63 ms·

Convoy Crackdown – power to freeze bank accounts without trial or legal recourse

• jl2718 5y ago
  5th grade social studies lesson from 2080: By the 2020’s western state power is no longer exercised through employment of a physical law enforcement corps. The middle class is sufficiently controlled by a centralized financial structure, but the social protection capacity of the state has become overwhelmed by both the numbers of the underclass and the wealth of the overclass. This is often presented as an intentional political position, but it should be easy to see that this was just a pragmatic alignment with the inevitable reality. A pandemic pushes the state into a position to assert absolute power, and a series of protests arise to test that power, while investors enter a mania for alternative financial systems. The differences in response to the various threats to state power raise the ultimate question of this learning unit: Is there such a thing as a power based on and constrained by the consent of the governed, or is a government only legitimized by its ability to exert and retain power in the form of control over the governed?
• rubatuga 5y ago
  The less we discuss and upvote this the longer it will stay on HN front page.
  • dang 5y ago
    Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.
  • stronglikedan 5y ago
    • dang 5y ago
      Please don't post unsubstantive and/or feed flamewars. Not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
• thepangolino 5y ago
• cal5k 5y ago
  I've seen a lot of commentary about the fact that the Emergencies Act provisions "expire" automatically after 30 days, and include "safeguards", ergo there's nothing worry about. People getting hung up on the text of the bill forget that it's merely an Act of Parliament, and thus can easily be amended or replaced via a simple majority vote. What played out last night indicates that none of these checks and balances really matter in a parliamentary system where the nuclear option of a non-confidence vote (and subsequent election) can be invoked to force any MPs with qualms to vote along party lines. It's easy to see what will happen next, based on this government's track record: they will introduce amendments to the Act, or new legislation containing only the provisions they would like to make permanent, and once again proclaim that voting against the amendment will result in a new election. They will probably also use it as an excuse to ram through their "Online Harms Bill", i.e. internet censorship, targeted at "misinformation" (disagreeable speech) and, many suspect, independent media outlets that the PM despises. Internet censorship + government-directed financial de-platforming = Canada's near-term future if the situation doesn't change somehow.
  • cranky908canuck 5y ago
    A few hours ago, the government revoked the act. So while there are many things that could have been done to extend / abuse it, they don't seem likely to happen.
  • version_five 5y ago
    I agree with you, just because comments like this are not popular here doesn't make them untrue.
  • wvenable 5y ago
    What better check and balance to automatically topple of the government if you really disagree with invoking the act? It's a minority government even. I suspect most people commenting haven't even read the act. It's actually very short and would take you less time than reading this article. One should entirely get hung up on the text of the act -- it outlines exactly what is possible and the consequences. It's actually very reasonable but point that out doesn't produce enough outrage up votes or get articles published.
• barbazoo 5y ago
  > In particular, it was about giving the government of Canada the permanent power to freeze, without trial or legal recourse, all the bank accounts and other assets of anyone it decides was ‘directly or indirectly involved’ in an ‘illegal protest.’ Is this actually true? According to [0] "The Declaration expires after 30 days unless an extension is confirmed within specific timelines by both the House of Commons and the Senate.". I don't see how this would grant the government permanent powers unless the Emergencies Act gets renewed in perpetuity. [0] https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2022/02/canadas-emergencies-act.html https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2022/02/can...
  • stronglikedan 5y ago
    • barbazoo 5y ago
      See [0], it seems far fetched to assume that from this video. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30432497 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30432497
  • _3u10 5y ago
    • BoGs83 5y ago
      • swamp40 5y ago
        https://twitter.com/ScottGo70179464/status/1496130126169391115 https://twitter.com/ScottGo70179464/status/14961301261693911... https://twitter.com/markstrahl/status/1495472037438967808 https://twitter.com/markstrahl/status/1495472037438967808 https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1496104624490790918 https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1496104624490790918 https://twitter.com/MarilynGladuSL/status/1495583315369287684 https://twitter.com/MarilynGladuSL/status/149558331536928768... etc. Which Twitter post is correct? You decide.
• teunispeters 5y ago
  See https://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-24.501/ https://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-24.501/ this is covered by existing laws. Proceeds involved in crime. () If it can be proven that those fund were not involved in criminal activity, the courts will unfreeze. (or at least that's how it's intended to function). () that's up to courts, not public opinion. I'm in the public.
  • totony 5y ago
    >it can be proven The emergency act removes that requirement, which is what is scary. Not only can you not prove it, they don't even have to hold a trial (afaict) Also that law was clearly not intended to be used against protests. Seems more aimed at organized crime.
    • teunispeters 5y ago
      No they have to hold a trial - after the act ends. (the precise details are way above my level of understanding). But everyone gets held on trial - including government. (I have no idea what that means as yet) As to organised crime, there's strong accusation of exactly that involved here. But I suppose it'll sort in the trials of the leaders.
