Canadian Government Okay With Ukrainian Protestors Throwing Molotov Cocktails During Protest

Does This Really Make Sense?

Does This Really Make Sense?

Now that a truce has been reached in Ukraine that no one is happy with and the people who fought in the streets will not accept as long as the Ukrainian president does not resign or get removed from office,  I ask what really was gained by the throwing of Molotov cocktails, the many deaths on both sides and the total failure and departure from the basic  fundamentals and principles of democracy and rule of law, by those in opposition and those actually on the ground?  What is more disturbing for me is the assertion by our Prime Minister that it is some how okay for the people of a country to rise up and use violent methods such as seen used by some Ukrainian citizens  to achieve regime change, policy change and to voice their displeasure with their leader, when they know that they as a government no matter what the people felt, no matter how much support they had, or from whom, would never allow this to happen in Canada.  Since protesting in the most peaceful forms are almost against the law in Canada and it has been stated that protesting is a privilege in Canada and not a right, I am honestly trying to understand the Canadian, European and American position on what is happening in Ukraine.  What is the Canadian position on:

  1. What constitutes an illegal strike, protest, sit in, or occupation of public property in Canada.
  2. What the government considers is the correct amount of force to used by police, army reserves, or soldiers to put down a strike, protest, sit in, or occupation of public property they figure has violated Canadian law.
  3. Whether or not there is ever a good enough reason for a citizen, or any group of citizens to take up arms against  the police, the reserves, or the army  in an attempt to force the downfall of a corrupt  and unpopular government, or the resignation of a corrupt and unpopular political leader.

One only has to go back and review what happened under this government when Stephen Harper hosted the G-8 summit to understand that Canada has uses unwarranted abusive force to put down political protest all the time.  I see reports of people in the Ukraine lining up and making and distributing molotov cocktails to throw at police and other members of Ukrainian law enforcement and I wonder what would be considered enough dissatisfaction by people to allow this to happen in Canada, the USA, or Europe?  I am with the people of the Ukraine and my heart goes out to them, but that does not mean that I cannot see the inconsistencies when it comes to the western worlds views on what it will tolerate and what force it is prepared to use to put down what it considers illegal strikes, protests, sit ins, or occupations of public property in its own towns, cities and communities by their citizens and what they think is acceptable behavior by the citizens of Ukraine and should be tolerated and dealt with by negotiation and not force government of the Ukraine.

We do not see cities on fire in Canada during strikes, protests, sit ins, or occupation of public property, because the people are not angry enough to do it, but rather because in Canada we know as citizens that this will not be tolerated and we know this because way before it gets to that. When we are still protesting quietly (The Occupy Montreal Protest for example), the police will break things up. There are rules that must be followed to make the strike, protest, sit in, or occupation of public property legal in the eyes of the government and local law enforcement.  If these rules are not followed to the letter the government will order local law enforcement to shut down what it considers an illegal strike, protest, sit in, or occupation of public property and if they are met with resistance they are to use any force they deem necessary to put down those in violation.

I would suggest that the First Nations of this country might feel that they have been pushed too far for far too long now by consecutive governments over the years that refuse to hear them, honor their treaties and agreements and keep them living in 3rd world conditions.  When asked why there are more 1st nations people in Canadian jails when they represent the lesser of the population, the Prime Minister of Canada says, “I guess that some people are just predisposed to break the law,” totally ignoring their circumstances brought on by a government and society that just does not seem to care about their plight and attributing their high numbers in our jails as some kind of problem in their genes, much like the ideology that Aboriginals can’t drink alcoholic beverages, because something in their genes makes them not be able to tolerated it.  Are we suggesting as a nation and as a government that a people dissatisfied with the way their government is treating them, or listening to them, or refuses to resign upon  its citizens demand should take up arms at some point and revolt?  This used to be called treason and to even utter such words was punishable by death.

