There is a bottom line to the railway blockades and the other illegal protests across the country in support of the Wet’suwet’en fight against the Coastal GasLink project.
Illegal protests have to stop.
Arrests would be unfortunate and perhaps counterproductive because such confrontation only heighten tensions between First Nations/environmentalists and others. This could add to the difficulty of finding long-term solutions.
But this may be the necessary reality.
The biggest problem in our nation right now is we’re really not bothering to listen to each other. Or, worse yet, about the only thing we seem capable of hearing is the slights each side directs at the other.
Consider the comment made by Conservative leader Andrew Scheer that First Nations and other protestors need to "park their privilege" in these protests.
It was an odd thing to come from a high-ranking politician who enjoys considerable privilege _ free residency by virtue of his position, being just one of them. It’s especially odd coming from Scheer, whose ousting from his party leadership has had a lot to do with a previously undisclosed arrangement in which party donors wound up paying for the private schooling of his children.
But this has little to do with laws being broken during these protests _ something that’s clearly unacceptable. You can be someone with fierce environmental concerns or someone of First Nations heritage with strong views on past and present wrongs, but that doesn’t given you the right to break the law.
And even if Scheer’s remarks were unhelpful, should they have “disqualified” Scheer from being invited by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to a joint federal leaders’ meeting to discuss possible resolutions to the protests and blockades?
In this minority Parliament that Trudeau said should be all about the “need to ensure that we are also listening to each other” wouldn’t it have been been appropriate to include all points of view? Wouldn’t that include Scheer’s view that does include the notion that the majority of elected and even some hereditary Wet’suwet’en chiefs sosupport this natural gas pipeline?
Ultimately, all of us in a democracy must not only live by majority rule, but also the rule of law.
You can’t break the law just to get your own way. And this is not a situation _ as Assembly of First Nations Grand Chief Perry Bellegarde put it _ about criminalizing what’s otherwise a political protest.
The law is the law.
But all this said, there’s always two sides to every story. It’s really easy to criticize those who break the law and maybe even easier to do so when those breaking the law seem intent on justifying why they are doing so.
Less easy understanding why First Nation and other protestors are so adament in their oppositon.
Sure, some of is purely driven by one’s philosophical worldview and that isn’t always a foundation for rational logical or deep understanding of issues in play.
Chants of “you can’t drink oil; keep it in the soil” during a recent downtown Toronto protest in support of Wet’suwet’en pipeline opposition seemed to badly miss the fact that this is a natural gas pipeline that could, arguably contriibute to greenhouse gas reduction.
However, what also might not be well understood is that the Wet'suwet'en First Nations did not sign treaties and their traditions do provide a legitimate role for hereditary chiefs in this debate.
Similarly, complaints that Coastal GasLink put undue pressure on elected chiefs to agree to this pipeline route when alternative routes might have been available further complicate matters.
But regardless of how legitimate the grievance may very well be, you aren’t doing to find the solutions in illegal protests that are sometimes thousands of miles away.
It makes no sense. A country cannot function this way.
