On Protests And Politics

Necessary Questions & Common Sense Responses

In a free society governed by the rule of law:

Is it wrong to question and reject a nation's (military) actions?

• No, it is not wrong to judge and to publicly condemn the actions of any nation or government provided the challenge to said actions is conducted in a peaceful and respectful manner. Constructive criticism is essential to the workings of the state.
• The actions of any government may be questioned and rejected if those actions are found to be unjust by a reasonable moral standard. See: https://catholicism.org/catholic-teaching-just-war.html
• No one behaving in a rational and orderly way may be restrained or indicted for engaging in a peaceful and respectful protest.
• No law-abiding protestor should be compelled to abandon a cause if it be a reasonable and objectively just cause.
• Given a natural right to promote justice, no government may impede the right of citizens to associate in the exercise of said right.
• Any inconvenience or interruption caused by protest(ors) must not exceed reasonable limits. Protests that are aimed at or inspired by the actions of foreign governments must not trump domestic needs. For example, civil disobedience may not trump:
• the legitimate moral health needs of the local population, which take priority;
• the ability to engage in one's livelihood or employment and education; said responsibilities take priority over protests; nor may an issue take precedence over the rights of other citizens to live in peace and to provide for themselves and their families.
• Protests that are more than informational and attempt to trump the informed conscience of an individual, and inhibit the free exercise of another's lawful responsibilities, and/or demean another or attempt to render someone harm, are for obvious reasons not tenable.
• Actions are untenable when they impinge on the inalienable rights and freedoms of others.

Is it right to judge and condemn the actions of a known terrorist organization and anyone affiliated with such an organization?

• Yes, it is justifiable to publicly judge and condemn the actions of a known terrorist organization, or any group or individual known to use violence against the innocent, and anyone who associates themselves with such an organization's policies and practices.
• To protect others from physical harm, anyone who subscribes to an ideology that directly or indirectly advocates violence, and who behaves in an irrational and disorderly way, should be restrained or indicted for their objectively harmful actions according to the prescriptions and proscriptions of the law.
• Human dignity requires actions intended to deter bad actors to be enacted with timely and appropriately just force. See: THE FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN PERSON a. The value and limits of freedom, 135: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
• A civilized society should not tolerate nor allow individuals (including those from foreign countries currently residing in an adopted homeland) who commit violent acts to go unrestrained.
• Politicians, police and representatives of the legal profession have a duty and moral obligation to protect innocent people from physical violence and/or coercive speech that impinges on the inalienable rights of law-abiding individuals in a free society.
• A society must be concerned about the environmental impacts of an individual's or group's actions.
• Protest that harms the local environment, degrades valued outdoor space(s) and impedes others from engaging community gathering places, cannot be justified. Harm to a local environment can (and usually does) adversely affect not only people but can negatively impact wildlife.

Risks

In Canada, peace, order and good government are high values. When citizens lobby on behalf of another country or people, it is only right that citizens or prospective citizens avoid escalating dissension and disorder that risks destabilizing Canadian society and disturbing the peace.

Generally speaking, Canadians are a reasonable people. Until recently, Canada has been a respected partner in the community of nations. We cannot help others if our own society harbours and fuels the very problems that other societies are suffering.

As mentioned above, acts which degrade the local living space cannot be justified. Waste in various forms - e.g., paper and plastic waste, human waste (which can spread disease), discarded food (which can attract rodents), drug paraphernalia - will severely affect health and well being. People have a right to enjoy shared public spaces that are free from harm to their physical well being.

Responsibilities

A person may very well be attached to his or her homeland, through family and friends and/or religion or culture, but that person - by choosing to come to Canada - must abide by the law of the land.

• Excepting reasons that concern the physical health and well being of others, no one should be pressured to abandon their inherited culture or religious practices. Horrific practices such as female genital mutilation (FGM) and honour killings are, for obvious reasons, not acceptable in a civilized society, and therefore must be rejected, and those who commit such crimes against the dignity of the person must be held accountable according to the law.
• To be clear, unjust laws - for example, laws or policies that condone and/or promote the killing of the unborn, or laws or policies that permit or condone the degradation of human dignity, health and wellbeing (e.g., pornography, prostitution, sado-masochism, mutilation by surgical or chemical means) - can and must be overturned through just means.

The transportation of social ills from other countries into Canada by bad actors has been and continues to be a challenge for people of goodwill who desire to live in neighbourly accord.

Consequences

Anyone who wants to live in Canada should understand and accept that he or she is subject to the same laws as everyone else, and that if or when someone cannot or will not abide by Canadian laws and the necessity for peace and order, he or she should expect to be incarcerated and/or returned to their country of origin.

• The unwillingness to integrate and to foster law-abiding associations - professional and personal - and the proven tendency to act illegally in their adopted homeland, is sufficient grounds for incarceration and/or deportation of those who disregard Canadian law.
• Those who have engaged in unlawful or morally indefensible behaviour, if they are landed immigrants and/or prospective citizens, should have their citizenship revoked and be deported to their country of origin.

Protests whose goal is to destabilize a society are therefore suspect and should be subject to restraint and dispersal.

• The leaders of groups whose aim is to destabilize a society should be subject to lawful prosecution.
• Those who are negatively impacted economically by protests are entitled to pursue legal means against protest organizers to recover lost income, lost property and other expenses.

All actions or impacts, potential and/or actual, must be weighed against the standard of inalienable human dignity. That is, the preservation of human dignity is the measure of every action committed by anyone asserting themselves in the promotion of a cause or issue.

Addendum 15MAY2024

Randall Smith @ The Catholic Thing

https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2024/05/14/student-demonstrations-power-not-freedom-of-speech/

Some years ago, a bright student of mine had a complaint about something on campus.  “Okay,” I said, “so what are you going to do?” After a moment’s thought, she said: “Gather people together to demonstrate?” “How about getting elected to student government, writing an op-ed in the paper, seeking to convince others of your position?” I replied. Those options either hadn’t occurred to her, or she had no faith in them.

Democracy is a messy business; it requires patience and skills of its own. It’s not like driving a car that moves in the direction I steer, accelerates to the speed I want, and stops when and where I determine. It means dealing with other people. And other people have ideas and concerns of their own.

Show no interest in the ideas and concerns of others, and they are likely to return the favor.  Like you, they want to drive the car in the direction they want. And as everyone who spends time on America’s highways knows, this highly individualistic lack of concern for others is bad for everyone.

As we need “rules of the road” to provide the order that ensures everyone can get to their destinations “freely” and in relative safety, so too if speech is to be “free,” if it is to be a “common good” and not merely the privilege of one powerful group, speakers must observe a set of procedural norms meant to preserve this freedom for everyone.