It Can’t Happen Here
It can’t happen here. Not here, where our rights are protected. But in truth, that is precisely why it can happen.
Dissent is something guaranteed us, though a right that is universally despised by those in power. We possess the right to dissent, to freedom of speech and expression, so that we have the power to voice discontentment, even if just a single person standing on a street corner.
Yet our perception of democracy is a convoluted one in that it does not particularly exist in this country, nor in most that claim it as their foundation. In reality, plutocratic governance is a far greater reality, and has been for centuries. Those that have the power to economically influence are of greater importance to government than the average citizen, that is the unfortunate state in which we are all born into.
In 2004, a couple from Texas traveled to Charleston, West Virginia, to hear the President speak on the 4th of July. Being that they disagreed with the policies of his administration, they wore homemade t-shirts that had the President’s last name on the front in a circle with a line through it and slogans on the back, one of which read “regime change starts at home”. Several hours before the President addressed the crowd, the couple, Nicole and Jeffery Rank, were arrested because they refused to take the t-shirts off. They were handcuffed and taken to jail without being charged. Once they were interned at the jail, the authorities charged them with trespassing, even though they were on State grounds, which are public property. The charges were later dropped, but only after the Rank’s were forced to return to Charleston to face prosecution, after which the elicited the help of the American Civil Liberties Union.
After the ordeal, the Rank’s decided to bring a civil suit against the city, which was later settled for $80,000 dollars. Interestingly, one of the stipulations that the city tried to have included in the settlement was a gag order so that the Rank’s would not be able to talk about what had occurred. The couple refused and, in the end, the city gave way.
Now, I’m sure that some of you reading this might be thinking that the Ranks fit the typical sterotype of ‘leftist radicals’. But as you can clearly see in the picture to the left, they’re just ordinary, average Americans – Americans with a grievance about the conduct of their own government that took it upon themselves to make a statement. The Constitution of the United States protects their freedom to so.
Ironically, the President, while addressing the crowd later that day, spoke about the freedoms enjoyed by Americans, the very same freedoms that the Rank’s were denied simply because they refused to remove their t-shirts.
Now, how does one define that? As a chance occurrence that is, in no way, indicative of a current trend? Would it shock you to learn that The White House actually has a manual in which staff members are educated on subjects including “deterring potential protestors from President Bush’s public appearances around the country”? During the Republican National Convention in New York prior to the last Presidential election, protestors were kept blocks from the convention, blocked by barricades and police brandishing assault rifles. So how is one supposed to view these freedoms that are supposedly guaranteed the people when they are met with such resistance?
Democracy, I am loathed to say, is become a rouse. When purple fingered Iraqis were being hailed by Congress and the Bush administration, the deliverance of democracy to Iraq was used as a justification for military intervention, one of the few straws grasped at after the primary reasons for the invasion proved dishonest. And now? Well, now US lawmakers seem to have no qualms about publicly stating that the very Iraqi government that was elected, and whose creation was celebrated, should be replaced because it is not meeting US goals. Interestingly, they’re not alone. Even Muqtada al-Sadr agrees, though his reasons for doing so are obviously somewhat different.
I have always wondered why one of the most popular slogans over the last fifty some odd years has frequently been “power to the people”. I suppose I have laboured under the misguided impression that our system of government was steeped in that principle. Unfortunately, it would seem that that isn’t necessarily the case, despite the fact that we like to convince ourselves otherwise. That said, perhaps we should simply come to terms with the fact that when we do attempt to wear dissenting clothing we can look forward to a trip to jail, and rest assured that those standing beside us when we are arrested will look the other way simply out of fear of joining us.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 21st, 2007 at 11:35 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:14 am
It’s sad because it’s happening more and more. I was a student at UBC during the whole APEC meeting years ago. From my 8th floor apartment, I could see snipers on all the high UBC buildings pointing down at the crowds of protesters below, even though they were mostly far removed (deliberately) from any of the main summit activities.
Too few people will stand up for their rights these days (which might involve them getting arrested), and instead passively give way under pressure like that. And as a result, the line in the sand keeps getting pushed further and further backwards.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 am
Interesting brand of “democracy” to export to Iraq.
