Tag: Canada

Categories
Accountability Fourth Amendment rights international affairs media and media people

Freedom Isn’t the Danger

Justin Trudeau, freedom, authoritarianism

After reading the Honorable Justice Paul Rouleau’s “Report of the Public Inquiry into the 2022 Public Order Emergency,” you may demand a palette cleanser.

Matt Taibbi wrote a full article, “The West’s Betrayal of Freedom.” 

I’m going to quote an anarchist. 

For both Taibbi and me, Justice Rouleau’s bizarre defense of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s leveraging of emergency powers to freeze truckers’ bank accounts during last year’s lockdown protests leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

If you have a taste for freedom.

Which people in the news media, as well as in government (but do I repeat myself?), decreasingly demonstrate. Mr. Taibbi, reacting to both Rouleau’s report and mainstream journalistic coverage, notes the general tenor of both, which he says read “like all the tsk-​tsking editorials in the West you’ve read since Trump, which used every crisis to hype the idea that freedom = danger.”

Rouleau excuses the tyrannical (anti-​protest, anti-​free-​speech, anti-​due-​process) Canadian government’s attack upon the truckers because it “met a threshold.” You see, “Freedom cannot exist without order.”

But that’s placing the matter downside up. Freedom provides its own order. 

It just so often happens to be an order that tyrants don’t like.

Freedom creates order: when neither you nor I infringe upon the other’s sphere of life, that is an epitome of orderliness. Crime and government (but do I repeat myself?) upset that harmony.

“Liberty,” explained P. J. Proudhon, is “not the daughter but the mother of order.”*

When politicians forget that freedom provides the order we need, they make anarchists look good.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

freedom,order, morn

* Proudhon, the first major writer to treat “anarchist” as a non-​pejorative, was arguably not an Antifa-​type anarchist — and the full quotation, presented here on Tuesday, talks about a Republic. Make of that what you will.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder​.ai

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights free trade & free markets too much government

The California-​Canada Connection

Canada, California, Medical License, consensus, censorship

What do California and Canada have in common, aside from bone-​chilling temperatures?

Well, the fact that they’re trying to chill the discourse of doctors.

In California, a new law empowers medical boards to punish doctors who spread “misinformation” about COVID-​19. The misinformative nature of a stated view about the pandemic is allegedly proved by the mere fact that it contradicts a putative scientific “consensus.”

Such laws rely on misinformation for their very existence. 

When coping with complex, incomplete, sometimes murky evidence, do scientists and others ever simply disagree, even fundamentally, on the road to scientific “consensus”? Can a consensus ever be wrong? Does anybody ever hew to an asserted consensus out of fearful desire to conform rather than honest intellectual agreement?

To ask these questions is to answer them. But let’s move on.

To Canada — and the case of Dr. Jordan Peterson, whose professional status in the country is being jeopardized because of medical and/​or political views, like opinions criticizing “climate change models,” “surgery on gender dysphoric minors,” and Canadian officials who threatened “to apprehend the children of the Trucker Convoy protesters.”

Stated on social media, these opinions are apparently incendiary enough — i.e., candid enough — to vex Canada’s powerful medical censors.

According to Peterson, the Ontario College of Psychologists demands that he submit to “mandatory social-​media communication retraining” because of his views. If he doesn’t comply, he may lose his license.

Such repressive impulses, he says, are “way more widespread than you might think.”

It’s cold outside.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with DALL-​E2

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability general freedom international affairs

Chain of Command?

truckers, Canada, Justin Trudeau, civil rights violations

Early this year, Canadian truckers rebelled against the Canadian government’s tyrannical response to the pandemic by protesting en masse — in their trucks.

The truckers objected to being forced to accept experimental non-​vaccines in order to go back and forth across the Canada‑U.S. border.

The Canadian government could have instantly solved the problem by rescinding the nonsensical travel ban and letting truckers truck freely.

Instead, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau deployed a dormant triple-​the-​tyranny measure called the Emergencies Act to make the truckers regret that they had ever dared lift a pinky in protest against the assault on their lives and livelihoods. The insanity included imposing freezes on their bank accounts and suspending their vehicle insurance.

Now Trudeau’s actions are being investigated in the Canadian parliament.

And guess what’s come to light? You’ll get a kick out of this if you’re one of my United States readers: Trudeau was urged to do something about those darn truckers by none other than the Biden administration.

February 10: the director of the U.S. National Economic Council spoke to Canadian officials. 

Same day: U.S. Transportation Boss Pete Buttigieg asked the Canadian Transportation Boss about Canada’s plan to cure the protests. 

February 11: President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau spoke.

