They were demonstrating about a situation in a far off foreign state.
They were right insofar as there is an ethnic group in that foreign state with a legitimate grievance; that group is an oppressed minority.
But the protesters here have their freedom -- they are, broadly put, Canadians. And so they should chant "freedom for the oppressed people of XYZ".
Is this a trifle?
I think not. I am a Canadian; though not born here I am Canadian and my roots don't change that. I may feel kinship with people who share my heritage in other nations, and I may support them and their hopes, and I may urge our government to support them, but it is OUR government and I am urging support as a Canadian.
We are Canadians first and, say, Italians, second.
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
1 comment:
Your comment suggests that, if they are free in Canada, they are free.
However, if these same people, whether Canadian citizens or not, went to region X, they would no longer be free.
In such an event, the statement "we want freedom now" is logically and semantically consistent with the assertion "we are Canadians."
Your problem with the chant arises from you seeing them *as* residents of region X, rather than as Canadians.
The suggstion, therefore, that their chant is somehow uncanadian, is something *you* impose on the situation, not something inherent in it.
As a lawyer, you should be aware of such distinctions, that the matter of fact in an event is the nature and intentions involved in the event itself, and not the interpretation some (possibly biased) observer places on it.
Post a Comment