• eth0up 5y ago
  It may seem stupid to state that such a practice will not be limited to a particular circumstance. It seems equally stupid to assume it would be. This is a new precedent. Expect it to proliferate, with virulence. I'm sure others will be addressing the subject of social credit.
• throwaway22032 5y ago
  This sort of stuff just has the same effect that the mandates did in the first place. Congratulations, now you've made it such that it would be _irresponsible_ for me to not keep a large amount of savings outside of the financial system.
  • ipaddr 5y ago
    This is the biggest benefit. This moves the conversation in many ways. Noting who is partipating and who is refusing helps map what services to use. The importance of avoiding exchanges/banks that require identifying information is on the back of everyone's mind.
• newaccount2021 5y ago
  Canadians have so far been majority in favor all measures, arbitrary or not, to wreck the convoys. The critics of the use of the Emergency Powers have been derided as cranks, and this is in line with the majority opinion of Canadians Canada simply does not have a heritage of individual rights. Their country, their rules.
  • 34679 5y ago
    >Canada simply does not have a heritage of individual rights. Their country, their rules. They absolutely do, and they changed "their rules" in 1982 to make it official. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and... > 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association.
    • newaccount2021 5y ago
    • xdennis 5y ago
      Yeah, and they managed to deny all four when they arrested a priest (Artur Pawlowski) for refusing to practice his religion.
  • SuoDuanDao 5y ago
    I don't know where the pollsters find these respondents, but judging by the comments of any article that still allows them it's not the majority of politically engaged canadians. Not that the majority being okay with it would make it all right under the charter.
    • BeefWellington 5y ago
      > but judging by the comments of any article that still allows them it's not the majority of politically engaged canadians. Do you believe comments section on poll and news websites are an accurate representation of the wider populace?
• stackedinserter 5y ago
  Any power given to government will be abused by them. It's sad that many Canadians support these clearly dangerous and totalitarian actions from their "leader". Did you notice how "freedom" became a swear word over the last 5-6 years? With all these "muh freedoms", "what exact freedom have you lost?", "freedom of speech don't protect you from anything" it seems like any movement that fights for any "freedom" will be labeled as terrorist/nazi in next few years. History repeats itself, and I'm sick of it. My country of origin and my country where I grew up, both turned to totalitarian hellholes, and now it's Canada's turn.
  • lovich 5y ago
    > Any power given to government will be abused by them. This assertion that the government cannot do anything good, by virtue of being the government, is kinda why the kids gloves are coming off between the Canadian government and these protestors. What exactly should the government response be to a group of people who demand the entire government be thrown out, and are going to ruin the majority of the populations lives until it happens? Are they supposed to sit there and accept that they’re a naughty little government who can never do anything right so they need to be quiet and go away?
    • ipaddr 5y ago
      Then why wasn't a treason charge leveled? You are falling for the drama. People decide to protest about removing restrictions and the news tells you everyone is here trying overthrow the government. You now think unarmed people with a hottub, roasting a pig who made a big party in front of parliment were a threat to the Canadian government? Does that make sense?
      • lovich 5y ago
        > Then why wasn't a treason charge leveled? Because it didn’t rise to the level of treason? For the entire rest of your comment I can’t respond until you let me know what was the appropriate response for the government here. So far you’ve implied they should have done nothing, and explicitly threw treason out as another possibility. Is there any step the government could have taken that was appropriate in your view other than do nothing, charge treason, or capitulate entirely to the protestors?
• akimball 5y ago
  • threeseed 5y ago
    • SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
      Is it common? My understanding is that freezing bank accounts is generally limited to things like financial crimes or drug dealing, where the account might contain money that you obtained unlawfully in the first place. Do people arrested for, say, murder usually have their bank accounts frozen?
      • adamrezich 5y ago
        there's a push both in Canada and here in the US to label these political undesirables as "domestic terrorists" as justification, because it makes sense to freeze the bank accounts of domestic terrorists. this is why they're trying to make a direct connection between the "January 6th Insurrection" and this incident, to portray both as connected instances of far-right-wing domestic terror/insurrectionism.
      • wvenable 5y ago
        Your bank will freeze your account if they detect suspicious activity. Your credit card agreement likely has a provision to allow them to freeze your bank account for non-payment. The underlying question is whether or not a financial crime is actually happening. The idea of a decentralized protest having some random "leaders" in-trusted with donations is in need of scrutiny. It doesn't matter if it's this or BLM. Where is this money coming from and who is it going to?
        • SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
          Which authorities specifically say that this is the underlying question? When Trudeau announced the policy, he said it was about "keeping Canadians safe, protecting people's jobs" (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60383385 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60383385) - it doesn't really sound to me like his goal was to protect protest donors from potential fraud.
• KennyBlanken 5y ago
  At best this is unsupported personal opinion and at worst a slippery slope fallacy.
