Demonstrations & Peaceful Civil Disobedience
Zeljko:
I worked with Tamil refugees, and the Tamil community when it was getting established in Toronto. So did the agency with which I worked, York Community Services, in Toronto. Sri Lanka was a comlicated situation. Not all Tamils agreed with the violent role of the Tamil Tigers. However the Tigers exerted a lot of pressure on ordinary Tamil lives, which sometimes was not wise to resist.
I have no problem with a legitimate " demonstration " deciding at some point to use " civil disobience " as a political tactic. The Tamils blocking one Toronto street to try to further their political message is an illegal act. There are by-laws in place to allow traffic to keep moving. I don't see this as extreme illegality, compared to " violence " as a means to make a political statement, even if only against property, not individuals. But at the same time, the Tamils committing civil disobedience, even of a mild nature, must accept that there may well be legal consequences - such as tickets for obstructing traffic. However, to their credit, police do sometimes " compromise " where the demonstration is generally kep " legal " , and sometimes " overlook " mild illegalities as part of a generally peaceful " demonstration " ( not " mob violence " ).
You are exercising no sense of proportion in your analysis.
Bob
Zeljko:
I worked with Tamil refugees, and the Tamil community when it was getting established in Toronto. So did the agency with which I worked, York Community Services, in Toronto. Sri Lanka was a comlicated situation. Not all Tamils agreed with the violent role of the Tamil Tigers. However the Tigers exerted a lot of pressure on ordinary Tamil lives, which sometimes was not wise to resist.
I have no problem with a legitimate " demonstration " deciding at some point to use " civil disobience " as a political tactic. The Tamils blocking one Toronto street to try to further their political message is an illegal act. There are by-laws in place to allow traffic to keep moving. I don't see this as extreme illegality, compared to " violence " as a means to make a political statement, even if only against property, not individuals. But at the same time, the Tamils committing civil disobedience, even of a mild nature, must accept that there may well be legal consequences - such as tickets for obstructing traffic. However, to their credit, police do sometimes " compromise " where the demonstration is generally kep " legal " , and sometimes " overlook " mild illegalities as part of a generally peaceful " demonstration " ( not " mob violence " ).
You are exercising no sense of proportion in your analysis.
Bob
Comment