Don’t worry, Trudeau told Biden. He had a plan to end the protests. Somehow I doubt that Biden said “Fine, so long as it’s not about stomping the truckers even harder.”

Three days later, Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act.

Correlation ain’t causation, but a schedule of influence indicates … almost … a conspiracy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with DALL-​E2

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
education and schooling First Amendment rights general freedom

Squelched in Quebec

Quebec, censorship, free speech, Covid

It’s a Université Laval thing; a Quebec thing: a Canada thing.

These are no places to be if you want to debate questions about pandemics and vaccines now “settled” by government-​mandated consensus. Professors Patrick Provost and Nicolas Derome, who both teach at Laval, recently got the message in spades.

Provost, professor of microbiology and immunology, has been suspended for two months without pay for doubting the wisdom of giving COVID-​19 vaccines to children. Kids face only a very low risk of serious consequences from the disease and a nonzero risk of being hurt by vaccination.

A newspaper that quoted his thoughts on the data and on free speech has cravenly deleted the offending article, stressing that “we can’t subscribe to” Provost’s views.

Laval also suspended Derome, professor of molecular biology, for expressing doubts about the value of vaccinating kids.

Canada’s authoritarians enjoy no monopoly on smothering academic and other speech. Many governments strive to more diligently repress their citizens. But Canadian officials fancy themselves pioneers in this area, and perhaps they are.

The hazards of squelching discourse about life-​and-​death matters should be obvious. It’s in our interest that scientists and everybody be able to freely investigate and discuss facts and interpretations without worrying whether an unauthorized assertion will cost the speaker two months of salary.

Or worse.

But some care nothing about logic and evidence — or, apparently, how useful these are to both individuals and to society at large.

It’s not an attitude consistent with … Common Sense.

I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom ideological culture Regulating Protest

Sources of Trudeau 2022

Justin Trudeau, authoritarian

The willingness of Canada’s thug-​in-​chief to so obnoxiously penalize protest — for one, “de-​banking” trucker-​protesters and supporters alike without even fake court orders — has shocked many of civilized sensibility.

Shouldn’t be surprising, though. It’s nothing new either in Justin Trudeau’s conduct or in that of Western governments. (The Canadian parliament has now endorsed the crackdown.)

David Solway reports that Trudeau’s reign has long been blighted by tyrannical policies as well as by overt sympathy for terrorists, dictators, and dictatorship.

And Glenn Greenwald observes that it has become standard in the West for many “who most flamboyantly proclaim that they are fighting fascists [to] wield the defining weapons of despotism” — weapons like squelching dissent (directly or indirectly by enlisting private firms to function as agents of repression) and punishing dissenters without trial.

Greenwald relates the example of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. When the U.S. government found no way to criminally charge him, it pressured firms to terminate his financial accounts and kick WikiLeaks off private servers.

Such tactics as pressuring, or ordering, companies to censor and financially ostracize political opponents “without a whiff of due process” are now part of the standard governmental toolkit.

The scale on which Trudeau has been doing this, and the flagrancy of it, may seem new in North America. But he is relying on well-​established precedent. Pre-​pandemic precedent.

But the framework for opposing this new authoritarianism has more precedent. Alberta’s premier, Jason Kenney, has rightly sued Trudeau and the Canadian government for abuse of authority in resorting to emergency powers.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights general freedom social media

#GoPoundSand

Give Send Go, crowd funding, Canada, truckers, GoFundMe

The exact words of GiveSendGo, on Twitter:

“Know this! Canada has absolutely ZERO jurisdiction over how we manage our funds here at GiveSendGo. All funds for EVERY campaign on GiveSendGo flow directly to the recipients of those campaigns, not least of which is The Freedom Convoy campaign.”

Just the attitude one would hope for.

This wonderful statement is in response to assertions by the government of Ontario that they’re preventing the Freedom Convoy from getting the funds via GiveSendGo that truckers need to eat, gas up after police steal their gas, etc. All the standard expenses involved in being a national (and now international) trucker convey fighting tyranny.

Compare the inspiring policies of the folks at GiveSendGo with the dreary interventionism of the pinch-​mouthed overlords at GoFundMe.

In addition to shutting down the Freedom Convoy campaign, GoFundMe briefly but seriously planned to steal some of the donations that had already been made.

GoFundMe has also shut down other fundraising campaigns to oppose mask and vaccine mandates, campaigns to help Kyle Rittenhouse and to help conservative students harassed at Arizona State University, a campaign to investigate voter fraud, etc.

We have to think long and hard. If we need to raise money for a purpose the tyrannical left would disapprove, are we better off going with new-​kid-​on-​the-​block GiveSendGo or better-​established GoFundMe?

I hope that you ponder this question for the same full millisecond that I did.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts