I have witnessed the sad events in Canada over the past few weeks through electronic media. I was reminded of the tremendous gulf between the intellectuals and the rest of society. In any free or semi-free society, the intellectuals are its conscience. If liberty requires eternal vigilance, it is the intellectuals who stand as watchmen, day and night. The freedom convoy was the reaction of Canadian society, particularly truckers, to draconian regulations under the garb of a pandemic that has lasted for two years now. It was not a protest organized, instigated, led, or guided by intellectuals in Canada or elsewhere. It truly was a grass-roots movement, a reaction of men and women who, guided by nothing more than their common sense, reason, and an unabating faith in the ideals of their country, decided that the only way to make themselves heard was to drive into their capital city and honk. And honk they did. The protests were, however, the culmination of an abdication – a tremendous abdication by the intellectuals whose very livelihoods consist of keeping a society free through reasoned thought, foresight, judgement, and moral responsibility. The absence of any ‘intellectual honking’ throughout the course of this so-called pandemic ultimately led to literal honking by men and women from all walks of Canadian life who for two weeks or so came together in a remarkable camaraderie of goodwill and shared values of freedom. The freedom convoy was just that – a convoy of trucks laden with men, women, and their children demanding they be left alone to live their lives, raise their children, and earn their livelihoods. No, when the convoy triumphantly entered Ottawa, the intellectuals did not greet them with open arms, medals of honour, or standing ovations. Instead, they were branded as a ‘fringe minority’ that no one should have to bear or be reminded of. The intellectuals were not being dishonest, they did believe that the convoy that had entered the capital was a minority representation of Canadian life with a distasteful viewpoint or as the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, put it – ‘with unacceptable views.’ The intellectuals in Canada and elsewhere continue to believe they are the saviours of humankind from a deadly plague that would have wiped humanity out into extinction had it not been for their proposed regulations. Medical evidence, however, continues also to contradict their cherished dogmas. When it became, increasingly, evident that this was not just a fringe minority with unacceptable views but that a substantial number of Canadians supported the freedom convoy, both in Ottawa and throughout Canada – when it also became increasingly clear that the freedom convoy in Canada inspired peaceful protests in other countries, Justin Trudeau, the Canadian Prime Minister, switched tactics and re-branded them as a clear and present danger to the Canadian state itself culminating in the imposition of an Emergency Act, hitherto, never implemented, and reserved only for the gravest of grave circumstances. It is significant that the Prime Minister of Canada never once thought it fit to address the convoy in person nor did he think it fit to meet with the organizers or representatives of this convoy. He never once asked, perhaps not even to himself, what would make a convoy of trucks traverse continental distances in sub-zero temperatures with men, women, and children aboard to make themselves heard. He, however, has had the organizers, along with hundreds of others, arrested, has had their bank accounts frozen, has inflicted upon them violence through heavily armed police personnel, and has threatened anyone who dared to make a $50 charitable donation or to speak in defense of the freedom convoy with retroactive, unspecified, and dire consequences. Resorting to near military tactics, he has unleashed battalions of policemen dressed in combat gear and armed with battlefield weapons to quell unarmed and defenseless men, women, and children. It is a testament to the character and integrity of the protestors of the freedom convoy that the border blockades were cleared prior to the imposition of Trudeau’s Emergency Act and in certain instances, were entirely relinquished voluntarily with the protestors and policemen hugging one another as a peaceful ending.
As of this writing, the Canadian parliament is voting on the Emergency Act to make it indefinite for the foreseeable future. Trudeau’s justification for the continuation of this act is that “future protests” might make it necessary for him to hold on to as much power as he can get away with. This argument is tantamount to the following – since all men can potentially murder, rob, pillage, and rape in the future, the wisest act would be to keep them confined in cages, indefinitely. This is the ultimate preventive regulation that a government can inflict upon its citizens – and is a hallmark of dictatorships. Irrespective of whether the Canadian parliament ratifies this draconian act, it is unconstitutional on multiple grounds and should be legally challenged, which it is being. I would only add one further point. Justin Trudeau’s cabinet serves at the pleasure of Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II who is represented by the Governor General of Canada. The Governor General is vested with reserve powers which she can use to dismiss a sitting cabinet of ministers and the Prime Minister. I submit that current circumstances in Canada justify the use of these reserve powers. Justin Trudeau, in his capacity as Prime Minister, is a clear and present danger to Canadian liberty, equality, fraternity, and individual rights.