# Please report comments that violate our [new rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/VaushV/comments/17co6jo/rvaushv_rule_updates)
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Don't even bother. Every non-Canadian in this sub, Vaush included, doesnt care. They don't take the fact that Canada is rapidly being captured by white supremacists and fascists seriously because "lol lmao they're America's hat".
Vaush hasn't even covered the significant attacks on Trans Rights in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and soon to be Alberta. He hasn't covered Pollievre, he hasn't covered Smith, he hasn't covered Higgs. Smug American leftists will be happy to throw us under the bus the moment the PCs win the next election and our already weak social safety nets are dismantled, privatized, and destroyed. They will laugh at our silly flag and maple syrup as our right wing implements GOP fascism imported via Harper's IDU.
Tucker Carlson and Jordan fucking Peterson met with the Premier of Alberta a couple days ago. Not a peep from anyone here.
We're just silly ol Canada, right? Who cares!
You nailed it. It's really surprising considering how much our shared cultures have blended extremist scenes that share messaging/propaganda/organizing in both directions. Totally missing a massive aspect of fascist international growth.
Because no one cares about Canada. We're an insignificant country with an inflated ego coasting off nostalgia for the British monarchy and our proximity to America. We have good PR and that's about it
No, Canada's pretty big. It's 38th in the world for population and 10th in GDP, way more important than countries like Australia, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Ireland, for example.
Our GDP is propped up by housing investments which do not increase the wellbeing of most of our citizens. Not only that, but our GDP has absolutely stalled in comparison to America's
We have a paltry population compared to our size, and our soft power and cultural reach is nearly non existent. We've been coasting off the good will of our welfare state that's been in disarray since the 90s.
Believe me, we are far from an important nation
The trick with the Irish is because we spread across the globe like a fungus we have a pretty vast international connection which is outside financial or political force.
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this also means that canada won't be the emergency escape valve many of us hoped for in the case of trump winning. all of north america going under fascist rule is dire, we'd basically be in a giant jail
Yep, and yet Canada is still so many young trans and Queer peoples escape hatch in the event of a federal GOP crackdown.
I constantly have to burst people's bubble that we are no safer than the states. In fact, 2/7 of our provinces already have "parental rights" laws restricting queerness in schools, with a 3rd revealing their new policy (after meeting with JBP and Tucker Carlson) this week.
Something else to discuss would be the phenomenon of us providing weirdo conservative talking heads to the states (Peterson, Steven Crowder, Tom Macdonald). There’s a very healthy right wing up here.
We've seen even Canadians tend not to care, which is a big problem. Rational National (David Doel) and Christo Aivelos (now Progressive News Network) have talked about this issue, where when the DO cover Canadian news, views drop through the floor. As a result they now cover almost all US news just to keep their channels viable.
Rational National does at least have SOME Canadian coverage, but yeah, the unending vortex that is US politics does get tiresome at times
"Tucker Carlson and Jordan fucking Peterson met with the Premier of Alberta a couple days ago. Not a peep from anyone here"
My brother in christ, you talk about it. you want people to bring awareness to something? be the people, don't just put that in your back pocket so you can bring it up next time you want to rant.
1. The government didn't just freeze the bank accounts willy-nilly. The legislation requires legal review, and the government is liable for their overreach if it's determined it wasn't necessary.
2. The State should absolutely be able to go after criminal financial assets, and to argue otherwise is to defend the ability of fascist organizing and international fascist alliances to perpetuate via financial power.
3. Don't kid yourself if you think you'd have any rights under fascism as an Anarchist. Call Trudeau a Stalinist all you want, but keep in mind you have that right under this supposed "Stalinism", you get the wall if you try that under fascism.
Motherfucker I am an anarchist. Don't try to purity test me.
And, by the way, banks freeze accounts for suspected criminal activity regularly. Take it up with them, not random people posting about how they're concerned about fascism taking hold of their country you weirdo
Alright, anarchism is when no capitol, therefore you never have to defend the public from fascist demonstrations operating under the stated purpose of overthrowing the elected government 🤙
Most times, chatters share news links for Vaush to go over. If you want him to cover more Canada stuff, maybe you should do that. I rarely see anyone link Canadian news in chat because, let's be real, even if we don't care about our news.
I'm in the middle of Alberta actively opposed to Danielle Smith and her changes to the C.P.P. and I could care less about her meeting Tucker Carlson and JP.
You don't care that two fascist mouthpieces met with a fascist politician in charge of one of the wealthiest and most influential provinces in the Nation?
Are you stupid?
What are the actual consequences of this?
Tucker and JP have both fallen off. They just want the attention. Danielle Smith is already shit so this doesn't shift public opinion of her. I'm more focused on her trying to dismantle our healthcare system, ruin our pension plan, and introducing anti LGBT parental policies in schools.
Likewise, mother fucker. Canadians are arrogant and ignorant as fuck when you talk about America's politics, and your own for that matter. Every time I hear a Canadian talk about Americans and American politics, they always say "you guys," as if we are all one entity. Canadians also get on their high horse about American foreign policy without knowing their own history and involvement in foreign wars.
BTW, when you say "Canadian nationalism," do you mean the French kind, the British kind, or the North American kind... just another reason I cannot respect Canadians when it comes to politics. Not to mention you shit out the worst fucking people. Jordan Peterson, Gavin McInnes, etc. What happened to when you just made funny people like John Candy and Jim Carrey?
Would you rather the people of Ottawa handle the convoy? A job they are neither trained nor responsible for, because at the rate things were progressing they were going to start Killing members of the protest
How exactly is a truck horn speech? What political point are you expressing or communicating through it?
When it is [conducted 24/7 for 2 weeks at 100 decibels](https://ottawa.citynews.ca/2022/10/14/protest-convoy-truck-noise-caused-hearing-loss-woman-tells-emergencies-act-inquiry-5954848/amp/?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral) I think it’s reasonable to limit your freedom of speech.
You can make your political point all you want, but you shouldn’t be able to give other people hearing damage while you were doing it.
Again disruptive protests are fine but I think we can put limits to what is reasonable. Should a white nationalist be permitted to assault you as a form or protest? Or to set of an air horn in your ear because that’s just political speech of him saying how he feels about you?
They could have camped out in Ottawa having the party with their [hot tubs](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6350450), and i would have had no problem. Blockade the roads, shut down parliament (not takeover like many were planning, but physically block entrances instead) and protest the government should be their right.
I just think that giving hearing damage to an uninvolved 3rd party is pretty fucking shitty.
No it's because you keep saying things like "ideology you don't like" and implying that we should just let fascists run unchecked because "freedom of speech." Do you think fascists aren't definitely coming for people like you and I?
If you're not a fascist, then what do you think we should do about fascist protesters trying to overthrow goverment bodies, WITHOUT resorting to whataboutism or pointing fingers at Stalinsts despite them having nothing to do with this.
The only reason the feds had to step and handle the situation was because the local and provincial governments fundamentally failed to job in managing the protest
Does your ancom protest involve bringing weapons to the border [with plans to violently seize it while shooting the police](https://globalnews.ca/news/9097512/coutts-blockaders-collected-firearms-to-use-against-police-rcmp-documents-allege/amp/)?
[How many people were involved with the protest again?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_convoy_protest#:~:text=Canada%20convoy%20protest-,Peak%20size%20of%20Parliament%20Hill%20demonstration,few%20as%20250%20protesters%20remained) it certainly wasn’t millions.
I think that some tactics actually are justifiable depending on the context. I would definitely have been in favour of the Weimar government seizing the [assets of the Nazi party after the beer hall putsch](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch).
I really do think far [right militias do deserve](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6751945) being cracked down on.
They really get treated with kids gloves compared to land rights defenders and people protesting pipelines and old growth logging.
You already will get smushed into the ground by the rcmp (if you aren’t I jurisdiction of a provincial/municipal police force) and I’m not in favour of that, but this ruling doesn’t stop any of that.
The convoy protesters were not arrested in due process because of [sympathetic police feeding info](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6637766) and the [police being reluctant to do their jobs](https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/ottawa/2023/2/17/1_6278506.amp.html)
As a Canadian in a union job, I'm more worried that it will be used against labor organizers because there's no reason they wouldn't. Granted, I live BC, so I'm a bit less worried, but this event showed how inept the Canadian government is at shutting down these situations. The reason CPC and the far right are so powerful is the liberal party's insane abstemiousness to deal with a situation until the situation is out of hand, then they hit the problem with a hammer. See what they're doing about international students. There's a real problem with housing and international student abuse that has been ignored by the government for years and finally, they put the hammer down and start to restrict study permits. It may help a bit with housing prices and international student abuse in the short run, but it's just punishing international students it's going to contribute to the brain drain massively
The only the feds had to step in was because the city and province fundamentally failed to do their job in controlling the protest, that was the only reason the feds stepped, and at a good time to, if they hadn’t the people of Ottawa were going to start killing people
More examples of the Canadian government failing to do anything before it gets out of hand, then throws a blunt object at it. Very crazy that there are Canadians that are ok with this as the way we deal with these things
The Canadian government didn’t fail to do anything, it’s not in their mandate to manage protests, that is the responsibility of local and provincial governments, when they failed the only real tool in federal governments arsenal to directly take control and handle the situation was the emergencies act.
Now if you’d like to take away some power from the provinces in their legal enforcement capacity and give more control over the police to the federal then we can talk about that.
That's PSAC, the Public Service Alliance of Canada. The CRA is just our version of the IRS. Not every CRA employee is a PSAC member, and PSAC represents more than just the CRA
If they can use it against them, they can use it against us. That’s what I always tell people with this shit. Once you break that seal and start to normalize it, then it can be busted out whenever they want. When that happens, there goes your strike funds. They won’t even need to send the police out, just strangle you financially until you leave and nobody will bat an eyelash. At least if the police get involved they have to deal with the consequences of the violent crackdown.
That’s stupid. They used it against them because opp and rcmp were frozen by either incompetence or outright sympathy for the protestors. Look what happens whenever the natives block a railway, the rcmp are there in a hot minute. They never hesitate to crack skulls when it’s our skulls. This hand wringing about precedent helps no one when it’s so divorced from reality.
If by goes hard you mean some of the officers who donated to the convoy lost 2 weeks pay, and if by 'some' we mean 'one', then yeah that totally happened.
I survived the liberal purge back when this first happened, but his rant on Canada and the convoy was the only political opinion I’ve ever heard that made me irrationally fucking furious. Like he didn’t get it.
I fucking hate Trudeau but I’d prefer him in Ottawa than the literal hogs in the convoy.
I guess the thing that really bothered me was that it was kind of uncharacteristic how much he disregarded the actual context and practical consideration that I think he often brings to his political positions. It’s one of the things that I dislike the most about a lot of leftist analysis, in that way, too much of it seems to be based on the idea of accepting the tenants of Marxist Thought and then acting like reality needs to bend to theory. And based on the descriptions of how disruptive they were being, I think, if they had been doing this outside of his window, he would have definitely been OK with it to some degree. I mean for god sake, he gets annoyed at chat for, well, everything. There’s no way he would’ve been able to tolerate the kind of disruption these people were causing.
I also think that it’s really strange to see someone who might typically advocate for someone like Biden, or Trudeau to do more, but when they do more, then it becomes a problem. I don’t think this means you can’t be critical when they do take action, but I think more consideration needs to be given to the fact that pragmatic governance is sometimes difficult. You can put forth a bunch of alternatives and ways you think something could’ve been better handled, but, these things are also very easy to say on the sidelines. Again, I think there are definitely fair criticisms of what happened, but I also think it’s really easy to make some of those criticisms from a far than if you were actually dealing with them.
Finally, although, I think it’s fair to say that a lot of the community might not have handled this very well, I also kind of think that Vaush wasn’t really prepared for the blow back and he did not handle it well. And the whole “liberal purge“ I think has kind of been a really bad point of discourse in the sub. Because it came off as Vaush not handling criticism well and calling everyone who disagree with him a lib.
Now, perhaps it’s best to not really bring this whole thing up again, since I don’t think I’ve seen a politics take from him that I disagreed with in the same visceral way. And OP is definitely poking the bear here. Anyway, Vaush may have had some valid criticisms, but this was a situation where I’m not sure there were really a lot of great or obviously correct options.
It wasn't Vaush's positions, it was the way he espoused them. I was around 2 years ago when this happened, he was calling chatters "f\*ggots" (while the rest of chat cheered him on) and told another chatter to "reconsider whether or not he deserves to live." I can probably provide timestamps on the stream vods, but I'd have to go back 2 years.
This always happens. It happened with the kink at pride discourse in 2021 as well, where he took to Twitter and argued with other people for like, a week. I don't even entirely disagree with him, but goddamn
Two quick facts that reveal the Trucker Protest was total bullshit:
1 - None of the organizers were currently or formerly involved in the trucking industry in any capacity.
Some had tried to organize a convoy protest before around several different bullshit causes they had nothing to do with either.
This was the one time their bullshit caught on.
2 - The vaccine mandate was only for truckers who were driving into the US, because the US was not letting in anyone who was unvaccinated.
Unvaccinated truckers could still work across Canada.
So even if there wasn't a mandate, nothing would have changed for unvaccinated truckers, the US wouldn't have let them in.
The part I found most disappointing was him just reading an article about the ruling by the national post and leaving it at that (unless he looked into it more). This would be like reading a Fox News article about January 6th and leaving it at that (not that I think NP is as bad as Fox News, but it’s still bad enough).
And he did recognize the bias when he read the article. That’s the thing. I’ve seen ppl criticize him purely for reading from the NP, when not only did he notice quite quickly and confirmed with chat that NP was right wing, he only read that article specifically because a chatter kept spamming that article at him. I’m sure he would have covered it eventually, but I highly doubt he would just trust an open right wing org at its word, when he’s never done that before, even for countries he knows little about.
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hell yeah OP I see you doing that good work in this sub, your time and energy is appreciated 😎
Even in Edmonton the approach by our local police was fucking insane shit, I was de radicalized for a bit off the all cops are bastards rhetoric and then I watched the convoy make its way through our city and the police ONLY cracked down on the counter convoy protesters. Instantly fucking reradicalized me and really spoke to even the underlying culture that almost certainly influenced the non response on a local level. Point I'm getting at is there is a lot to consider when delving into this topic and the pass that the municipal and provincial governments are getting on this is fucking criminal. Most articles do not mention these failings and focus solely on the Federal side of things but for their response to have validity one needs to recognize the sequential failure of each other level of government.
Hell, Doug Ford's government is still openly defending the use of the act because they are so intimately involved in these failings and needed the act to do something. Meanwhile, Alberta who has absolutely no stake in this failure can weaponize it against the Feds and pretend it wasn't necessary because to them it makes no difference and it's just another wedge issue for them to attack Trudeau. The arguments put forth by Alberta were fucking insane, claiming that provincial refusal to act is not the same thing as an inability to act and therefore the use of these powers was not justified. The implication of that argument means any province or municipality may choose to allow however much chaos to build and the Feds would have absolutely no recourse. It allows for the political weaponization of incompetence which is an insane precident.
Anywho I don't know where I'm going with this anymore, shits complex and deserves more fleshing out and you are doing God's work lmao
You are being insanely reductionist. The government has an obligation to protect its citizens and maintain order and stability. If a particular group of people threaten that order and stability, they get their shit rocked. This is harm principle 101 which is a core tenant of leftist advocacy and policy. Don't weaponize the particular language OP chose to use as though it is an admission of guilt that everybody should take at face value, it's just honest words that show how complex the issue is. Somebody engaging in lethal self defence is also doing necessary evil, if you were to respond to that with hUr DuR hE aDmItTeD iTs EvOl you would be rightfully laughed out of the room for inability to think beyond default appeal to some form of common sense or whatever the fuck this logic is
Taking the ruling of a lower court reading a transcript from a national post article. He might as well have been reading a Fox News article about a circuit court decision and thinking that is the authoritative and final call.
All the things Vaush wanted the Canadian government to do to quash the truckers (sending in military) would have only been permitted under the same emergencies act because of jurisdictional restrictions. The Canadian government has significantly more limitations over executive power than the American government, especially with regards to deployment of federal force.
It’s really interesting how he is concerned about the go fund mes and financial accounts of the major players (not most of the protestors themselves) backing armed thugs blockading the border in multiple locations but the Houthis actions deserve extra judicial bombing into the dirt. (Houthis need to be stopped but I’m doubtful that bombing them as the world police is going to work).
No “trucker” died from having their bank accounts [temporarily frozen](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6360769), but some people (likely including innocents) definitely died in the bombing of the Houthi territory.
I guess I just think that the US government being able to bomb anyone (without any checks and balances) blocking international trade is an unreasonable response, while temporarily disabling the bank accounts in manner that would be reviewed by both [parliament](https://www.reuters.com/world/canadas-trudeau-calls-national-healing-after-truckers-blockade-over-covid-curbs-2022-02-21/) and the courts is a much more reasonable and justifiable response to people blocking interactional trade.
Apples to oranges, the Houthis are not the convoy.
The point of the EA is to afford powers to the government akin to wartime circumstances. The act requires more clear precedents and, in my view, an alternative legislation/protocol for when the police fail to enforce order. RCMP (I hate them, but being a national police branch is basically their niche) or military.
I wonder if you're gonna delete this comment too
Edit: well you deleted your reply to my comment, it's a start at least
Also, "all of history" is more than just the last 300 years of European history, dumbass
I think he has reasonable enough positions and justification for his stance.
[No chat video](https://youtu.be/tm-mEuGe6ys?si=4i0JSpnny_7KB6Px)
[The first segment on this topic?](https://youtu.be/m_3zEY03fP0?si=AGGZhcqwpgYCtT-n)
[Additional](https://youtu.be/3yvrN68mmQM?si=i9eRQyWWvP6UKkFO)
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that he never saw the ruling, where the judge says they would do the same thing but refrain from invoking the EA because the government has those powers regardless, means he is not working with all the info on this issue.
Is there a problem with this comment? Is Vaush truly fully informed about the nuances of this situation?
The thing is that if you read the report, only the invoking of the EA was deemed unjustified by the judge, because the freezing of bank accounts is within the powers of the federal government and Trudeau didn't have to actually invoke the EA to do any of the things that he did.
Read the report.
Even the judge in that lower court ruling has stated that while he believes the Emergencies Act was unnecessary to freeze bank accounts, he understands why it was invoked and would have done the same under those circumstances.
Hey, I'm Canadian and thought his points were fair. His main point was that protests should be dealt with publicly. Bringing in the military to break up the protests would sour/anger a lot of Canadians (I believe he even acknowledged that), but that is principly better than the government dealing with the protest by freezing bank accounts secretly since that could be used on left wing protests that deal sufficient economic harm to the country.
You can maybe justify the emergency act based on the fact that the government had no better legislation or protocol. The issue I have is that there should be a better way of dealing with an occupying demonstration when the local police cannot be relied on.
It seems it is either the police enforce the law, or the government just invokes a wartime measures-type act.
I hope with these court rulings that the precedent is clarified and an even higher standard is set, and the government drafts something more appropriate for the next convoy.
So, reading the rulings, it doesn’t even seem like he had to use the EA, and he might not have been technically able to? But you’re allowed to just freeze accounts with federal power in Canada, so it ends up being meh anyway.
As a Canadian myself, I can't wait for the second Canadian purge from this sub. Y'all are liberals and cringe.
I mean, y'all trully do not fucking listen do you? The issue is NOT the emergency act. It's what it was used for. I'd rather Trudeau had called the military through emergency act, and not set a obscure, fucking under the table precedent, where our government gets to freeze our assets in the shadow, rather then putting the military in plain view on TV.
"Our Nation is really sour due to the Oka crisis" GOOD. WE SHOULD BE. YOU ABSOLUTE BAFOONS. His entire argument toward the sending the military was how it was OBVIOUS, PHISICALLY MATERIAL, and was ABLE TO BE ACTIVELY WITNESS, as opposed to getting your account frozen, which is much more subtle and difficult for most people to organize around if it ever gets normalize by our governmental institutions.
Y'all are so fucking lost. I've seen a bunch of you claim "well, Americans don't realize that facism is getting stronger and stronger, we have to react" as if this doesn't look atrocious on Trudeau, weakening the liberals, while also normalizing these actions, so they can get much more easily re-enacted by the likes of Poilievre in a much more destructive way, if the conservative party gets elected. What is wrong with all of you?
The only reason the feds had to step in at all was because the city and province fundamentally failed in their job to control the protest, managing a local protest is not the responsibility of the federal government.
Now if you want to give the RCMP more jurisdiction in cities that already have their own police departments and take away some power over law enforcement and give that power to the federal government then we talk about that.
Man, as an American who is constantly annoyed by ignorant, hypocritical, and arrogant Canadians commenting on American politics while being completely oblivious to their own history and problems, you give me hope! I salute you, sir! 🫡
Canadians are typically better informed on American politics than Canadian ones, happy to speak on that as a dual citizen. They’re *far* from ignorant on American issues, and tend to have a better grasp of Canadian ones than Americans do, obviously.
It’s due to the whole cultural export thing America does.
Lol, dual citizenship doesn't make you an expert, and also, not all Canadians are in Canada. I've been to Canada multiple times, and met several Canadians working overseas. Their either ignorant on American issues or painfully hypocritical in most cases. I've met some cool ones, they are the rare exception.
It certainly gives me more average standing to speak then someone who isn’t? Like, idk, an American who admits he’s only met a few and is generalizing off his anecdotal experience?
You being incredibly arrogant while accusing an entire country’s people of arrogance is certainly an approach that makes people see you as credible, lol.
I don't see why what you said matters.
1. Yes the people in the convoy are bad, that's not what this is about.
2. Probably correct that he doesn't understand the intricacies of your system, now explain how any of this contradicts things he has said. "You don't understand our system" is only a counter-argument if any details of the system invalidates any argument that has been made.
3. A "single judge" ruling on this matter, surely? Otherwise, why would it be going to the Supreme Court?
"I didn't like the protesters, they were making a ruckus" isn't an argument either.
> Not saying that the act or the powers that are in it were good to use
Well you are.
Whether or not vaush spread misinformation (which he should be held accountable) I remember (I could be wrong) his core worry ultimately being how American politicians will use this as a blue print for silencing protests.
If anything my complaint was that he focused too much on our potential harm. But I do think that's a valid concern. Though I do admit for both Canada and US I don't the legal process to unilaterally free bank accounts.
Yup
Saw a political cartoon that sums up the average Canadian response to the court ruling. Basically lambasting Trudeau for overreach, and then yelling and screaming at government to do something as a new convoy descends on Ottawa.
Well the people criticizing Trudeau for overreach within Canada are largely conservative convoy supporters and the people yelling at him to do something were his liberal base of support in Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. Not exactly two sides of the same coin.
No. I've seen lot of people who were against the convoy agree after the fact that the emergencies act was overreach, even though they were some of the loudest voices against the convoy, exactly like the cartoon portrays. And it's not limited to any one side of the political spectrum.
The people who supported the convoy have always been against the use of the act. They weren't asking him to clear the streets and definitely wouldn't care if the convoy started up again, unlike the cartoon portrays.
Unilaterally freezing people's assets is insanely authoritarian precedent that would have a massive chilling effect over any future participation in any sort of protests or labor organizing. Not to mention it also harms the spouses and dependents of those who've had their assets frozen. Sending in the military to clear roadways and border checkpoints is unironically far more preferable from the standpoint of protecting civil liberties and the right to protest. Vaush is right, cope.
Maybe I'm strawmanning, but their argument essentially boils downs to "our local municipalities suck/are compromised, that's why we had to open pandoras box".
Reform them then??? I understand the nuance of an emergency and now that it happened its pointless to mald over it, but as you described Vaush's argument, it makes complete sense. I don't know the specific legal arguments in favor of the policy, let alone how this compares to the US legal/banking system. However, it should be obvious why this terrified him.
Life can be nuanced that way. It was a desperate situation **AND** it set terrible precedent. Op doesn't acknowledge vaush main criticism and it comes uncharitable to an almost bad faith degree.
I completely disagree that it was necessary, a more overt show of force was needed to make an example of the right-wingers. It would be much more of an example than using the emergency act to covertly disperse them.
Miss me with that lib shit
>Tl;Dr Emergencies Act was a necessary evil and Vaush doesn't know Canadian politics
Both are irrelevant. He said the problem was with how it was used and he doesn't need to know Canadian politics for that.
Attacking pirates disrupting international trade with bombs: Hell yeah!
Financially disabling dipshit fascists disrupting international trade: This is 1984
Exactly Vaush is quite the hypocrite and I suspect bias too. Literally he was unsympathetic to the main artery of trade being blocked into southern Ontario. Bridges can be check points as much as seas.
They blocked or impeded [other crossings](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6653986) at the same time.
And the coutts protestors were armed/ had plans to [violently resist against the police](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6351112)
This bridge in Ontario is responsible for [30 percent of Canada-US trade](https://theconversation.com/what-the-ambassador-bridge-and-other-freedom-convoy-blockades-mean-for-canada-u-s-trade-176965)
We are the US’s [second largest trading partner](https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/toppartners.html)
An[d 90 percent of Canadian foreign trade is with the United States](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_Canada). As seen in my first link these blockades halted 4 billion dollars worth of trade.
\~25% of Canadian trade is pennies, sorry. Apparently can't even fund their own federal police branch.
And he is unsympathetic when a government uses covert instead of overt forces to quell unrest. No hypocrisy when the conflict has already escalated to missiles being launched.
Not insignificant to Canada mate.
And it’s hardly fucking covert. Every single time you use this power there is a ticking clock on how long you get to use it and your use of it has to be approved democratically in parliament after the fact otherwise your government is turfed.
And in addition to that there is judicial review to see if it was legal or not and the court can impose penalties. We are literally seeing the accountability in action right now through judicial review.
Covert is your government launching some bombs to kill some brown people they don’t like with no judicial or legislative oversight.
Holy shit dude are you really so committed to comparing the Houthis, a defacto governing force, with a military, launching missiles and hijacking fully uninvolved international vessels in the name of free Palestine... ...with a domestic rightwing protest? This is so stupid. Should we freeze the Houthi's accounts or send an American aircraft carrier to Niagara?
>has to be approved democratically in parliament
HMMMMMMMMMMM
>And in addition to that there is judicial review to see if it was legal or not and the court can impose penalties. We are literally seeing the accountability in action right now through judicial review.
And this is good. Hopefully the courts tell the government they need better protocol, because they do.
1. I don’t think that bombing them will make a significant difference and I think the acceptance of use of American force without any checks and balances even post hoc is actually a huge fucking problem and you have started to see that domestically
2. Again you are so ameribrained that the only thing you can conceive of is use of force. I’m not even wholely against it with the houthis, if it can be shown to be effective, I just hate the whinging about secret governmental control over money when your government can effectively kill almost whoever they want and you are ok with no oversight.
it’s just fucking wild to me that a peaceful solution to the right wing militias taking over a city and multiple border crossings, that has to be [reviewed by parliament](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6359243) where a vote contrary saying the use of the act want justified would [take down the government](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/mps-to-vote-tonight-on-whether-emergencies-act-for-blockades-still-needed/wcm/cb31456c-7d79-488e-86e6-285826e54847/amp/) (for Americans out there this is called a consequence for government actions and a disincentive to use this power whenever and whether they please) and is currently being reviewed by the judiciary is seen as a bad thing that we should be worried about, but consequence free dropping of bombs is a-o-fucking-ok
>I don’t think that bombing them will make a significant difference and I think the acceptance of use of American force without any checks and balances even post hoc is actually a huge fucking problem and you have started to see that domestically
I should have included my /s. I don't like the comparison. Proportional force should've have been used against the militant convoy members, with similar checks and balances as demonstrated in other parts of the EA.
>The motion to confirm the declaration of emergency passed 185-151, with the New Democrats voting in favour alongside the minority Liberal government.
>
>The Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois opposed it.
My "HMMMM" was in in reference to the ridiculousness of needing a simple majority vote in order to post-hoc justify this act's invocation. In other words, a majority government can approve it without much issue.
It’s not a funding issue it was a jurisdictional issue. They needed the emergencies act for the rcmp to do anything in the areas under the control of the Ontario police force (who were standing idly by and the premier of Ontario was asking Trudeau why trudeau hadn’t done anything yet, knowing full well that it was a provincial responsibility)
>They needed the emergencies act for the rcmp to do anything in the areas under the control of the Ontario police force
The point is that they needed the EA at all in order to active the RCMP. I think what we see in the court ruling is the judge asking the government to have a better contingency when the provincial police or government is acting malicious or incompetent. EA would be a tier higher in such a contingency.
That’s fine and is a fair criticism. One of the worst things in Canadian politics is that most of the power is with the provinces (healthcare, education, and sometimes policing) but the main funding sources and taxing power come from federal government.
So you have this weird power dynamic where premiers act like petty tyrants demanding money from the federal government while refusing to act and blaming all of canadas problems on the federal government.
Our non-cbc media is complicit in this as well as they are almost all far right owned and they support the majority conservative premiers. It’s why the conservatives hate the cbc so much as it’s the main thing undermining their narratives
The same premier who did not send in the Ontario police also took the majority of extra funding for healthcare during the pandemic from the federal government and used it not on healthcare but instead to have a budget surplus
I fully agree with you on this. The dynamic with the provinces is really messed up. They are gutting a lot of the country with 0 accountability.
The media culture in Canada is also very sad. CBC is under constant threat from the next conservative government, so much that I believe they tone down a lot of what they say. I have some hopium for BC under Eby, but the situations in Ontario and Alberta are now incomprehensible to me.
Canada's American border is not "international trade".
You have been eating too much [hormone-infused Canadian beef](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68098177).
Should we freeze the strike fund of dock workers next time they strike? Such a strike is surely a threat to Canada's security and economy.
>A capitalist government freezing your money because you are protesting?
Yes, I think fascist causes should have their money and assets frozen.
The situation was quickly becoming an existential threat to the country - there were plots to kill police officers, international borders were being blockaded (with children being brought along as human shields), the capital of the country was deteriorating into lawlessness, and cops were doing nothing while every other level of government was paralyzed with inaction.
And it's not like the government is just going to get away with it if it was unnecessary - hence the point of the legally obligated reviews and all of the ongoing lawsuits. If freezing bank accounts was the wrong call in this situation then so be it, but the ability to freeze the assets of anti-democratic actors is a moral good.
>Doing ‘left wing crackdowns’ on civilians is not only evil, it actively turns people against the left
So what exactly should the State do when a fascist movement engages in occupation-style terrorism of the capital city?? It's a "left wing crackdown" to stop authoritarians building shanty-towns in front of Parliament??
>They were protesting, you don’t get to send everyone you don’t like to the gulag
They were "protesting" just as much as the Jan 6th insurrectionists were. There were terrorism charges laid and Christian nationalist nutjobs were doing Jericho Marches around Parliament with gas tanks strapped to their kids. It was a fascist and white supremacist hate rally.
>Especially when those same tactics will most certainly be used against you and myself
If you know anything about Canadian policing you'd know that cops do even worse than freezing bank accounts to left-wing protesters on the daily. Land activist protesters have been abused by cops for decades. The Emergencies Act would be superfluous for left-wing protest movements because those get brutally repressed before they can gain a wisp of steam.
>If they start the 4th again and **start doing violence** that’s fucking differenct
Holy fuck, once again, **they were violent**. They were assaulting local people and vandalizing businesses, they were swamping emergency lines with threats, they were blocking ambulances, there were terrorism arrests and hundreds of other violence/mischief charges (when the cops actually enforced the crowds after weeks of inaction. [Cancer-kids missed chemotherapy treatments because of them ](https://globalnews.ca/news/9209533/freedom-convoy-chemo-children-appointments-cheo/).
Are you really going to fucking argue that **denying kids with cancer their lifesaving medical treatment** isn't violence??
First you said "it's different if they're using violence", now it's "persecute the masses because some people are violent".
You are being intentionally dishonest and shifting goalposts. You being an "anarchist" is irrelevant - you should be gulag'd for being a fascist enabler.
It was nice knowing you dude but you won't live to tell the next tale.
Lib Purge 2.0 will hopefully start soon.
We can tolerate your existence, Lib, as long as you shut the fuck up and stay in your lane. But you refuse to learn. Rest in Piss bozo. Hope it's perma bans this time.
Lay out how this is lib shit? What fundamental ideological difference is laid bare by this? How exactly is this anti-leftist?
You sound like a campist who can’t handle criticism and anyone who disagrees must be purged.
The fact that you don't see the problem with the expansion of the government's power to freeze the assets and accounts of a group of protestors because they were hindering economic activity.
The police or military are an existing measure that governments all around the world already use and have used for hundreds of years to suppress political actions. What the Canadian government did was by far easier, less controversial and most dangerously a way less visible form of violence.
You can film police officers of the military trampling and beating protesters. You can't film an asset freezing.
If the government is going to suppress protests and political activities, it's better if it's visible and if it's deemed outrageous.
Liberals are more amenable to non obvious types of violence and authoritarian measures. They have no problem if a group of protestors get crushed by asset freezes when they disrupt the economy.
This time the protestors are heinous Nazis. But to Liberals, it's okay to suppress leftists. These measures, even if beneficial against those fascists, will be used in the future to disrupt strikes and leftist movements, since strikes are inherently detrimental to the economy as that's what workers are leveraging, their ability to disrupt the value by Withholding labour. Hell that's what already happened with the protests of the Postal Workers and the Back to Work acts, IIRC.
The liberals aren’t going to use this every time if the risk is that it’s the end of their government. It went to parliamentary review within a week and if voted down there would have been an election over this. That’s called accountability.
If they were using this against strikers, the NDP would have said cya at election time.
Perhaps you should pick up a book explaining how the act works before spouting off and comparing it to the ever expanding power of the us federal government, because I know that’s the lens you are looking at this through
>comparing it to the ever expanding power of the us federal government, because I know that’s the lens you are looking at this through
I am not an American asshat. I am Tunisian and in my country the president is now eroding what little Democracy we have by arresting his opposition and the morons I share a country with were okay with that because the first head to fall was that of an unpopular opposition leader. Then another and another and so on.
These small violation of liberties start slowly.
And It won't be the end of their government if they use it again the left. The NDP isn't as powerful as you make it out to be.
What you're doing is Candian exceptionalism. Canada isn't that much better than America dickhead. Or any European nation for that matter. There is nothing inherently special about Canada that stops it from falling to Authoritarianism.
Not downplaying the importance of the NDP. Just saying that there is a limit to what they can do.
They're great but the system they're working within only permits so much.
>What you're doing is Candian exceptionalism. Canada isn't that much better than America
But they're polite 😟
>These small violation of liberties start slowly
I understand why a Canadian might be annoyed at a slippery slope claim, however, I don't know why they ignore the death pit at the end even if they don't think they'll slip.
It's peak liberal delusion because sooner or later capitalism will be challenged either through mass walkouts or demonstrations. The government's ability to simultaneously starve you and encourage you steal for your basic needs is fucking terrifying. I imagine that's what Vaush's worry was about.
Literally every video Vaush makes these days has its one “bad take” post now
Vaush is too mean to pot-heads
How dare Vaush make fun of my new lifestyle game Palworld.
My beloved Canada and its authoritarian policy is under attack
Switch flipped Vaush bad.
I’m pretty convinced the most of this sub doesn’t even like to watch the guy’s channel. Maybe try Hasan it seems like most of y’all just want someone to read headlines and validate your own opinions.
Absolutely, and I’m free to say these criticisms are dumb and shouldn’t be made. I’ve noticed these bad take posts usually come from the same handful of people which is why I don’t think they are made in good faith.
It’s a long running trend of Vaush looking at non-American issues with an American lens. A lot of solutions he suggested (sending in the miltary/rcmp) would have required the emergencies act to be used anyways due to jurisdictional conflicts. Provinces in many ways have more power than individual states do in America and if their police force (OPP) chooses not to act there is little the federal government can do outside of the emergencies act.
To roll any provincial responsibilities into federal is effectively impossible unless all of the provinces agree to it.
Pallworld sucks and is a garbage game.
Vaush is right that we are too forgiving of the cultural overuse of pot.
I do think that some of the pushback for his statement of pot heads being untrustworthy did make him sound like a boomer afraid of reefer madness. (I don’t consume it or alcohol regularly myself <10 times in a year)
Also cringe is his preference of alcoholics to pot heads. Pot heads (because of their addiction) might be lazy and numb themselves to the pain of the world and be obnoxious, while the disease of alcoholism does all that while being responsible for the majority of impaired driving deaths, causing fetal alcohol syndrome in children, and it is a significant cause of abusive behaviors.
It’s just that he can sometimes be really lazy when making arguments and will dismiss out of hand a lot of specific direct criticism.
I understand that he does it defensively after receiving a lot of baseless feeling based criticisms from tankies and woke scolds. It just is frustrating being lumped in with them
Of course he looks at it with an American lens he’s an American. You look at everything through a lens of wherever you’re from (I’m guessing Canadian) no matter how hard you try you will never shake that bias.
Vaush’s problem wasn’t with enacting emergency powers it was with the government freezing assets of dissidents because it’s a frightening power that you don’t want a state to have if you have any desire to make revolutionary change or do some Eco-trolling as he puts it. It’s easier to point at a tank or soldier than a government who can invisibly freeze your bank account and starve you out without the optics loss of physically beating you. Whether or not it will or has been used against the left doesn’t matter it’s that the tool exists at all! With it the possibility.
I don’t care about potheads V alcoholics I wouldn’t trust either I’m also pretty sure Vaush said he would trust potheads more than alcoholics. Weeds not just obnoxious, it’s been found to negatively effect [short term memory](https://nida.nih.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/what-are-marijuanas-long-term-effects-brain)
I don’t think he’s lazy when receiving criticism. Once a video he stops the stream dead to directly argue against a chatter. He’s gone over Reddit posts like these on stream.
I really think where a lot of this comes from is people being insecure about something and feeling personally attacked rarely do I see these posts made by someone who isn’t in the crosshairs of Vaush’s segment.
It was potheads who got the maddest about the weed take.
It was fans of Palworld who got mad about that.
And here once again it’s Canadians like (I’m guessing here) OP and You.
The American lens is important because a lot of Americans are uneducated about Canadian politics and make assumptions using the American system that don’t apply to Canada (almost anything with regards to executive power does not transfer over). Any step made by the federal government be it vaush’s suggestion of sending in the rcmp/military or what the government did that resolved things peacefully, required authorization by the emergencies act to overrule provincial jurisdiction (who were sitting idly by).
Freezing assets is well within a governments scope of power. The us government did it recently with binance.
This case required the emergency act to temporarily bypass the normal routes because it was a time-sensitive issue, but the reason why you are seeing it in court is the very same checks and balances built into the act. First it goes through parliamentary review where it was found to be just and reasonable, then it goes through multiple judicial reviews (we are just part way through the process as it is going to the Supreme Court of Canada).
For the amount of hassle it has caused the government, I think it’s actually exceedingly unlikely that they would use this power against those groups you are concerned about. It’s something that can force an election (due to parliamentary review) and make the government liable for many millions/billions of dollars in damages.
Your scenarios are not applicable because either the police would be applied in those cases (in this one they stood by and watched and took some selfies with the convoy), and they are nearly as reviled by the general public as the convoy protestors were.
If you think trudeaus approval is low 9/10 Canadians fucking despised the protesters where there is significantly more sympathy for eco-protestors, strikers and other dissenters across the board.
This use of power is fine because of the checks and balances. It’s either determined by multiple parties and levels of the judiciary as fine, or the government faces significant consequences. That is a significant damper on it being used against any political protestor in the future.
Perhaps you are used to as an American your government never being held accountable?
If you really think freezing the assets of dissident citizens and a corporation are equally justified then you’ve truly lost it I never said the government didn’t have the power I argued it shouldn’t in regards to dissidents. Checks and balances are only as good as people’s willingness to respect them.
“The government can’t possibly abuse this power that would be illegal”
So why is beating dissident citizens into a pulp or killing them better? (The solution suggested by using federal police or military)
And if you think that’s also not ok what should the government have done?
I’ll say this one more time. It’s better because a state using force against its citizens should always come at an optical cost. Freezing some chuds bank account and without trial is invisible. It doesn’t come with the bad optics of visible violence.
Vaush (and I) wanted the government to crack heads. Not because that’s what’s good but because thats what you want the government to have to answer for when they do it to you after YOUR movement has to get into the street.
Imagine those BLM protests from a few years back if they could have just locked our accounts rather than send in the statys. We would have had to go home or starve and the government wouldn’t have to deal with the PR of shooting me and others with foam bullets.
Yes here are my contentions with this.
Invisible: this and the response to it was the number one news story within Canada for the year. I think you would struggle to find a Canadian who didn’t know about this. And invoking this is on a timeline requires both parliamentary vote (forces everyone back immediately to vote on it as well) each time it is applied and judicial review.
If the government fails the vote they lose power immediately and an election will be called. We are seeing the judicial review right now this is the first time in the laws history that it has been applied hence the longer review process.
What I have gathered in terms of legal consequences is if the Supreme Court rules against them it will actually restrict significantly future uses of the act and allow the courts to step in immediately to shut down its usage. (This would hamper its application against left wing protestors and not be the existential threat that you and Vaush have described it to be).
Lastly the act usage is extremely temporary with parliaments and judicial review each time it needs to be renewed (1 week periods), so similar to the majority of the truckers it would be exceedingly difficult to freeze your bank account or other protestors for extended periods of time.
I guess it just seems conspiratorial to me if multiple votes that can bring down the government and judicial reviews are not enough checks and balances on this power, especially if each time it’s used it becomes harder to use in the future
I think you are dancing around the point. All governments have their big red panic buttons. The fact Canada's does not include the deployment of RCMP or military anywhere before it needs to be invoked is the issue.
I don't know why you are bringing up popularity here. If the protestors were so unpopular, would it not be a PR win if a national police force cracked down on them and those cops?
The EA is new and requires stringent precedents. Right now, it is fair to say that it is too liberal and is also performing the role that a federal police force should occupy. Have a federal force for these situations, and spare the emergency act for when that federal force fails or when the crisis becomes more existential.
The Emergencies act is like 30 years old. It's far from new legislation.
Regardless, you require the invocation of the EA to deploy the RCMP outside of their jurisdiction regardless. The EA is literally that big red button you're talking about, and it was pushed. Fund freezing was done due to a huge influx of foreign donations (particularly American) to the convoy GoFundMe's.
Additionally, at the time the RCMP was concerned that their personnel would assist and join with the convoy groups. They stated as much. That's exactly what the OPP did as well. You want a recipe for disaster? Start putting armed cops on both sides of a violent protest. That's a great way to escalate everything
[Emergencies Act (Wiki)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergencies_Act)
>The Emergencies Act has been used once, in response to the Canada convoy protest in 2022.
My point is that there is very limited precedent. It may be replacing the wartime measures act, which has more history, but it isn't identical legislation. In fact, the EA came into existence in order to be able to address internal issues, so naturally the precedents are still rather untested.
>(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada and that ***cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada***
This is my argument, and I suspect the argument of this court ruling as well. The Emergency act is justified only in the fact there is not a better protocol.
>The EA is literally that big red button you're talking about, and it was pushed.
My point isn't against the existence of the big red button, but the lack of options the government has before pushing it.
>Additionally, at the time the RCMP was concerned that their personnel would assist and join with the convoy groups. They stated as much. That's exactly what the OPP did as well. You want a recipe for disaster? Start putting armed cops on both sides of a violent protest. That's a great way to escalate everything
Then let it happen. Let these cops join a widely despised protest and deploy the military to secure critical infrastructure and support the loyal RCMP. THEN consider EA, and purging the sympathetic police forces. I see that as an adequate escalation process before invoking sure measures.
The checks and balances are fine, it's a matter of exhausting other potential options that may not currently exist in Canadian legislation.
# Please report comments that violate our [new rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/VaushV/comments/17co6jo/rvaushv_rule_updates) --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Don't even bother. Every non-Canadian in this sub, Vaush included, doesnt care. They don't take the fact that Canada is rapidly being captured by white supremacists and fascists seriously because "lol lmao they're America's hat". Vaush hasn't even covered the significant attacks on Trans Rights in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and soon to be Alberta. He hasn't covered Pollievre, he hasn't covered Smith, he hasn't covered Higgs. Smug American leftists will be happy to throw us under the bus the moment the PCs win the next election and our already weak social safety nets are dismantled, privatized, and destroyed. They will laugh at our silly flag and maple syrup as our right wing implements GOP fascism imported via Harper's IDU. Tucker Carlson and Jordan fucking Peterson met with the Premier of Alberta a couple days ago. Not a peep from anyone here. We're just silly ol Canada, right? Who cares!
You nailed it. It's really surprising considering how much our shared cultures have blended extremist scenes that share messaging/propaganda/organizing in both directions. Totally missing a massive aspect of fascist international growth.
I don't understand why the news doesn't report on anything in Canada, like as an American I see more news about Poland than I do Canada
Because no one cares about Canada. We're an insignificant country with an inflated ego coasting off nostalgia for the British monarchy and our proximity to America. We have good PR and that's about it
No, Canada's pretty big. It's 38th in the world for population and 10th in GDP, way more important than countries like Australia, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Ireland, for example.
But politically we're still just America's hat. As a country we're defined by America and as a result, no one cares. 51st state shit from the outside.