  • paganel 5y ago
    There's nothing slippery slope-y about a political party freezing the bank accounts of the opponents that are protesting against its policies in the streets. Had this been happening in the countries we (meaning the West) don't like the press would have been up in arms about it, for obvious reasons.
    • ethanbond 5y ago
      The obvious reason being that the government in question is democratically elected and the ones that (probably) fall into “countries we don’t like” aren’t democratically elected?
      • bombcar 5y ago
        Doesn't matter, all that matters is are they on "your side" or not. Had the USA froze assets of BLM and BLM-associated groups during 2020 the "democratically elected" wouldn't have stopped people complaining.
        • ethanbond 5y ago
          Right, nor is it stopping people from complaining now, is it?
      • parthdesai 5y ago
        Explain this then? And in case you weren't aware, India is the largest democracy in the world https://twitter.com/rahulbetgeri/status/1494963031847337985 https://twitter.com/rahulbetgeri/status/1494963031847337985
        • known 5y ago
• BoGs83 5y ago
  [flagged]
  • dang 5y ago
    Would you please not post in the flamewar style and especially please not use HN primarily for political or ideological battle? All those things destroy what HN is supposed to be for. We want curious conversation here. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
• modzu 5y ago
  its hard to fathom the case being made by canada's government that the 100,000 people who donated are accomplices to a crime. statistically, they would otherwise have to be average law abiding citizens. there was no violence in ottawa, no deaths; certainly nothing remotely worthy of invoking the emergency act; you can watch for yourself, if you can find feeds that werent deleted, many of the 170 arrests. they were mass arrests. i believe the most severe charge facing the organizer is conspiracy to commit... mischief. further, i have never witnessed such blatant, shameless propaganda combined with censorship in a western country. are there academic theories about why this is happening that don't veer into tinfoil hat territory?
  • lovich 5y ago
    Brah you can’t claim it’s “shameless propaganda” while also claiming there was no violence in ottawa
    • modzu 5y ago
      do you live here? who got hurt? i mostly saw a lot of hippies with canadian flags
      • lovich 5y ago
        Literally watched videos of violence. People throwing hands, and that’s on top of the honking reaching hearing level damage inside peoples homes. I don’t know about you but when someone does something that damages my body for weeks on end, I consider that violence
        • CountDrewku 5y ago
• imwillofficial 5y ago
  Kinda scary use of power in a democracy
• hpkuarg 5y ago
  Emergency powers that suspend fundamental civil liberties without judicial oversight are, in a democracy, only justifiable in times of an existential crisis of the nation. One can hardly see how the trucker protests qualify as such. Very disappointing to see.
  • threeseed 5y ago
    > One can hardly see how the trucker protests qualify as such There are multiple facets to the protests. - Blocking the bridge that was responsible for a sizeable percentage of trade between US and Canada goes far beyond a protest and any government would be well within their right to classify this as an emergency. - You had US-based, armed, ultra-right wing militia elements who weren't trying to protest at all but rather sow discord. These were the types wanting to overthrow the government. Which meant that police weren't able to control the situation and there were legitimate concerns about it getting out of hand.
    • cickpass_broken 5y ago
      Wasn't the ambassador bridge cleared before the emergency was declared? To your second point.. I've watched mainstream media in Canada and watched livestreams coming out of Ottawa, and have no heard of this _at all_. Is there actual evidence of this?
      • threeseed 5y ago
        They left it up to local enforcement to clear the protest. When they were deemed unable to is when the emergency decree went into effect. And the Canadian government stated that some portion of the protests were either part of or linked to US militia groups: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/16/ottawa-blockade-strong-ties-extremists https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/16/ottawa-blockad...
    • Banana699 5y ago
      >You had US-based, armed, ultra-right wing militia elements who weren't trying to protest at all but rather sow discord Reputable source or it didn't happen.
• fudged71 5y ago
  I'm seeing a lot of terrible takes by Americans, and a lot of Canadians shaking their heads. It seems theres a lot of disinformation crossing the border. * Quoting Ezra Levant is just... hilarious. His news rag has been banned from so many press events. * We JUST had a federal election where these protesters could have made their point. Instead they chose to strangle the capitol and borders across the country. * Over a thousand donors to the Convoy have been linked to the Jan 6th capitol demonstration and attack. * 3 weeks of disruption to the nation's capital with horns blaring overnight, arson attempts, and weapons seizures is not "non-violent". There is not much difference between storming a capital and strangling one. Police and Military members were involved in creating supply lines and creating an occupation. And there were plans to block airport cargo terminals. The economic impacts across the nation are in the billions of dollars. * The freezing of finances IS NOT retroactive, thanks to our charter, meaning if you donated to the convoy before the invocation of the Emergencies Act, you won't be targeted. The only accounts were “individuals and companies suspected of involvement in illegal acts,” such as “influencers in the illegal protest in Ottawa” and vehicle owners and drivers “who did not want to leave the area impacted by the protest.” * It's hard to see the act as a tyrannical overreach if it can be challenged in court and has a public inquiry * Police didn't enforce the law which is why the feds needed to intervene. The public inquiry (required by the act) should reveal why police forces were unable to shut down these protests earlier, and where the money was flowing. If donor lists are to be believed, there was a significant amount of foreign funding into this operation, as well as members of the public service.
  • modzu 5y ago
    1. with a sample size in the hundreds of thousands, even if its true, it's irrelevant. 2. the state of emergency could not be in response to the border closures, because they were cleared prior. one single cachet of weapons was found. per 100,000 criminals, gee, thats better than my hood. as for honking, it should be punishable by death or bankruptcy in any civilized country. 3. yes it is. override of the charter is precisely the power the emergency act seeks 4. have you ever donated to the world wildlife fund? sponsored a child in africa? the data has already made it clear that the majority of funding came from within canada in small amounts. occams razor: this is the result of frustrated citizens, not vladimir putin
• h2odragon 5y ago
  There are communities that live without access to the banking system already. Many of them do so from a philosophy of independence (in the old sense, they wish to limit their reliance on things outside their community). Certainly some of their methods will be of great interest to the unpersons, perhaps some of the philosophy will be more appealing too.
  • kelnos 5y ago
    I can only assume that adopting this form of finance would involve a huge change in lifestyle for most people. Those changes should be adopted by choice, not because a government has capriciously pulled the rug out from under you.
• mywittyname 5y ago
  This is the risk in protesting. Authorities have never been nice to protestors. Protesting has always carried the risk of assault and the loss of livelihood, wealth, freedom, or life. So before protesting, you need to ask yourself if what your protesting for is worth it. The state is fucking powerful. After all, the state is the one in charge of checking the state's power. If you piss off enough people, or merely the wrong people, you may discover that your rights only extend so far as other people are willing to protect them. The difference here is that most protestors are punished via ass-kicking, seizure of personal belongings, a few nights being humiliated in a jail cell, and a bunch of fines. The people whose lives were interrupted by this are pissed off and out for blood. And Trudeau is going to give it to them, and be heralded as a hero while doing so. Especially after the perceived police incompetence in the matter (by failing to dole out the standard ass-kicking-jail-fine punishment).
  • tistoon 5y ago
    I tend to disagree. In democracy, the people is the state and, in extent, has the power. The government (elected people in place) is only temporary.
    • beardedetim 5y ago
      I agree with you on paper but have a really hard time viewing my current relationship with any State as that of which I have power. Nor do I see myself with any _limited State_ having any power. Nor do I see myself as having _any_ ability to legally inflict harm to others as the State has power to do. I totally agree that democracy on paper says the People have control but I am not seeing that play out at any real scale.
    • throwaway894345 5y ago
      In a lot of countries, "the people are the state" is only nominally true. Special interests often carry the day, and anyway in a partisan environment devoid of principles we need to protect against moments of passion where a 51% majority can infringe on the rights of 49% (or in my country, a largely elite 10%--which helms universities and media institutions and so on--can use the state to push their ideology on the other 90%).
• kelnos 5y ago
  I've been very anti-cryptocurrency/anti-blockchain for years now. I'm still skeptical of them (possibly more due to their current implementations and the fanboy-ism that surrounds them), but this absolutely convinced me that we need non-custodial financial instruments. (Maybe that isn't crypto/blockchain stuff, who knows. Physical cash is annoying to deal with, though.) However, the problem is that you still need to convert this "uncontrollable" currency into fiat currency. At the very least, you need to pay your taxes. But if the governments decide that non-custodial currency is illegal, then everything from grocery stores to web hosts won't risk accepting anything but government-approved currency. Sure, we'll have black markets where people can convert things to fiat, but those will be expensive and risky. So I still don't see blockchain as a savior here. If the government can give themselves the power to freeze people's custodial assets on a whim, they can also make it illegal to deal in bitcoin or whatever. And I'm skeptical that this is the kind of issue that can be boiled down into easy-to-understand bits in order to generate a lot of public support. Blockchain already has an image problem, being full of "bros" and undeserved millionaires/billionaires. Most people are not going to put their political support behind this without a huge shift.
  • nathanaldensr 5y ago
    There's no escape as long as the entire world relies on fiat currency. There has been a loud contingent of people pointing this out for decades now. Except in typical fashion, most people need something to actually happen before acting on it. Well, now that something has happened.
    • lawn 5y ago
      Unfortunately, most cryptocurrency supporters have been more focused on increasing the fiat price (so they can cash out to fiat and become rich), than on increasing adoption so that you can spend your crypto directly. Sadly, as long as this hype fueled bubble remains, I doubt much will change.
  • ipaddr 5y ago
    The proper balance is not to keep all of your eggs in one basket. In situations like this having a backup emergency supply of nok-fait money is critical. If your bank account is frozen for any reason.
• nhunter 5y ago
  I'm also concerned about the long term implications of using the Emergencies Act, particularly in the future when we have a majority parliament where attaching confidence wouldn't be as much of a mitigation. I'm okay with the use of it in this scenario since it's possible to connect the sources of money from foreign actors and some of the activities connected with the protests, particularly when the government committed to follow on with legislation that would serve the same function as what they're using in the act. One comment about the article tho: Quoting Ezra Lavant immediately destroys the credibility of the author due to his obvious and direct connection to misinformation and over all general grift by attaching himself to right wing causes. There are lots of strong credible sources that could back up the argument of government overreach with the EA, but Ezra is not one of them.
• NoPie 5y ago
  This all madness started when Canadian government couldn't admit that with omicron vaccine mandates no longer make much sense. Even if they played some role previously, previous infection is functionally equivalent to vaccination. Most provinces had already implemented the plan to revoke them and many other countries are dropping them as well. This proves again and again that when the government implements a policy that is not based on science, the outcomes are very very bad.
  • BeefWellington 5y ago
    > This all madness started when Canadian government couldn't admit that with omicron vaccine mandates no longer make much sense. At the time this convoy began, Ontario was experiencing a surge in its hospitals with around 4000 hospital beds occupied by people with COVID.[1][2] Note, that's from COVID, not with COVID. While it may turn out to be true that Omicron made mandates make no sense, keep in mind these rules were in response to the US' implementation, announced in October of last year.[3] Canada implemented these to sync up and provide clarity at the borders in January, when then American rules went into effect.[4] [1]: https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/hospitalizations [2]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/covid-19-update-ontario-1.6324211 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/covid-19-update-ontar... [3]: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/10/12/secretary-mayorkas-allow-fully-vaccinated-travelers-canada-and-mexico-enter-us-land https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/10/12/secretary-mayorkas-allow... [4]: https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canada-s-vaccine-mandate-for-cross-border-truckers-is-now-in-effect-1.5741561 https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canada-s-vaccine-mandate-for-c...
    • NoPie 5y ago
      Two remarks about this: 1) About half of those people in hospitals were vaccinated. 2) Vaccine mandates do not considerably improve vaccination update, especially among elderly who benefit the most from vaccination. As for the US rules, both countries ignore science on this. Nothing good came out of it.
      • BeefWellington 5y ago
• barelysapient 5y ago
  This article is an eye opener. A liberal modern economy de-platforming their citizens without due process. Gross.
• nickspacek 5y ago
  Tweeted this the other day: Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem like that much to require that: > A person must not participate in a public assembly that may reasonably be expected to lead to a breach of the peace by: > > (a) the serious disruption of the movement of persons or goods or the serious interference with trade; > (b) the interference with the functioning of critical infrastructure; or > (c) the support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property. I think it's possible to respect that approach, but still be mad as hell and get your point across.
  • kelnos 5y ago
    Not sure what your point is here, though. I agree with you, but the right way to deal with people who violate this is to arrest them, charge them with a crime, and put them on trial. Not freezing their bank accounts without due process or recourse. The latter is undemocratic and authoritarian.
    • srcreigh 5y ago
      Agreed. I've watched the news this past week. We somehow went from A) allowing most illegal activities to B) completely disallowing any form of actual protest. (EDIT: according to rescripting, there are protests still happening in Ottawa. See thread [0]) [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30434974 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30434974 They are clearing the entire city. Anybody who doesn't work or live in Ottawa is not allowed to be there - you get arrested for being there. The new Ottawa police chief said something to the effect of "We are doing everything we can to ensure there are no more protests happening in Ottawa." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWygfG3D9g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRWygfG3D9g I wish all these law enforcement actions came along with official instructions for how to legally protest. Right now protesting is simply not allowed.
      • cardy31 5y ago
        Right but it will be allowed again like next week. After a three week occupation, clearing things out for a few days seems pretty sane.
• nati0n 5y ago
  Very lengthy read, but worthwhile and stayed out of the politics well.
• exabrial 5y ago
• stephc_int13 5y ago
  • shagie 5y ago
    Is the government that is being advocated for by the protesters more authoritarian than the one that currently in place even with expansion of powers, is this a move to "adopting the methods of the CCP" or is this "realizing that the current tolerance promoted is not able to cope with philosophies espoused by the protesters"? My take on this is much of this is based on some form of accelerationism and a "burn it down and we'll build it again." And given the views of the people promoting this, I tend to doubt that they'll make something better afterwards either.
• sleepingadmin 5y ago
  There will be many history books written on what has happened and is about to happen. I hope I get to read them, maybe I will even write one. This will be an impossible subject to wade through due to the very charged reality of what has gone down. Preconceived perceptions are broken. I respect Bill Maher's opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i72czkSUsM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i72czkSUsM I respect Jimmy Dore's opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUNnGdv8ceM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUNnGdv8ceM One of the best objective timelines I have read on this subject to date: https://quillette.com/2022/02/21/the-ottawa-trucker-protest-was-disruptive-the-hysterical-reaction-to-it-was-worse/ https://quillette.com/2022/02/21/the-ottawa-trucker-protest-...
  • kelnos 5y ago
    I was with you after watching the Maher video, but Dore is operating on false assumptions. Vaccine passports won't "track wherever you go for the rest of your life". Getting vaccinated doesn't "only protect you". Stopped watching after barely 30 seconds.
    • sleepingadmin 5y ago
      >I was with you after watching the Maher video, but Dore is operating on false assumptions. Vaccine passports won't "track wherever you go for the rest of your life". Getting vaccinated doesn't "only protect you". Stopped watching after barely 30 seconds. 20 minute video, I'm sure he's going to say stuff. I'll even say that I tend not to agree with him on many things. He's a bernie bro and I'm certainly not. But the point I was making, the shit going down in Canada is real and hard pill to swallow. If you wish to ignore jimmy dore, fine. Did you read the article?
• t0bia_s 5y ago
  Another reason to have decentralisation in financial system. I'm not for cryptocurrency but this excess in democratic state is exactly what brings people to alternatives, ie Bitcoin.
• anamax 5y ago
  I wonder what the reaction would have been if Trump had done something similar during the "mostly peaceful" protests about 18 months ago? There wasn't much/any honking, but there was some looting and burning.
  • theandrewbailey 5y ago
    IIRC, Trump offered to send in help, but his offers were declined. Any law enforcement failures back then should rightfully be placed on local and state authorities.
• ipaddr 5y ago
  The people cheering for this are the ones who will be camplaining when it gets used against all future protests. Canada has dropped many rankings on the democracy scale.
• dd36 5y ago
  Pardon my ignorance, absent any guise of protest, can people be paid to block bridges and roads? Is there any other legal mechanism to combat organized disruption?
  • ipaddr 5y ago
    Laws exist they were just not enforced until the act was called.
• weeblewobble 5y ago
  Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any references to any specific incidences or examples of a person having their accounts frozen for simply donating to the protest. Can anyone provide a reliable source of this happening? Since it's the whole point of the alarmism in the article it seems an important thing to establish. This article https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/02/21/convoy-protesters-bank-accounts/ https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/02/21/convoy-protesters-b... isn't quite a debunking but certainly throws some cold water on this claim. Although it's not really explicitly claimed in the article that this is actually happening, just strongly implied. I wonder if that is intentional.
  • Traster 5y ago
    Yeah I think this is the real key, basically the emergency powers are all or nothing. They're designed for an absolute emergency, so it's perfectly reasonable to have the ability to freeze accounts and do all sorts of extreme stuff. It's not like the emergency provisions were designed specifically for this process, they're designed for everything from a natural disaster to a long term pattern of terror attacks or act of war. So the question isn't "Is it reasonable to have the power to do this in this specific case". The question really should be, are the powers actually being exercised in this way. It seems pretty clear that they aren't. So all this outrage about freezing accounts for donating to a political course are outrage over something that doesn't seem to have actually happened.
  • MaxMoney 5y ago
  • BoGs83 5y ago
    Exactly, the RCMP has not been guiding the banks to freeze the accounts [0]. RCMP and Banks state accounts for donors will not be frozen [1]. At worst RCMP can advise the banks which makes the decision (source from Federal MP) [2]. The government is also working on a plan where you can appeal your account being frozen. [0] https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rcmp-says-it-did-not-provide-names-of-convoy-donors-to-financial-institutions-1.5790096 https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/rcmp-says-it-did-not-provide... [1] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-rcmp-banks-and-ottawa-say-convoy-protest-donors-wont-have-accounts/?utm_medium=Referrer:+Social+Network+/+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-rcmp-banks-an... [2] https://twitter.com/MarkGerretsen/status/1495381037274251268 https://twitter.com/MarkGerretsen/status/1495381037274251268
• motohagiography 5y ago
  I'd like to be wrong, as I'm asserting this based on the logic of a known playbook for these kind of things. If I am not wrong, it would be evidence they are using that playbook with some implied ends in mind. The provisions expire ostensibly in 30 days, but what's pretty clear is there are exceptions for certain protests, and what I forsee occuring is there will be provocative so-called "counter protests," backed by the governing parties, which will result in "random" violence (some staged, some provoked), that will be used as a further pretext to extend and augment the powers into an indefinite emergency. (remind me: April 15, 2022) The playbook is a mix of colour revolution tactics with Arendt's description of totalitarian movements using absurdity and chaos via other movements to neutralize people at large. In case you were still catching up, it would now seem uncontroversial that the Emergencies Act is at least how far they are willing to go to implement digital identity via vaccine passports. Simply, the Canadian government has metastasized. I'm not neutral at all, but I like to constantly reassess whether my views have predictive power. The outs I see are: a) tension fizzles and cools off, vaccine passports get pulled as promised in 2 weeks, act expires in 30 days, life goes back to mostly normal, pandemic finished like it is in dozens of other countries around the world. b) narrative changes and now that truckers are moved, no reason to pull back vaccine passports anymore, and some excuse is contrived to maintain them - permanently divided society results. c) government becomes histrionic and starts escalating reaction to imaginary threats, adds additional powers, starts purging society groups from financial system and employment - result is decade+ of strife. d) government just says fuck it, Queen dies, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and potentially France form a new post-national bloc with only nominal local rule, similar to the EU, but mainly operated by a transnational committee that implements a social credit system to engineer a utopian experiment that accepts a lot of casulties. These are coarse grained scenarios, but as poles for likely outcomes, they're the waypoints I'm using. Most people think option a) is plausible, but I think their hope obscures their ability to see incentives. Option b) is a verifiable bet in a couple of weeks, and if b, then it's a quesiton of whether it's in service of c) or d).
  • motohagiography 5y ago
    Reading news today(feb 23, 2022) that Emergencies Act is being revoked, let's see if scenario a) plays out, or b) plays out.
• dang 5y ago
  All: if you're going to post in this thread, please make sure you're up to date on the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. That includes not posting flamewar comments, not calling names, not crossing into personal attack, not being snarky, and not using the thread for political or ideological battle. You can make your substantive points without any of that, and we want curious conversation here.
• buraktamturk 5y ago
  The same exact thing happened after 15 July 2016 (Erdogan staged a coup attempt on his own) in Turkey. To put it simply it was the beginning of the genocide of peaceful Gulen movement members or anyone who had any kind of connection with them in the past. The bank that I had account + credit card was shut down (stolen by Turkish state) with the decree laws. My brother had an additional account in another bank. That bank terminated his account and credit card using decree laws as a reason, no court order. We lost our jobs, money and freedom in a single night. Our company was shut down by the state without due process. My relatives, friends and colleagues got jailed and tortured by Turkish police and soldiers. We got fired and almost none of us were able to get employment (we got work permits revoked) code 36 (fired due to decree laws) is on social insurance records. University degrees of some of us cancelled by the decree law. There are thousands of things I want to tell but it is too long. At the end my brother became a permanent resident in Canada via asylum and I am an asylum seeker in Greece (decisions take way long here). My relatives and friends still in jail in Turkey. To put it simply, what Canadian government is planning right now is a clear way to go for genocide. Killing people economically is a part of genocide method (don't ask me where I know it).
  • ipaddr 5y ago
    I remember when this happened but I was confused by the lack of western support either officially or through press coverage. When the Saudi prince locked up his brothers under false charged pulling a complete power coup and no one said much I wondered why.
  • dash2 5y ago
    Your comment is really interesting but it is probably getting downvoted because of the last paragraph. Accusing the Canadian government of planning genocide is way over the top.
    • TimTheTinker 5y ago
      20th century history ought to teach us that too much power in government almost invariably leads to mass murder of some group or another: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll#List_of_political_leaders_and_regimes_by_death_toll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic... Given that modern technology enables silencing political opposition without necessarily murdering them, some might argue that we'll see fewer murders in the future. But China is a good counter-argument to that assertion. It's very technologically advanced, yet its totalitarian regime is continuing to commit atrocities (murders, work camps, prison sentences without due process, etc.) against Uyghurs.
• nickysielicki 5y ago
  Occupy Wall Street was started by a group of organized Canadians and they blocked access to NYSE facilities. OWS was obviously an occupation (it’s right there in the name), but the better question is: was OWS a protest, too? If so, why can’t this be called one as well? There are generally more parallels between OWS and the truckers than people are willing to recognize, because there’s been a hell of an inversion: if you supported OWS 10 years ago you probably don’t like the truckers today and if you like the truckers you probably weren’t for OWS 10 years ago. There are a handful of Tim Pools that like both, and there are elites that disliked both, but the average person has to do some gymnastics. All that I ask is that everyone is consistent: if OWS is a protest, then this is too. If you don’t like that Americans funded the truckers, you have to be willing to call out that OWS took place in NYC but formed from a Canadian nonprofit.
  • jsnodlin 5y ago
  • michael1999 5y ago
    Good point. If it hadn’t been for the honking and intimidation, I bet the party could still be going on. But the truckers imposed themselves on too many people to tolerate. They seemed to take pleasure in making Ottawa residents miserable. They had limited ability or willingness to police themselves which OWS at least tried to do.