The separatists in Quebec have long felt that the federal government does not listen to them, treats them unfairly and was trying to strip them of their language, culture and very existence and at one time thought to use violence to achieve its goals.  This attempt at violence to achieve their goal was called acts against the government, kidnapping and murder as it should have been, or so I thought was the position of all Canadians and all politicians despite what political party they represented and what goals they had politically or what their agenda was. does Quebec’s separatists have the right to take up arms and try to force their federal government to listen to them and release them from the federation that is Canada? I think that this is what we are seeing in Ukraine; people with a very good reason to rise up against their government and demand that they step down, but can Canada as a democratic state condone and in fact support the use of violence and treason to achieve regime change all the while maintaining that we are a country that believes in the democratic principles of governance?

I would argue that the minorities of Quebec and the Anglophones living in Quebec feel they have the right to fight for their very survival as well and if they dared to make distribute and throw Molotov cocktails at police and were responsible for killing over 7 policemen that neither the federal government or the  provincial government would be concerned with the reasoning of the killers/citizens, but would move to put down the uprising with all the force required and negotiations would only start once the violence stopped, because the democratic principles we live under.

As I said before, I think Canada was being hypocritical when it backed and encouraged the Ukrainian people to take up arms against its government as if it would allow such actions here. I also think that the government needs to rethink its position and the consequences of it, before suggesting to its own population that it is okay to take up arms to force a regime change if one feels ignored, or has another dispute about how they are being governed and that it is acceptable behaviour to burn down a city, kill law enforcement personnel in order to affect the overthrow of the Prime Minister, a Premiere or a Mayor, lest this country find itself reaping what it is so freely sowing the seeds of internationally.

About archemdis

I try to say what is on my mind and not hurt others, but some things need to be said whether they hurt or not and I do just that. I try to listen as well as talk, but my opinion is just that mine. You need not take it as your own, just respect the fact that I am entitled to it, as you are yours. I do read all comments, but will only answer, or allow to be displayed those which adress me by name, refer to the post by name in the comment, or that have been sent through the proper channels. In this manner I can tell whether the comment was meant for me and that it is not just spam.
This entry was posted in abuse of power, Canada, Government, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Canadian Government Okay With Ukrainian Protestors Throwing Molotov Cocktails During Protest

  1. Canada's full says:

    I noticed you said this “I guess I am a little disturbed at the way the government sticks it nose into anything to do with money, or how to keep Canada’s European race and heritage pure and multi ethnic free” in a post about Guy Turcotte, I have to disagree Canada is full of immigrants and the government was letting Chinese business men and woman in that were willing to loan 800000 dollars to the government. Even David Suzuki says Canada’s full of immigrants, so I have to disagree that the government is “trying to keep a European race”. Cantonese is the second most spoken language in Canada so I don’t where you live but Canada is full up on immigrants.


    • archemdis says:

      I have written over 500 posts and prefer that comments or questions are kept to what the post your commenting on is talking about, but if you intend to comment on another post could you at least give the name of the post you are talking about so that I can refer to it and see if indeed you are quoting me correctly. Having said that I did not make the statement that Canada needs to insure that Canada immigration policy protects its European heritage, religion, culture and 2 official languages, that was Steven Harper the Prime Minister of Canada speaking, while defending the changes to the immigration act. I live in Montreal, Quebec where the government is taking away the rights of Anglophones and minorities. We have language police here and the Parti Quebecois is trying to pass into law its Quebec Charter of Values which would for one thing make it illegal for a person to wear any religious symbols save a crucifix if they work for the Quebec government. Would you not say that removing all languages from government forms except French and only allowing for the crucifix to be worn in government offices are in keeping with as you put it “trying to keep a European race?” I for one think that the Harper government cannot step in and help the people of Quebec, because they are guilty of the same racist, protectionist policies that the Quebec government employs. Lastly it has never been the Canadian way to limit immigration solely to those people who can afford to lend the Canadian government money. Is that what kind of people we have become that the value we place on getting Canadian citizenship is an $800,000 loan to the Canadian government? I personally liked it better when we were accepted refugees from all over the world and not only from countries that had trade value and cared about family reunification, before the citizenship for sale days of the Harper government. This is my opinion and I respect that you have yours and am truly sorry if my comments disturbed you. Thank you for taking the time to comment and good night to you.


Comments are closed.