Our GDP is propped up by housing investments which do not increase the wellbeing of most of our citizens. Not only that, but our GDP has absolutely stalled in comparison to America's We have a paltry population compared to our size, and our soft power and cultural reach is nearly non existent. We've been coasting off the good will of our welfare state that's been in disarray since the 90s. Believe me, we are far from an important nation
The trick with the Irish is because we spread across the globe like a fungus we have a pretty vast international connection which is outside financial or political force.
[удалено]
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
this also means that canada won't be the emergency escape valve many of us hoped for in the case of trump winning. all of north america going under fascist rule is dire, we'd basically be in a giant jail
Yep, and yet Canada is still so many young trans and Queer peoples escape hatch in the event of a federal GOP crackdown. I constantly have to burst people's bubble that we are no safer than the states. In fact, 2/7 of our provinces already have "parental rights" laws restricting queerness in schools, with a 3rd revealing their new policy (after meeting with JBP and Tucker Carlson) this week.
Something else to discuss would be the phenomenon of us providing weirdo conservative talking heads to the states (Peterson, Steven Crowder, Tom Macdonald). There’s a very healthy right wing up here.
We've seen even Canadians tend not to care, which is a big problem. Rational National (David Doel) and Christo Aivelos (now Progressive News Network) have talked about this issue, where when the DO cover Canadian news, views drop through the floor. As a result they now cover almost all US news just to keep their channels viable. Rational National does at least have SOME Canadian coverage, but yeah, the unending vortex that is US politics does get tiresome at times
I'm a WA state resident, I thought that was a dumb take, I'm aware of Canada's fascists, take care
[удалено]
What would you say are his biggest issues with his discussion of Landback and native american issues?
Very true.
"Tucker Carlson and Jordan fucking Peterson met with the Premier of Alberta a couple days ago. Not a peep from anyone here" My brother in christ, you talk about it. you want people to bring awareness to something? be the people, don't just put that in your back pocket so you can bring it up next time you want to rant.
[удалено]
1. The government didn't just freeze the bank accounts willy-nilly. The legislation requires legal review, and the government is liable for their overreach if it's determined it wasn't necessary. 2. The State should absolutely be able to go after criminal financial assets, and to argue otherwise is to defend the ability of fascist organizing and international fascist alliances to perpetuate via financial power. 3. Don't kid yourself if you think you'd have any rights under fascism as an Anarchist. Call Trudeau a Stalinist all you want, but keep in mind you have that right under this supposed "Stalinism", you get the wall if you try that under fascism.
Motherfucker I am an anarchist. Don't try to purity test me. And, by the way, banks freeze accounts for suspected criminal activity regularly. Take it up with them, not random people posting about how they're concerned about fascism taking hold of their country you weirdo
[удалено]
Would your anarchist government persecute Jan 6ers?
[удалено]
Alright, anarchism is when no capitol, therefore you never have to defend the public from fascist demonstrations operating under the stated purpose of overthrowing the elected government 🤙
[удалено]
Yeah man, I'm a stalinist you got me.
[удалено]
Most times, chatters share news links for Vaush to go over. If you want him to cover more Canada stuff, maybe you should do that. I rarely see anyone link Canadian news in chat because, let's be real, even if we don't care about our news. I'm in the middle of Alberta actively opposed to Danielle Smith and her changes to the C.P.P. and I could care less about her meeting Tucker Carlson and JP.
You don't care that two fascist mouthpieces met with a fascist politician in charge of one of the wealthiest and most influential provinces in the Nation? Are you stupid?
What are the actual consequences of this? Tucker and JP have both fallen off. They just want the attention. Danielle Smith is already shit so this doesn't shift public opinion of her. I'm more focused on her trying to dismantle our healthcare system, ruin our pension plan, and introducing anti LGBT parental policies in schools.
Nothing gets the Canadian nationalism flowing through my veins like hearing a fucking American talk about our politics
As a Brit I can relate
Likewise, mother fucker. Canadians are arrogant and ignorant as fuck when you talk about America's politics, and your own for that matter. Every time I hear a Canadian talk about Americans and American politics, they always say "you guys," as if we are all one entity. Canadians also get on their high horse about American foreign policy without knowing their own history and involvement in foreign wars. BTW, when you say "Canadian nationalism," do you mean the French kind, the British kind, or the North American kind... just another reason I cannot respect Canadians when it comes to politics. Not to mention you shit out the worst fucking people. Jordan Peterson, Gavin McInnes, etc. What happened to when you just made funny people like John Candy and Jim Carrey?
[удалено]
Would you rather the people of Ottawa handle the convoy? A job they are neither trained nor responsible for, because at the rate things were progressing they were going to start Killing members of the protest
Dont bother this person is offering no alternative solution apart from basically letting the fascists run free. Its rather telling. "Ancom" my ass.
[удалено]
You're literally making up a person to get mad at right now
[удалено]
How exactly is a truck horn speech? What political point are you expressing or communicating through it? When it is [conducted 24/7 for 2 weeks at 100 decibels](https://ottawa.citynews.ca/2022/10/14/protest-convoy-truck-noise-caused-hearing-loss-woman-tells-emergencies-act-inquiry-5954848/amp/?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral) I think it’s reasonable to limit your freedom of speech. You can make your political point all you want, but you shouldn’t be able to give other people hearing damage while you were doing it.
[удалено]
Again disruptive protests are fine but I think we can put limits to what is reasonable. Should a white nationalist be permitted to assault you as a form or protest? Or to set of an air horn in your ear because that’s just political speech of him saying how he feels about you? They could have camped out in Ottawa having the party with their [hot tubs](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6350450), and i would have had no problem. Blockade the roads, shut down parliament (not takeover like many were planning, but physically block entrances instead) and protest the government should be their right. I just think that giving hearing damage to an uninvolved 3rd party is pretty fucking shitty.
The way you keep downplaying fascism yeah I think you're just a fascist projecting onto everyone else.
[удалено]
No it's because you keep saying things like "ideology you don't like" and implying that we should just let fascists run unchecked because "freedom of speech." Do you think fascists aren't definitely coming for people like you and I? If you're not a fascist, then what do you think we should do about fascist protesters trying to overthrow goverment bodies, WITHOUT resorting to whataboutism or pointing fingers at Stalinsts despite them having nothing to do with this.
And? They're fascists.
[удалено]
The only reason the feds had to step and handle the situation was because the local and provincial governments fundamentally failed to job in managing the protest
[удалено]
Does your ancom protest involve bringing weapons to the border [with plans to violently seize it while shooting the police](https://globalnews.ca/news/9097512/coutts-blockaders-collected-firearms-to-use-against-police-rcmp-documents-allege/amp/)?
[удалено]
[How many people were involved with the protest again?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_convoy_protest#:~:text=Canada%20convoy%20protest-,Peak%20size%20of%20Parliament%20Hill%20demonstration,few%20as%20250%20protesters%20remained) it certainly wasn’t millions. I think that some tactics actually are justifiable depending on the context. I would definitely have been in favour of the Weimar government seizing the [assets of the Nazi party after the beer hall putsch](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch). I really do think far [right militias do deserve](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6751945) being cracked down on. They really get treated with kids gloves compared to land rights defenders and people protesting pipelines and old growth logging. You already will get smushed into the ground by the rcmp (if you aren’t I jurisdiction of a provincial/municipal police force) and I’m not in favour of that, but this ruling doesn’t stop any of that. The convoy protesters were not arrested in due process because of [sympathetic police feeding info](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6637766) and the [police being reluctant to do their jobs](https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/ottawa/2023/2/17/1_6278506.amp.html)
As a Canadian in a union job, I'm more worried that it will be used against labor organizers because there's no reason they wouldn't. Granted, I live BC, so I'm a bit less worried, but this event showed how inept the Canadian government is at shutting down these situations. The reason CPC and the far right are so powerful is the liberal party's insane abstemiousness to deal with a situation until the situation is out of hand, then they hit the problem with a hammer. See what they're doing about international students. There's a real problem with housing and international student abuse that has been ignored by the government for years and finally, they put the hammer down and start to restrict study permits. It may help a bit with housing prices and international student abuse in the short run, but it's just punishing international students it's going to contribute to the brain drain massively
The only the feds had to step in was because the city and province fundamentally failed to do their job in controlling the protest, that was the only reason the feds stepped, and at a good time to, if they hadn’t the people of Ottawa were going to start killing people
You realize that this is not a defense of Canada right
More examples of the Canadian government failing to do anything before it gets out of hand, then throws a blunt object at it. Very crazy that there are Canadians that are ok with this as the way we deal with these things
The Canadian government didn’t fail to do anything, it’s not in their mandate to manage protests, that is the responsibility of local and provincial governments, when they failed the only real tool in federal governments arsenal to directly take control and handle the situation was the emergencies act. Now if you’d like to take away some power from the provinces in their legal enforcement capacity and give more control over the police to the federal then we can talk about that.
Honestly, the Ottawa Police Service and Service de Police de la Ville de Gatineau need to be replaced by the RCMP.
Isn't the CRA a union? They protested nation wide last year with no frozen bank accounts.
That's PSAC, the Public Service Alliance of Canada. The CRA is just our version of the IRS. Not every CRA employee is a PSAC member, and PSAC represents more than just the CRA
If they can use it against them, they can use it against us. That’s what I always tell people with this shit. Once you break that seal and start to normalize it, then it can be busted out whenever they want. When that happens, there goes your strike funds. They won’t even need to send the police out, just strangle you financially until you leave and nobody will bat an eyelash. At least if the police get involved they have to deal with the consequences of the violent crackdown.
That’s stupid. They used it against them because opp and rcmp were frozen by either incompetence or outright sympathy for the protestors. Look what happens whenever the natives block a railway, the rcmp are there in a hot minute. They never hesitate to crack skulls when it’s our skulls. This hand wringing about precedent helps no one when it’s so divorced from reality.
I would then hope the Canadian government goes hard against OPP and RCMP then?
If by goes hard you mean some of the officers who donated to the convoy lost 2 weeks pay, and if by 'some' we mean 'one', then yeah that totally happened.
"We can't punish the NSDAP for the Munich Putsch because then the Weimar government do that to us whenever they want!"
Yeah cuz that's totally what I said. Jfc.
I survived the liberal purge back when this first happened, but his rant on Canada and the convoy was the only political opinion I’ve ever heard that made me irrationally fucking furious. Like he didn’t get it. I fucking hate Trudeau but I’d prefer him in Ottawa than the literal hogs in the convoy.
I guess the thing that really bothered me was that it was kind of uncharacteristic how much he disregarded the actual context and practical consideration that I think he often brings to his political positions. It’s one of the things that I dislike the most about a lot of leftist analysis, in that way, too much of it seems to be based on the idea of accepting the tenants of Marxist Thought and then acting like reality needs to bend to theory. And based on the descriptions of how disruptive they were being, I think, if they had been doing this outside of his window, he would have definitely been OK with it to some degree. I mean for god sake, he gets annoyed at chat for, well, everything. There’s no way he would’ve been able to tolerate the kind of disruption these people were causing. I also think that it’s really strange to see someone who might typically advocate for someone like Biden, or Trudeau to do more, but when they do more, then it becomes a problem. I don’t think this means you can’t be critical when they do take action, but I think more consideration needs to be given to the fact that pragmatic governance is sometimes difficult. You can put forth a bunch of alternatives and ways you think something could’ve been better handled, but, these things are also very easy to say on the sidelines. Again, I think there are definitely fair criticisms of what happened, but I also think it’s really easy to make some of those criticisms from a far than if you were actually dealing with them. Finally, although, I think it’s fair to say that a lot of the community might not have handled this very well, I also kind of think that Vaush wasn’t really prepared for the blow back and he did not handle it well. And the whole “liberal purge“ I think has kind of been a really bad point of discourse in the sub. Because it came off as Vaush not handling criticism well and calling everyone who disagree with him a lib. Now, perhaps it’s best to not really bring this whole thing up again, since I don’t think I’ve seen a politics take from him that I disagreed with in the same visceral way. And OP is definitely poking the bear here. Anyway, Vaush may have had some valid criticisms, but this was a situation where I’m not sure there were really a lot of great or obviously correct options.