  • joe_the_user 5y ago
    All that I ask is that everyone is consistent: if OWS is a protest, then this is too. I have no idea why whether this event is a protest or not is considered the key question. Both movements could be protests and still be diametrically opposed in aims, approaches and broad political direction. Protests often go beyond the legal bounds of free speech. Yeah. But obviously go far enough beyond legal bounds and you may find yourself in jail. And if you've done that in a fashion that's mostly oriented to harming the average person, then you may well deserve to be in jail by a strong concensus. But sure, you're still protesting. Edit: A simple way to put that occurs to me is, sure, "people on the left support some protests that break some laws for some causes they consider important". But that doesn't mean they would or anyone would support "any protest that breaks any law for anything the protesters consider important"
• YaBomm 5y ago
• TacticalCoder 5y ago
  My wife just asked me: haven't the truckers now basically been proven right? I mean: in the end what they were really protesting against were measures they did find totalitarian (btw I'm double vaccinated and so is my wife, out of our free will, so we're not anti-vaxx). The measures taken do not look like something normal to do in a democracy: invoking an emergency act and using laws meant for war times... Aren't some people who were not sympathetic to their cause now going to think they were right all along? I'm asking because I just explained the situation to my wife and her first reaction was precisely what I mentioned: "so they were right all along?" I didn't look at it from that angle but there are obviously people who will.
  • vaidhy 5y ago
    Is it a slightly different twist on the question of whether a tolerant society tolerate the intolerant? It seems to me like the protestors were already treated very liberally and their continued escalation and radicalization led to stronger response. On a smaller scale, you cannot sit on your neighbour's doorstep screaming they hate you and when you get evicted, claim you were right all along.
    • _dain_ 5y ago
      The way you deal with that is by arresting them and charging them with specific crimes. You do not just get to seize all of their assets without due process. The protest was already cleared away using conventional policing methods yet this law still remains on the books and they are going after protestors retroactively. It is vindictive and despotic.
• robocat 5y ago
  For anybody wondering about the meme terms wordcel and shape rotator that appear later in the article: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cultures/wordcel-shape-rotator-mathcel https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cultures/wordcel-shape-rotato... https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/wordcels-numbercels-definition https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/wordcels-numbercels-defi...
• kragen 5y ago
  Well, as I said before — another day, another answer to "What is Bitcoin good for?" This time the answer is "It's useful to make your mortgage payment when one of your family members donates to a trucker protest that successfully applies pressure to the Canadian government, which then 'freezes' your bank account until the emergency legislation expires." The quoted tweets point out that legal pornographers and legal gun shops have been subjected to similar, but less transparent, measures. Of course the law says it applies equally to cryptocurrencies, but it really only applies to intermediaries. The point of cryptocurrencies is that they make you independent of intermediaries; you can possess your own coins instead of lending them to a bank or a stockbroker. This is part of what the Nunchuk response quoted explains. Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30408611 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30408611
  • kragen 5y ago
    Update: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-event-feb23-1.6361847 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-event-feb23-1.63618...
• cardy31 5y ago
  Wow the libertarian tech bros are really coming out in force on this one. Unlike in the US, most Canadians are okay with trading some small freedoms for the greater good. As a Canadian I have no problem with these power being used in this extreme case. After three weeks of occupying downtown Ottawa with the demand that the government be dismantled, they are no longer peaceful protesters. They are a group trying to remove a democratically elected western government. It makes perfect sense that funding for a group like that (a terrorist group) would be blocked. I am glad that unlike the US, Canada is not allowing the far right to operate unimpeded. Homegrown right wing extremism is a growing problem in the US and is spilling over into Canada (Thanks Facebook) and I’m happy to see it being put down in this small way.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• loufe 5y ago
  I live in the downtown area of Ottawa and found the protests to be annoying but respected their right to do so. It's strange seeing the hyperbole that pops up in the news contradicting what you can see with your own eyes outside. I have to go through police checkpoints to get to my home. I'm dealing with political divisions ripping through my friends and family right now. I'm scared of how this is pushing us to more centralized, unchecked, and unjust power in the hands of government.
• bryanlarsen 5y ago
  Update: Bank accounts are already being unfrozen. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergency-bank-measures-finance-committee-1.6360769 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergency-bank-measures-fin...
• 0xTJ 5y ago
  Anyone reading this should realize that these "protests" have been completely beyond what's reasonable. They're fighting against sensible measures made to protect the population, and have made absolute idiots of themselves. They don't have any respect from the average Canadian. They are an incredibly disruptive, sometimes violent group, with no respect for basic human decency. I know people who were forced out of their homes because you go crazy after that much continuous honking. I don't have the slightest shred of pity for anyone involved in these "protests", or anyone who supported them. It's a disgrace that strong action wasn't taken more quickly.
• Tomminn 5y ago
  If anyone is interested in the strategy I took to try defend New Zealand from being torn apart by the Convoy protests, I've documented it here. https://www.facebook.com/thomas.minnee/posts/10160089120917456 https://www.facebook.com/thomas.minnee/posts/101600891209174...
  • HWR_14 5y ago
    Is there a non-Facebook mirror? I find that many people oppose even viewing posts on Facebook these days.