I have been urged by a great deal of people from all sides of the political spectrum to write something about Bill C-51. And while it may be said that I am no stranger to facing tough and controversial issues, I must admit that I weigh into this debate with a good deal more trepidation than is usually the case. For I have decided to sidestep the doomed position of being in favor or against this legislation. Instead, I aim to expose both sides for the hypocrites they are.
First, to right-wingers who support the bill, I say the following: more security legislation will not make us safer. I say this because there are already measures in place that give our police and spy agency the right to eavesdrop on people they suspect to be hell-bent on blowing up people and buildings. Furthermore, "lone wolf assailants" are not like the Al Qaeda of yesteryear. Lone wolves are just that: self-directed, unpredictable, and often under the radar.
Some of you might argue that giving the police more power to arrest "potential threats" or hold people in detention for longer while they gather evidence could have prevented some of the tragedy that occurred last year. But this brings us into an immoral political quandary from which it is impossible to escape, as by that logic we ought to just arrest everyone first and ask questions later. And who is to determine who is or is not a threat? I suppose this all sounds well and good when you're the one calling the shots. But who will speak for you when you are taken?
Second, to left-wingers who oppose the bill, I say the following: I hope feeling "targeted by Harper" gives you pause for thought and empathy. For a great deal of your neighbours, co-workers, and family members, feeling targeted by public policies and agencies of a distinctly ideological bias is just a way of life. Gun owners, people employed by natural resource extraction and many church going Canadians have been subjected to everything from seizure of property to public ridicule to censorship for decades at this point. Talk about Stalinist methods.
Some of you might argue that these people hold beliefs or participate in activities that are inherently risky to the public, the earth, etc., using the worst sampling of these groups to prove your point. Well, where do you think the short-pants staffers who wrote C-51 got their statistics from? Like you, they only counted the most disrespectful members of your political movements to justify the inclusion of some of C-51's harsher measures. Thus, if you wish to counter C-51 with any legitimacy, you cannot hold onto the methods you currently employ: all of it must go.
And finally, for those who feel outside of either camp, I say the following: bill C-51 and its contents are really just a microcosm of a wider issue in Canadian politics. Thanks to our media, our voting patterns and the serious lack of intelligent engagement with tough issues at all levels of government, we have often been reduced to legislation that is blunt or unhelpful in areas that need nuance and legislation that is half-baked or neutered in areas that need serious renovation.
Some of you might argue that politics have always been this way, and I would be the first to admit that there never were "good old days" just as there is no utopia in the future. But what dismays me most is the fact that at this point most parties aren't trying to hide it anymore, let alone be conciliatory or cooperative. They are just going ahead with their plan and their base's desires, pun intended. "We'll lead, you follow - or get out of the way," is now a universal slogan.
The only way out of this malaise is a serious attitude adjustment for those who want to be called adults in the long term. We are all to blame for the state of political affairs, and only by getting involved at the ground level and changing the tone of the conversation can we hope to steer our nation to the truest embodiment of peace, order, and good government.