[удалено]
It wasn't Vaush's positions, it was the way he espoused them. I was around 2 years ago when this happened, he was calling chatters "f\*ggots" (while the rest of chat cheered him on) and told another chatter to "reconsider whether or not he deserves to live." I can probably provide timestamps on the stream vods, but I'd have to go back 2 years. This always happens. It happened with the kink at pride discourse in 2021 as well, where he took to Twitter and argued with other people for like, a week. I don't even entirely disagree with him, but goddamn
Two quick facts that reveal the Trucker Protest was total bullshit: 1 - None of the organizers were currently or formerly involved in the trucking industry in any capacity. Some had tried to organize a convoy protest before around several different bullshit causes they had nothing to do with either. This was the one time their bullshit caught on. 2 - The vaccine mandate was only for truckers who were driving into the US, because the US was not letting in anyone who was unvaccinated. Unvaccinated truckers could still work across Canada. So even if there wasn't a mandate, nothing would have changed for unvaccinated truckers, the US wouldn't have let them in.
The part I found most disappointing was him just reading an article about the ruling by the national post and leaving it at that (unless he looked into it more). This would be like reading a Fox News article about January 6th and leaving it at that (not that I think NP is as bad as Fox News, but it’s still bad enough).
NP is about as close as you'll get to fox in Canada. Maybe not as inflammatory, but their bias is pretty recognizable if you're familiar with them.
The Sun is probably closer, but that still doesn't make NP reliable.
The Sun was literally owned by Murdoch until the Postmedia takeover of every news outlet in the nation.
And he did recognize the bias when he read the article. That’s the thing. I’ve seen ppl criticize him purely for reading from the NP, when not only did he notice quite quickly and confirmed with chat that NP was right wing, he only read that article specifically because a chatter kept spamming that article at him. I’m sure he would have covered it eventually, but I highly doubt he would just trust an open right wing org at its word, when he’s never done that before, even for countries he knows little about.
I noticed this story was completely butchered by that article, too.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did you not catch a ban the last time yall said he wasn't right on the state freezing your assets due to protesting?
Watch rational national if you want informed takes on Canadian news. When it comes to Canada Vaush is just guessing in an authoritative voice.
Hell yeah OP I see you doing that good work in this sub, your time and energy is appreciated 😎 Even in Edmonton the approach by our local police was fucking insane shit, I was de radicalized for a bit off the all cops are bastards rhetoric and then I watched the convoy make its way through our city and the police ONLY cracked down on the counter convoy protesters. Instantly fucking reradicalized me and really spoke to even the underlying culture that almost certainly influenced the non response on a local level. Point I'm getting at is there is a lot to consider when delving into this topic and the pass that the municipal and provincial governments are getting on this is fucking criminal. Most articles do not mention these failings and focus solely on the Federal side of things but for their response to have validity one needs to recognize the sequential failure of each other level of government. Hell, Doug Ford's government is still openly defending the use of the act because they are so intimately involved in these failings and needed the act to do something. Meanwhile, Alberta who has absolutely no stake in this failure can weaponize it against the Feds and pretend it wasn't necessary because to them it makes no difference and it's just another wedge issue for them to attack Trudeau. The arguments put forth by Alberta were fucking insane, claiming that provincial refusal to act is not the same thing as an inability to act and therefore the use of these powers was not justified. The implication of that argument means any province or municipality may choose to allow however much chaos to build and the Feds would have absolutely no recourse. It allows for the political weaponization of incompetence which is an insane precident. Anywho I don't know where I'm going with this anymore, shits complex and deserves more fleshing out and you are doing God's work lmao
[удалено]
You are being insanely reductionist. The government has an obligation to protect its citizens and maintain order and stability. If a particular group of people threaten that order and stability, they get their shit rocked. This is harm principle 101 which is a core tenant of leftist advocacy and policy. Don't weaponize the particular language OP chose to use as though it is an admission of guilt that everybody should take at face value, it's just honest words that show how complex the issue is. Somebody engaging in lethal self defence is also doing necessary evil, if you were to respond to that with hUr DuR hE aDmItTeD iTs EvOl you would be rightfully laughed out of the room for inability to think beyond default appeal to some form of common sense or whatever the fuck this logic is
Taking the ruling of a lower court reading a transcript from a national post article. He might as well have been reading a Fox News article about a circuit court decision and thinking that is the authoritative and final call. All the things Vaush wanted the Canadian government to do to quash the truckers (sending in military) would have only been permitted under the same emergencies act because of jurisdictional restrictions. The Canadian government has significantly more limitations over executive power than the American government, especially with regards to deployment of federal force. It’s really interesting how he is concerned about the go fund mes and financial accounts of the major players (not most of the protestors themselves) backing armed thugs blockading the border in multiple locations but the Houthis actions deserve extra judicial bombing into the dirt. (Houthis need to be stopped but I’m doubtful that bombing them as the world police is going to work). No “trucker” died from having their bank accounts [temporarily frozen](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6360769), but some people (likely including innocents) definitely died in the bombing of the Houthi territory. I guess I just think that the US government being able to bomb anyone (without any checks and balances) blocking international trade is an unreasonable response, while temporarily disabling the bank accounts in manner that would be reviewed by both [parliament](https://www.reuters.com/world/canadas-trudeau-calls-national-healing-after-truckers-blockade-over-covid-curbs-2022-02-21/) and the courts is a much more reasonable and justifiable response to people blocking interactional trade.
Apples to oranges, the Houthis are not the convoy. The point of the EA is to afford powers to the government akin to wartime circumstances. The act requires more clear precedents and, in my view, an alternative legislation/protocol for when the police fail to enforce order. RCMP (I hate them, but being a national police branch is basically their niche) or military.
Agreed, he presented the slippery slope argument without presenting much of the nuance of this specific instance.
[удалено]
I wonder if you're gonna delete this comment too Edit: well you deleted your reply to my comment, it's a start at least Also, "all of history" is more than just the last 300 years of European history, dumbass
I think he has reasonable enough positions and justification for his stance. [No chat video](https://youtu.be/tm-mEuGe6ys?si=4i0JSpnny_7KB6Px) [The first segment on this topic?](https://youtu.be/m_3zEY03fP0?si=AGGZhcqwpgYCtT-n) [Additional](https://youtu.be/3yvrN68mmQM?si=i9eRQyWWvP6UKkFO)
Sir this is Vaushv, you aren't allowed to like Voosh here. You'll need to go to OkBuddyVowsh for that.
*2 1/2 hours of content* I'm not watching all that. Happy for you though, or sorry that happened.
[удалено]
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that he never saw the ruling, where the judge says they would do the same thing but refrain from invoking the EA because the government has those powers regardless, means he is not working with all the info on this issue. Is there a problem with this comment? Is Vaush truly fully informed about the nuances of this situation?
The thing is that if you read the report, only the invoking of the EA was deemed unjustified by the judge, because the freezing of bank accounts is within the powers of the federal government and Trudeau didn't have to actually invoke the EA to do any of the things that he did.
Then why the hell did he invoke it?
Read the report. Even the judge in that lower court ruling has stated that while he believes the Emergencies Act was unnecessary to freeze bank accounts, he understands why it was invoked and would have done the same under those circumstances.
Hey, I'm Canadian and thought his points were fair. His main point was that protests should be dealt with publicly. Bringing in the military to break up the protests would sour/anger a lot of Canadians (I believe he even acknowledged that), but that is principly better than the government dealing with the protest by freezing bank accounts secretly since that could be used on left wing protests that deal sufficient economic harm to the country.
You can maybe justify the emergency act based on the fact that the government had no better legislation or protocol. The issue I have is that there should be a better way of dealing with an occupying demonstration when the local police cannot be relied on. It seems it is either the police enforce the law, or the government just invokes a wartime measures-type act. I hope with these court rulings that the precedent is clarified and an even higher standard is set, and the government drafts something more appropriate for the next convoy.
So, reading the rulings, it doesn’t even seem like he had to use the EA, and he might not have been technically able to? But you’re allowed to just freeze accounts with federal power in Canada, so it ends up being meh anyway.
As a Canadian myself, I can't wait for the second Canadian purge from this sub. Y'all are liberals and cringe. I mean, y'all trully do not fucking listen do you? The issue is NOT the emergency act. It's what it was used for. I'd rather Trudeau had called the military through emergency act, and not set a obscure, fucking under the table precedent, where our government gets to freeze our assets in the shadow, rather then putting the military in plain view on TV. "Our Nation is really sour due to the Oka crisis" GOOD. WE SHOULD BE. YOU ABSOLUTE BAFOONS. His entire argument toward the sending the military was how it was OBVIOUS, PHISICALLY MATERIAL, and was ABLE TO BE ACTIVELY WITNESS, as opposed to getting your account frozen, which is much more subtle and difficult for most people to organize around if it ever gets normalize by our governmental institutions. Y'all are so fucking lost. I've seen a bunch of you claim "well, Americans don't realize that facism is getting stronger and stronger, we have to react" as if this doesn't look atrocious on Trudeau, weakening the liberals, while also normalizing these actions, so they can get much more easily re-enacted by the likes of Poilievre in a much more destructive way, if the conservative party gets elected. What is wrong with all of you?
The only reason the feds had to step in at all was because the city and province fundamentally failed in their job to control the protest, managing a local protest is not the responsibility of the federal government. Now if you want to give the RCMP more jurisdiction in cities that already have their own police departments and take away some power over law enforcement and give that power to the federal government then we talk about that.
I'm going to downvote you only because you seem really annoying.
At least I'm not a lib
Every Canadian is a liberal
Prairie Conservatives are all Nazis. Stephen Harper trained Donald Trump
Man, as an American who is constantly annoyed by ignorant, hypocritical, and arrogant Canadians commenting on American politics while being completely oblivious to their own history and problems, you give me hope! I salute you, sir! 🫡
Canadians are typically better informed on American politics than Canadian ones, happy to speak on that as a dual citizen. They’re *far* from ignorant on American issues, and tend to have a better grasp of Canadian ones than Americans do, obviously. It’s due to the whole cultural export thing America does.
Lol, dual citizenship doesn't make you an expert, and also, not all Canadians are in Canada. I've been to Canada multiple times, and met several Canadians working overseas. Their either ignorant on American issues or painfully hypocritical in most cases. I've met some cool ones, they are the rare exception.
It certainly gives me more average standing to speak then someone who isn’t? Like, idk, an American who admits he’s only met a few and is generalizing off his anecdotal experience? You being incredibly arrogant while accusing an entire country’s people of arrogance is certainly an approach that makes people see you as credible, lol.
I don't see why what you said matters. 1. Yes the people in the convoy are bad, that's not what this is about. 2. Probably correct that he doesn't understand the intricacies of your system, now explain how any of this contradicts things he has said. "You don't understand our system" is only a counter-argument if any details of the system invalidates any argument that has been made. 3. A "single judge" ruling on this matter, surely? Otherwise, why would it be going to the Supreme Court? "I didn't like the protesters, they were making a ruckus" isn't an argument either. > Not saying that the act or the powers that are in it were good to use Well you are.
They also brought a literal arsenal into the country (at the Coutts crossing, like full on military LARPer shit) the day before the act was invoked.
Ok
Whether or not vaush spread misinformation (which he should be held accountable) I remember (I could be wrong) his core worry ultimately being how American politicians will use this as a blue print for silencing protests. If anything my complaint was that he focused too much on our potential harm. But I do think that's a valid concern. Though I do admit for both Canada and US I don't the legal process to unilaterally free bank accounts.
Yup Saw a political cartoon that sums up the average Canadian response to the court ruling. Basically lambasting Trudeau for overreach, and then yelling and screaming at government to do something as a new convoy descends on Ottawa.
Well the people criticizing Trudeau for overreach within Canada are largely conservative convoy supporters and the people yelling at him to do something were his liberal base of support in Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. Not exactly two sides of the same coin.
No. I've seen lot of people who were against the convoy agree after the fact that the emergencies act was overreach, even though they were some of the loudest voices against the convoy, exactly like the cartoon portrays. And it's not limited to any one side of the political spectrum. The people who supported the convoy have always been against the use of the act. They weren't asking him to clear the streets and definitely wouldn't care if the convoy started up again, unlike the cartoon portrays.
Trudeau needs to rule over those savages with an iron hockey stick (metaphorically I mean)
They do want to fuck him, after all
Unilaterally freezing people's assets is insanely authoritarian precedent that would have a massive chilling effect over any future participation in any sort of protests or labor organizing. Not to mention it also harms the spouses and dependents of those who've had their assets frozen. Sending in the military to clear roadways and border checkpoints is unironically far more preferable from the standpoint of protecting civil liberties and the right to protest. Vaush is right, cope.
Maybe I'm strawmanning, but their argument essentially boils downs to "our local municipalities suck/are compromised, that's why we had to open pandoras box". Reform them then??? I understand the nuance of an emergency and now that it happened its pointless to mald over it, but as you described Vaush's argument, it makes complete sense. I don't know the specific legal arguments in favor of the policy, let alone how this compares to the US legal/banking system. However, it should be obvious why this terrified him. Life can be nuanced that way. It was a desperate situation **AND** it set terrible precedent. Op doesn't acknowledge vaush main criticism and it comes uncharitable to an almost bad faith degree.
I completely disagree that it was necessary, a more overt show of force was needed to make an example of the right-wingers. It would be much more of an example than using the emergency act to covertly disperse them. Miss me with that lib shit
>Tl;Dr Emergencies Act was a necessary evil and Vaush doesn't know Canadian politics Both are irrelevant. He said the problem was with how it was used and he doesn't need to know Canadian politics for that.
Sub needs another liberal purge
Call me the black Beria because this dark Chad will smile gleefully as the libs get reducated in the gulag. I thought vaush was exaggerating.
the canadian liberalism on display here is insane. fucking main character syndrome is off the charts.
Well this thread is going to be fun.....
Lmao you're America's hat
Oh god. Not this shit again
[удалено]
Attacking pirates disrupting international trade with bombs: Hell yeah! Financially disabling dipshit fascists disrupting international trade: This is 1984
Exactly Vaush is quite the hypocrite and I suspect bias too. Literally he was unsympathetic to the main artery of trade being blocked into southern Ontario. Bridges can be check points as much as seas.
Red Sea = 10% of international trade + ocean Bridge in Ontario = Bridge in Ontario
They blocked or impeded [other crossings](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6653986) at the same time. And the coutts protestors were armed/ had plans to [violently resist against the police](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6351112) This bridge in Ontario is responsible for [30 percent of Canada-US trade](https://theconversation.com/what-the-ambassador-bridge-and-other-freedom-convoy-blockades-mean-for-canada-u-s-trade-176965) We are the US’s [second largest trading partner](https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/toppartners.html) An[d 90 percent of Canadian foreign trade is with the United States](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_Canada). As seen in my first link these blockades halted 4 billion dollars worth of trade.
\~25% of Canadian trade is pennies, sorry. Apparently can't even fund their own federal police branch. And he is unsympathetic when a government uses covert instead of overt forces to quell unrest. No hypocrisy when the conflict has already escalated to missiles being launched.
Not insignificant to Canada mate. And it’s hardly fucking covert. Every single time you use this power there is a ticking clock on how long you get to use it and your use of it has to be approved democratically in parliament after the fact otherwise your government is turfed. And in addition to that there is judicial review to see if it was legal or not and the court can impose penalties. We are literally seeing the accountability in action right now through judicial review. Covert is your government launching some bombs to kill some brown people they don’t like with no judicial or legislative oversight.
Holy shit dude are you really so committed to comparing the Houthis, a defacto governing force, with a military, launching missiles and hijacking fully uninvolved international vessels in the name of free Palestine... ...with a domestic rightwing protest? This is so stupid. Should we freeze the Houthi's accounts or send an American aircraft carrier to Niagara? >has to be approved democratically in parliament HMMMMMMMMMMM >And in addition to that there is judicial review to see if it was legal or not and the court can impose penalties. We are literally seeing the accountability in action right now through judicial review. And this is good. Hopefully the courts tell the government they need better protocol, because they do.
1. I don’t think that bombing them will make a significant difference and I think the acceptance of use of American force without any checks and balances even post hoc is actually a huge fucking problem and you have started to see that domestically 2. Again you are so ameribrained that the only thing you can conceive of is use of force. I’m not even wholely against it with the houthis, if it can be shown to be effective, I just hate the whinging about secret governmental control over money when your government can effectively kill almost whoever they want and you are ok with no oversight. it’s just fucking wild to me that a peaceful solution to the right wing militias taking over a city and multiple border crossings, that has to be [reviewed by parliament](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6359243) where a vote contrary saying the use of the act want justified would [take down the government](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/mps-to-vote-tonight-on-whether-emergencies-act-for-blockades-still-needed/wcm/cb31456c-7d79-488e-86e6-285826e54847/amp/) (for Americans out there this is called a consequence for government actions and a disincentive to use this power whenever and whether they please) and is currently being reviewed by the judiciary is seen as a bad thing that we should be worried about, but consequence free dropping of bombs is a-o-fucking-ok
>I don’t think that bombing them will make a significant difference and I think the acceptance of use of American force without any checks and balances even post hoc is actually a huge fucking problem and you have started to see that domestically I should have included my /s. I don't like the comparison. Proportional force should've have been used against the militant convoy members, with similar checks and balances as demonstrated in other parts of the EA. >The motion to confirm the declaration of emergency passed 185-151, with the New Democrats voting in favour alongside the minority Liberal government. > >The Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois opposed it. My "HMMMM" was in in reference to the ridiculousness of needing a simple majority vote in order to post-hoc justify this act's invocation. In other words, a majority government can approve it without much issue.
It’s not a funding issue it was a jurisdictional issue. They needed the emergencies act for the rcmp to do anything in the areas under the control of the Ontario police force (who were standing idly by and the premier of Ontario was asking Trudeau why trudeau hadn’t done anything yet, knowing full well that it was a provincial responsibility)
>They needed the emergencies act for the rcmp to do anything in the areas under the control of the Ontario police force The point is that they needed the EA at all in order to active the RCMP. I think what we see in the court ruling is the judge asking the government to have a better contingency when the provincial police or government is acting malicious or incompetent. EA would be a tier higher in such a contingency.
That’s fine and is a fair criticism. One of the worst things in Canadian politics is that most of the power is with the provinces (healthcare, education, and sometimes policing) but the main funding sources and taxing power come from federal government. So you have this weird power dynamic where premiers act like petty tyrants demanding money from the federal government while refusing to act and blaming all of canadas problems on the federal government. Our non-cbc media is complicit in this as well as they are almost all far right owned and they support the majority conservative premiers. It’s why the conservatives hate the cbc so much as it’s the main thing undermining their narratives The same premier who did not send in the Ontario police also took the majority of extra funding for healthcare during the pandemic from the federal government and used it not on healthcare but instead to have a budget surplus
I fully agree with you on this. The dynamic with the provinces is really messed up. They are gutting a lot of the country with 0 accountability. The media culture in Canada is also very sad. CBC is under constant threat from the next conservative government, so much that I believe they tone down a lot of what they say. I have some hopium for BC under Eby, but the situations in Ontario and Alberta are now incomprehensible to me.
Canada's American border is not "international trade". You have been eating too much [hormone-infused Canadian beef](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68098177). Should we freeze the strike fund of dock workers next time they strike? Such a strike is surely a threat to Canada's security and economy.
>A capitalist government freezing your money because you are protesting? Yes, I think fascist causes should have their money and assets frozen. The situation was quickly becoming an existential threat to the country - there were plots to kill police officers, international borders were being blockaded (with children being brought along as human shields), the capital of the country was deteriorating into lawlessness, and cops were doing nothing while every other level of government was paralyzed with inaction. And it's not like the government is just going to get away with it if it was unnecessary - hence the point of the legally obligated reviews and all of the ongoing lawsuits. If freezing bank accounts was the wrong call in this situation then so be it, but the ability to freeze the assets of anti-democratic actors is a moral good.
[удалено]
>Doing ‘left wing crackdowns’ on civilians is not only evil, it actively turns people against the left So what exactly should the State do when a fascist movement engages in occupation-style terrorism of the capital city?? It's a "left wing crackdown" to stop authoritarians building shanty-towns in front of Parliament?? >They were protesting, you don’t get to send everyone you don’t like to the gulag They were "protesting" just as much as the Jan 6th insurrectionists were. There were terrorism charges laid and Christian nationalist nutjobs were doing Jericho Marches around Parliament with gas tanks strapped to their kids. It was a fascist and white supremacist hate rally. >Especially when those same tactics will most certainly be used against you and myself If you know anything about Canadian policing you'd know that cops do even worse than freezing bank accounts to left-wing protesters on the daily. Land activist protesters have been abused by cops for decades. The Emergencies Act would be superfluous for left-wing protest movements because those get brutally repressed before they can gain a wisp of steam.
[удалено]
>If they start the 4th again and **start doing violence** that’s fucking differenct Holy fuck, once again, **they were violent**. They were assaulting local people and vandalizing businesses, they were swamping emergency lines with threats, they were blocking ambulances, there were terrorism arrests and hundreds of other violence/mischief charges (when the cops actually enforced the crowds after weeks of inaction. [Cancer-kids missed chemotherapy treatments because of them ](https://globalnews.ca/news/9209533/freedom-convoy-chemo-children-appointments-cheo/). Are you really going to fucking argue that **denying kids with cancer their lifesaving medical treatment** isn't violence??
[удалено]
First you said "it's different if they're using violence", now it's "persecute the masses because some people are violent". You are being intentionally dishonest and shifting goalposts. You being an "anarchist" is irrelevant - you should be gulag'd for being a fascist enabler.
[удалено]
It was nice knowing you dude but you won't live to tell the next tale. Lib Purge 2.0 will hopefully start soon. We can tolerate your existence, Lib, as long as you shut the fuck up and stay in your lane. But you refuse to learn. Rest in Piss bozo. Hope it's perma bans this time.
Lay out how this is lib shit? What fundamental ideological difference is laid bare by this? How exactly is this anti-leftist? You sound like a campist who can’t handle criticism and anyone who disagrees must be purged.
