep bringing this up. > Trudeau’s party is believed to lend passive support to the Khalistanis who have been using Canada as a strong base for decades now. > The Canadian PM has repeatedly failed to take into account the sensitivities in India regarding support to Sikh terror groups in Canada. > His visit to India earlier this year had made the Khalistan movement a talking point once again. During his meeting with Trudeau, Punjab Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh said he had raised the issue of Khalistan. In an incident that caused further embarrassment to the Canadian premiere, Trudeau’s wife was clicked with Jaspal Atwal, a member of an illegal Sikh separatist group, who was invited to an event hosted by the Canadian High Commission.[1] And he is concerned about "terrorist financing?" [1] https://indianexpress.com/article/world/justin-trudeau-canada-lists-khalistani-extremism-as-threat-5492519/ https://indianexpress.com/article/world/justin-trudeau-canad...

egberts1 5y ago

Authoritarians are gonna authoritarian. Meanwhile US media are ignoring this because … it doesn’t fit with the elites’ current goal of dumbing down the audience to a compliant masses of their own choosing.

xnx 5y ago
US media is definitely not ignoring this: "Right-wing media offers fawning coverage of Canadian truckers as it encourages similar protest in US" https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/09/media/right-wing-media-canadian-truckers-reliable-sources/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/09/media/right-wing-media-canadi...

causi 5y ago

Not that the trucker protestors are right, but watching the Right and Left do a complete 180 and copy/paste each others' comments from the 2020 BLM protests is either the funniest or the saddest thing I've ever seen. It seems more and more that people only pretend to have principals so long as they can use them to advocate for their own side.

pinephoneguy 5y ago
These people are moderate libertarians, not the right. If it was the right and if they were copy/pasting from BLM it would be a violent White supremacy movement. That's just not going to happen.
kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
Maybe it's the difference between protesting and rioting? Did the truckers burn stuff down and loot shops?
- bluetonium 5y ago
  If we're being honest with ourselves blocking major trade routes has at least as much economic impact, though it's harder to see/measure.
  - kkjjkgjjgg 5y ago
    I don't think they can simply block the trade routes - surely people can route around it. In any case they protest against not being allowed into the country with their trucks, so either way the trucks wouldn't be running?
    - EForEndeavour 5y ago
      "They" just blocked The Ambassador Bridge for six days. This bridge transports 25% of the value of all Canada-US trade, coming out to roughly $360 million (presumably USD) per day: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/truckers-ambassador-bridge-perfect-spot-threaten-us-canada-trade-2022-02-11/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/truckers-ambassador-b... The Ambassador Bridge links Detroit to Windsor across the Detroit River at the southern tip of the Ontario Peninsula. The closest US-Canada land crossing is the Blue Water Bridge between Sarnia, ON and Port Huron, MI, 2 hours' drive north.

s5300 5y ago

US has civil forfeiture but we never see much uproar about that, & it’s much more rampant & discriminatory

stewx 5y ago

None of it would be happening if the local police in Ottawa actually enforced the law. It's against the law to blockade public roads. The police leaders have not instructed front-line officers to arrest the blockaders or to tow the trucks away. They should have never been allowed to park their big rigs in the road and set up camps, hot tubs, and a concert stage in the first place.

Overtonwindow 5y ago

“Do what we say or we will make your lives miserable.” This seems to be the tacit mantra of governments in the era of COVID. Alongside a willingness to entrench at the slightest pushback, in my humble opinion governments across the world have gone too far. I completely support the right of the truckers to protest, and it would seem that the protest is upsetting the very people that it is meant to upset. I Sympathize with the people of Ottawa, and hope maybe they will come together with the truckers, but I doubt it. The government cannot budge, the government cannot back down. Like the American government, the Canadian government knows it must fight any question to its authority because if it doesn’t, it runs the risk of losing that authority. The truckers are going to have to break the Canadian government to win, and frankly I hope they do.

