The government of Canada does not have the permanent power to require financial institutions to cease dealing with certain people. It has this power until the emergency declaration expires, see Section 18 of the relevant Act: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/section-18.html
I agree w/ you mostly, but you’re hyperventilating and going to dark place, so I’m going to add to the story. Hope this helps:
let’s look at the alternatives. You say that people get arrested when they protest and that’s the right thing to do. But in every single interaction with the police, individuals waive the right to life if they fumble with their wallet. In your mind risking the lives of several hundred hotheads is less totalitarian than a reversible nonviolent intervention. I’m going to be that guy and say it, your privilege is showing.
You failed to mention how Big rigs are practically military weapons. You failed to mention how the truckers are armed. You failed to mention that the truckers were about to get reinforcements from the United States a country with ten times the population. Trudeau was able to de-escalate the situation without a bloodbath. They live long enough to vote again and protest again (preferably peacefully).
there’s precedence for waving the right to transact. In the past a person could be declared an “outlaw” and would lose their property and their ability to get into contracts. in more recent times people would be blackballed. For example Rosa Parks nearly starved to death in the late 50s. She was blackballed from any job or charity and anyone who offered her charity was also threatened with being blackballed. This whole ordeal might be a step back but it’s not new in anyway. Maybe we should all be thinking of how we’re going to protest like poor people. How are we going to protest with out money?
I can only hope everyone remembers this when governments attempt to discontinue the use of cash. Having a month’s worth of cash is far superior to any crypto-based solution.
Stop being so gullible. Understand that the danger comes from "your side" not the "other side". The vigilance that keeps a free country safe is the vigilance of policing your own side. In practice, this involves a lot of lying and deception. Lets walk through an example:
In the straightforward "by the book" means of handling a power-hungry executive, the country simply votes him out, or, in the direst of emergencies, the parliament (in Canada) makes a vote of no confidence and removes him.
Too late for that, but we can see obvious flaws with the plan too. Many party members, despite whatever misgivings they might have privately, would be unwilling to publicly take such an action. It's also obvious that this is a non-starter because despite the widespread distaste for Trudeau's actions, you don't actually see anyone calling for his head. Though it's obviously deserved.
So... there's little prospect for punishing a PM after the fact. Like tic-tac-toe and Global Thermonuclear War, the only way to win is not to play.
In contrast, actually winning requires involvement. The only way to win is to play. In this case, it means policing your own side. You know your own side better. You know the people you select for leadership positions. You know which ones are basically good people and which are cutthroats. You know which ones truly care about democracy and which ones will stand up in front of cameras giggling about trashing civil liberties. Those folks you have to work to divert away from positions of power has much as possible. This takes constant, unending, unrecognized and thankless work.
Unfortunately, that work hasn't been done, and from the top down the ranks are full of people who will gleefully trample on your civil liberties. Getting rid of them is going to be difficult, but the correct steps are still the same. At every opportunity, understand who these people are, and sideline, reject, remove, and diminish as many as you can who would misuse their power so gratuitously.
Great post, thank you.
The government of Canada does not have the permanent power to require financial institutions to cease dealing with certain people. It has this power until the emergency declaration expires, see Section 18 of the relevant Act: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/section-18.html
It can also be revoked by Parliament, which is not the same as the government, especially now as the Liberals don't have a majority in the House of Commons. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/section-21.html
Section 58 lays out how the declaration must be considered and voted upon by both the House and the Senate, if either house votes it down the emergency declaration is revoked: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/section-58.html
Section 26 (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-4.5/section-26.html) lays out how the temporary regulations are revoked automatically once the emergency declaration is over.
In case you haven't seen, the regulations are here: https://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2022/2022-02-15-x1/html/sor-dors22-eng.html
"Without the freedom to transact there is no freedom."
"The exercise of rights costs money."
These sound like a couple of rather strong arguments for a guaranteed basic income and to a lesser extent against economic inequality.
Actually, "tru" in French ("trou") means hole. "Trou d'eau" means "hole of water" or something like "hole made of water."
I agree w/ you mostly, but you’re hyperventilating and going to dark place, so I’m going to add to the story. Hope this helps:
let’s look at the alternatives. You say that people get arrested when they protest and that’s the right thing to do. But in every single interaction with the police, individuals waive the right to life if they fumble with their wallet. In your mind risking the lives of several hundred hotheads is less totalitarian than a reversible nonviolent intervention. I’m going to be that guy and say it, your privilege is showing.
You failed to mention how Big rigs are practically military weapons. You failed to mention how the truckers are armed. You failed to mention that the truckers were about to get reinforcements from the United States a country with ten times the population. Trudeau was able to de-escalate the situation without a bloodbath. They live long enough to vote again and protest again (preferably peacefully).
there’s precedence for waving the right to transact. In the past a person could be declared an “outlaw” and would lose their property and their ability to get into contracts. in more recent times people would be blackballed. For example Rosa Parks nearly starved to death in the late 50s. She was blackballed from any job or charity and anyone who offered her charity was also threatened with being blackballed. This whole ordeal might be a step back but it’s not new in anyway. Maybe we should all be thinking of how we’re going to protest like poor people. How are we going to protest with out money?
I can only hope everyone remembers this when governments attempt to discontinue the use of cash. Having a month’s worth of cash is far superior to any crypto-based solution.
What to do?
Stop being so gullible. Understand that the danger comes from "your side" not the "other side". The vigilance that keeps a free country safe is the vigilance of policing your own side. In practice, this involves a lot of lying and deception. Lets walk through an example:
In the straightforward "by the book" means of handling a power-hungry executive, the country simply votes him out, or, in the direst of emergencies, the parliament (in Canada) makes a vote of no confidence and removes him.
Too late for that, but we can see obvious flaws with the plan too. Many party members, despite whatever misgivings they might have privately, would be unwilling to publicly take such an action. It's also obvious that this is a non-starter because despite the widespread distaste for Trudeau's actions, you don't actually see anyone calling for his head. Though it's obviously deserved.
So... there's little prospect for punishing a PM after the fact. Like tic-tac-toe and Global Thermonuclear War, the only way to win is not to play.
In contrast, actually winning requires involvement. The only way to win is to play. In this case, it means policing your own side. You know your own side better. You know the people you select for leadership positions. You know which ones are basically good people and which are cutthroats. You know which ones truly care about democracy and which ones will stand up in front of cameras giggling about trashing civil liberties. Those folks you have to work to divert away from positions of power has much as possible. This takes constant, unending, unrecognized and thankless work.
Unfortunately, that work hasn't been done, and from the top down the ranks are full of people who will gleefully trample on your civil liberties. Getting rid of them is going to be difficult, but the correct steps are still the same. At every opportunity, understand who these people are, and sideline, reject, remove, and diminish as many as you can who would misuse their power so gratuitously.