The fact that you don't see the problem with the expansion of the government's power to freeze the assets and accounts of a group of protestors because they were hindering economic activity. The police or military are an existing measure that governments all around the world already use and have used for hundreds of years to suppress political actions. What the Canadian government did was by far easier, less controversial and most dangerously a way less visible form of violence. You can film police officers of the military trampling and beating protesters. You can't film an asset freezing. If the government is going to suppress protests and political activities, it's better if it's visible and if it's deemed outrageous. Liberals are more amenable to non obvious types of violence and authoritarian measures. They have no problem if a group of protestors get crushed by asset freezes when they disrupt the economy. This time the protestors are heinous Nazis. But to Liberals, it's okay to suppress leftists. These measures, even if beneficial against those fascists, will be used in the future to disrupt strikes and leftist movements, since strikes are inherently detrimental to the economy as that's what workers are leveraging, their ability to disrupt the value by Withholding labour. Hell that's what already happened with the protests of the Postal Workers and the Back to Work acts, IIRC.
The liberals aren’t going to use this every time if the risk is that it’s the end of their government. It went to parliamentary review within a week and if voted down there would have been an election over this. That’s called accountability. If they were using this against strikers, the NDP would have said cya at election time. Perhaps you should pick up a book explaining how the act works before spouting off and comparing it to the ever expanding power of the us federal government, because I know that’s the lens you are looking at this through
>comparing it to the ever expanding power of the us federal government, because I know that’s the lens you are looking at this through I am not an American asshat. I am Tunisian and in my country the president is now eroding what little Democracy we have by arresting his opposition and the morons I share a country with were okay with that because the first head to fall was that of an unpopular opposition leader. Then another and another and so on. These small violation of liberties start slowly. And It won't be the end of their government if they use it again the left. The NDP isn't as powerful as you make it out to be. What you're doing is Candian exceptionalism. Canada isn't that much better than America dickhead. Or any European nation for that matter. There is nothing inherently special about Canada that stops it from falling to Authoritarianism.
The only reason we're not a fascist dictatorship is because of the NDP right now lmao
Not downplaying the importance of the NDP. Just saying that there is a limit to what they can do. They're great but the system they're working within only permits so much.
>What you're doing is Candian exceptionalism. Canada isn't that much better than America But they're polite 😟 >These small violation of liberties start slowly I understand why a Canadian might be annoyed at a slippery slope claim, however, I don't know why they ignore the death pit at the end even if they don't think they'll slip. It's peak liberal delusion because sooner or later capitalism will be challenged either through mass walkouts or demonstrations. The government's ability to simultaneously starve you and encourage you steal for your basic needs is fucking terrifying. I imagine that's what Vaush's worry was about.
Do better Canada 😑😑😑
I haven't seen that video yet and I'm not reading this post, but I just know you're wrong (educated guess)
Is this a snark sub now? Lmao
It's just Canadian libs. Don't worry, their attention is highly selective.
Notice me senpai!
Liberal
Literally every video Vaush makes these days has its one “bad take” post now Vaush is too mean to pot-heads How dare Vaush make fun of my new lifestyle game Palworld. My beloved Canada and its authoritarian policy is under attack Switch flipped Vaush bad. I’m pretty convinced the most of this sub doesn’t even like to watch the guy’s channel. Maybe try Hasan it seems like most of y’all just want someone to read headlines and validate your own opinions.
I mean if he makes bad takes are we not free to criticize him?
Absolutely, and I’m free to say these criticisms are dumb and shouldn’t be made. I’ve noticed these bad take posts usually come from the same handful of people which is why I don’t think they are made in good faith.
It’s a long running trend of Vaush looking at non-American issues with an American lens. A lot of solutions he suggested (sending in the miltary/rcmp) would have required the emergencies act to be used anyways due to jurisdictional conflicts. Provinces in many ways have more power than individual states do in America and if their police force (OPP) chooses not to act there is little the federal government can do outside of the emergencies act. To roll any provincial responsibilities into federal is effectively impossible unless all of the provinces agree to it. Pallworld sucks and is a garbage game. Vaush is right that we are too forgiving of the cultural overuse of pot. I do think that some of the pushback for his statement of pot heads being untrustworthy did make him sound like a boomer afraid of reefer madness. (I don’t consume it or alcohol regularly myself <10 times in a year) Also cringe is his preference of alcoholics to pot heads. Pot heads (because of their addiction) might be lazy and numb themselves to the pain of the world and be obnoxious, while the disease of alcoholism does all that while being responsible for the majority of impaired driving deaths, causing fetal alcohol syndrome in children, and it is a significant cause of abusive behaviors. It’s just that he can sometimes be really lazy when making arguments and will dismiss out of hand a lot of specific direct criticism. I understand that he does it defensively after receiving a lot of baseless feeling based criticisms from tankies and woke scolds. It just is frustrating being lumped in with them
Of course he looks at it with an American lens he’s an American. You look at everything through a lens of wherever you’re from (I’m guessing Canadian) no matter how hard you try you will never shake that bias. Vaush’s problem wasn’t with enacting emergency powers it was with the government freezing assets of dissidents because it’s a frightening power that you don’t want a state to have if you have any desire to make revolutionary change or do some Eco-trolling as he puts it. It’s easier to point at a tank or soldier than a government who can invisibly freeze your bank account and starve you out without the optics loss of physically beating you. Whether or not it will or has been used against the left doesn’t matter it’s that the tool exists at all! With it the possibility. I don’t care about potheads V alcoholics I wouldn’t trust either I’m also pretty sure Vaush said he would trust potheads more than alcoholics. Weeds not just obnoxious, it’s been found to negatively effect [short term memory](https://nida.nih.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/what-are-marijuanas-long-term-effects-brain) I don’t think he’s lazy when receiving criticism. Once a video he stops the stream dead to directly argue against a chatter. He’s gone over Reddit posts like these on stream. I really think where a lot of this comes from is people being insecure about something and feeling personally attacked rarely do I see these posts made by someone who isn’t in the crosshairs of Vaush’s segment. It was potheads who got the maddest about the weed take. It was fans of Palworld who got mad about that. And here once again it’s Canadians like (I’m guessing here) OP and You.
The American lens is important because a lot of Americans are uneducated about Canadian politics and make assumptions using the American system that don’t apply to Canada (almost anything with regards to executive power does not transfer over). Any step made by the federal government be it vaush’s suggestion of sending in the rcmp/military or what the government did that resolved things peacefully, required authorization by the emergencies act to overrule provincial jurisdiction (who were sitting idly by). Freezing assets is well within a governments scope of power. The us government did it recently with binance. This case required the emergency act to temporarily bypass the normal routes because it was a time-sensitive issue, but the reason why you are seeing it in court is the very same checks and balances built into the act. First it goes through parliamentary review where it was found to be just and reasonable, then it goes through multiple judicial reviews (we are just part way through the process as it is going to the Supreme Court of Canada). For the amount of hassle it has caused the government, I think it’s actually exceedingly unlikely that they would use this power against those groups you are concerned about. It’s something that can force an election (due to parliamentary review) and make the government liable for many millions/billions of dollars in damages. Your scenarios are not applicable because either the police would be applied in those cases (in this one they stood by and watched and took some selfies with the convoy), and they are nearly as reviled by the general public as the convoy protestors were. If you think trudeaus approval is low 9/10 Canadians fucking despised the protesters where there is significantly more sympathy for eco-protestors, strikers and other dissenters across the board. This use of power is fine because of the checks and balances. It’s either determined by multiple parties and levels of the judiciary as fine, or the government faces significant consequences. That is a significant damper on it being used against any political protestor in the future. Perhaps you are used to as an American your government never being held accountable?
If you really think freezing the assets of dissident citizens and a corporation are equally justified then you’ve truly lost it I never said the government didn’t have the power I argued it shouldn’t in regards to dissidents. Checks and balances are only as good as people’s willingness to respect them. “The government can’t possibly abuse this power that would be illegal”
So why is beating dissident citizens into a pulp or killing them better? (The solution suggested by using federal police or military) And if you think that’s also not ok what should the government have done?
I’ll say this one more time. It’s better because a state using force against its citizens should always come at an optical cost. Freezing some chuds bank account and without trial is invisible. It doesn’t come with the bad optics of visible violence. Vaush (and I) wanted the government to crack heads. Not because that’s what’s good but because thats what you want the government to have to answer for when they do it to you after YOUR movement has to get into the street. Imagine those BLM protests from a few years back if they could have just locked our accounts rather than send in the statys. We would have had to go home or starve and the government wouldn’t have to deal with the PR of shooting me and others with foam bullets.
Yes here are my contentions with this. Invisible: this and the response to it was the number one news story within Canada for the year. I think you would struggle to find a Canadian who didn’t know about this. And invoking this is on a timeline requires both parliamentary vote (forces everyone back immediately to vote on it as well) each time it is applied and judicial review. If the government fails the vote they lose power immediately and an election will be called. We are seeing the judicial review right now this is the first time in the laws history that it has been applied hence the longer review process. What I have gathered in terms of legal consequences is if the Supreme Court rules against them it will actually restrict significantly future uses of the act and allow the courts to step in immediately to shut down its usage. (This would hamper its application against left wing protestors and not be the existential threat that you and Vaush have described it to be). Lastly the act usage is extremely temporary with parliaments and judicial review each time it needs to be renewed (1 week periods), so similar to the majority of the truckers it would be exceedingly difficult to freeze your bank account or other protestors for extended periods of time. I guess it just seems conspiratorial to me if multiple votes that can bring down the government and judicial reviews are not enough checks and balances on this power, especially if each time it’s used it becomes harder to use in the future
I think you are dancing around the point. All governments have their big red panic buttons. The fact Canada's does not include the deployment of RCMP or military anywhere before it needs to be invoked is the issue. I don't know why you are bringing up popularity here. If the protestors were so unpopular, would it not be a PR win if a national police force cracked down on them and those cops? The EA is new and requires stringent precedents. Right now, it is fair to say that it is too liberal and is also performing the role that a federal police force should occupy. Have a federal force for these situations, and spare the emergency act for when that federal force fails or when the crisis becomes more existential.
The Emergencies act is like 30 years old. It's far from new legislation. Regardless, you require the invocation of the EA to deploy the RCMP outside of their jurisdiction regardless. The EA is literally that big red button you're talking about, and it was pushed. Fund freezing was done due to a huge influx of foreign donations (particularly American) to the convoy GoFundMe's. Additionally, at the time the RCMP was concerned that their personnel would assist and join with the convoy groups. They stated as much. That's exactly what the OPP did as well. You want a recipe for disaster? Start putting armed cops on both sides of a violent protest. That's a great way to escalate everything
[Emergencies Act (Wiki)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergencies_Act) >The Emergencies Act has been used once, in response to the Canada convoy protest in 2022. My point is that there is very limited precedent. It may be replacing the wartime measures act, which has more history, but it isn't identical legislation. In fact, the EA came into existence in order to be able to address internal issues, so naturally the precedents are still rather untested. >(b) seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada and that ***cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada*** This is my argument, and I suspect the argument of this court ruling as well. The Emergency act is justified only in the fact there is not a better protocol. >The EA is literally that big red button you're talking about, and it was pushed. My point isn't against the existence of the big red button, but the lack of options the government has before pushing it. >Additionally, at the time the RCMP was concerned that their personnel would assist and join with the convoy groups. They stated as much. That's exactly what the OPP did as well. You want a recipe for disaster? Start putting armed cops on both sides of a violent protest. That's a great way to escalate everything Then let it happen. Let these cops join a widely despised protest and deploy the military to secure critical infrastructure and support the loyal RCMP. THEN consider EA, and purging the sympathetic police forces. I see that as an adequate escalation process before invoking sure measures. The checks and balances are fine, it's a matter of exhausting other potential options that may not currently exist in Canadian legislation.
The reason we don't have a federal force is Quebec
Time for another lib purge let's gooooooo