loceng 5y ago

I hope people see this: Tamara Lich (one of the convoy protest organizers) and Brian Peckford (the last living First Minister/premiere of a province, retired in 1984 I believe, and directly helped draft our Charter of Rights and Freedoms) did a press conference yesterday - which helps explain the situation. Facebook original link: https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=2883409135138326 https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?v=2883409135138326 YouTube copy (poor quality): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoMyyXRmR8U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoMyyXRmR8U The convoy organizers and protestors are vast majority peaceful, and not the myriad of other lies used by Trudeau to promote hate and mislead Canadians and the world. Edit to add: This is the 1st time Emergency Act (War Measures Act) has been invoked in Canadian history, this 100% should allowed to stay up and allow discussion on - else HN is just another place for ideological bubbles to stay coddled/sheltered - and for people to not hear the truth.

lordxp 5y ago

Enabling laws are dangerous. The German chancellor had less than 50% of the seats and needed more power: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

loudtieblahblah 5y ago

BLM riots were ok But honk honk honk is terrorism

TMWNN 5y ago
Yes, I've been struck by how often the "constant honking = terrorism" claim has been made. It indicates that there is seemingly no better argument against what the truckers are doing; if there were, it would be cited instead.
- fortuna86 5y ago
  I'm assuming you have never had an 18-wheeler parked outside your window honking non-stop. Terrorism isn't the right word, but that is disruptive beyond a protest. Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them.
  - TMWNN 5y ago
    >Also "Honk Honk" has be co-opted my more extreme forces. I think we all know what "HH" stands for. But it has deniability, so it's perfect for them. Oh, good grief. I'd sarcastically say "Yeah, right, whatever" with an OK hand sign to you, except you'd claim that that is also a "far right"/"alt right"/"Nazi"/[insert epithet here] symbol, too.
    - fortuna86 5y ago
      Prefect example. The Ok hand sign signals everyone it has to, remains deniable for everyone else. Don't know if you are willingly playing along with this game, but others are.

davidg109 5y ago

As a Canadian, I think this is shameful and a despicable act by the "leader" of our country. But let me get one thing straight, Justin Trudeau is no leader. His actions throughout his leadership have played off as one of legacy and self-preservation. This is the same person who corrected someone from saying "mankind" with "peoplekind" while extending dinner invitations to extremists. Four Premiers (nearly half of them) have dismissed Justin's invoking of the Act that permits him to do such things as seize personal bank accounts. The opposition parties have essentially shat all over his lack of leadership and handling of this whole mess. The Convoy is refusing to even speak to Justin and have asked for other leaders to step into his place. That in itself should say it all. The Emergency Act itself is being invoked inappropriately, and is essentially Justin throwing his hands up in the air saying "I don't know what I'm doing, so let's try this!" Really the way forward is for Justin to hang his head in shame and resign, and have a more capable leader installed without resorting to the "Emergencies" Act. Sources: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/caution-must-be-taken-against-overreach-premiers-react-to-trudeaus-call-for-emergencies-act https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/caution-must-be-taken-a... https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2002879555581 https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2002879555581

jrochkind1 5y ago

From https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/15/world/canada-protests-news https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/15/world/canada-protest... > While the government has yet to present detailed orders, Chrystia Freeland, the deputy prime minister and finance minister, said on Monday that all online fund-raising services operating in Canada, regardless of where they are based, will have to register with Canada’s financial intelligence agency, which analyzes transactions for signs of money laundering or terrorist related activity. > Not all of them, however, are likely to comply. After the protesters were cut off by GoFundMe, they moved their appeal to GiveSendGo. When an Ontario judge last week ordered the seizure of several million dollars raised through that platform, the online service defiantly posted on Twitter that “Canada has absolutely ZERO jurisdiction over how we manage our funds.” > But Vanessa Iafolla, a criminologist and financial crime consultant in Halifax, Nova Scotia, who studies money laundering, said that the government has a way around that. There is a long chain of companies that process the payments for all fund-raising sites. That chain, she said, eventually leads to banks and other financial institutions in Canada that are, since the emergency declaration, now required to cut off any payments to and from crowdfunding sites that choose not to follow the new emergency regulations.