What a joke.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:23 am
You (Matt) said:
‘That said, perhaps we should simply come to terms with the fact that when we do attempt to wear dissenting clothing we can look forward to a trip to jail, and rest assured that those standing beside us when we are arrested will look the other way simply out of fear of joining us.’
I (ashleigh-dawn) say:
You know what???That doesn’t seem so bad though (getting thrown in jail)…Personally I don’t care…I would rather stand up for what I believe in and be thrown in jail while other ppl stare than simply keep my mouth shut…I have it on good authority that you would do the same…We have to…if we don’t than our children will live in the same crap we do. or worse. and of course we will have criminal records, and be bribed or blackmailed to keep our mouthes sewn shut (maybe neither if they feel certain individuals to be of no consequence), but there is no way on earth I will let some giant machine keep me from expressing my concerns about the world…even if democracy does end up in the ground. kill me if you must, but my opinion and right to express it is mine for Forever.
As for Iraq…I read about that last night…its so moronic! Every excuse in the book is being dragged out just to make the US look justified in their meddling in foreign affairs. They don’t really care who gets the job just as long as they come off looking good. There’s always a scapegoat. They will probably never admit that they are responsible for all of this. It’s like the kid who never does his homework. on purpose.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:46 am
Interesting point. I think part of the reason governments hate protesters is because those who disapprove of government policies tend to shout a lot louder than those who are not compelled to protest, whether through apathy, indecision or because they actually have no beef with the government.
Case in point; at Sydney University in Australia today i was disturbed during my classes by an angry and clearly impassioned group chanting in protest of Bush’s policies and John Howard’s support of them. My class was being held in a room adjacent to the lawn on which the protesters were stood. They were making such a noise that i was compelled to take a look at what was happening. There were about 40 protesters screaming with all their might. In a University of this size, and the extent of poster campaigning that had gone on, i was surprised at how few there were.
Like many Universities, Sydney has anti-Bush or anti-Howard poster campaigns, usually propounding a ’socialist alternative,’ all over campus, outnumbering all other forms of advertising 10-1. Any day-visitor to Sydney University would believe that the student body was anti-Bush/Howard and left wing in the extreme. However, only 40 chose to show up to this protest. It illustrated both the passion of these protesters, but also how politically lethargic the rest of us are. Why do these posters dominate our political voice? Why don’t more moderate poster campaign occur, and if we are all actually anti-Bush, why didn’t more meet on the lawn and shout? Apathy dominates our political landscape, and leaves it open to usurpation - be it at government or student level.
I’m sure Howard would have considered today’s turnout to be ’sad,’ but what was more sad, in my opinion, was the fact that there was at least 1 armed police officer standing by for every two banner toting protesters. Maybe intimidation encourages apathy.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:54 am
I’m sure I could look it up but Matt, or anyone else, how common has it been for past administrations to so brazenly muzzle public protest? Especially harmless protest like wearing a t-shirt?
I know efforts are always made to minimize negative press, but this just seems particularly outrageous and absurd.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:03 am
“That said, perhaps we should simply come to terms with the fact that when we do attempt to wear dissenting clothing we can look forward to a trip to jail, and rest assured that those standing beside us when we are arrested will look the other way simply out of fear of joining us.”
At this point I wonder if the fear of police is as strong a deterrent as the fear of looking uncool. Man, I can’t wait until Hollywood starts pumping out blockbusters where the hero is a hero because he protests violence rather than proliferating it.
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:40 am
so whats next?will they shoot?of course.some do.when convinced they must.we wont be treated any different.so you will die to free us?.i.would that work?probly not.i dont know.
septicemia’s.get em from in i say.they fear losing control cause they know they never diserved it.gooday.
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:52 am
just for t-shirts, wonder whats next
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:35 am
“So how is one supposed to view these freedoms that are supposedly guaranteed the people when they are met with such resistance?”
Out of many things you’ve written in the past, I’ve read this one^ comment with my most interest.
I suppose the question is met with a simple answer: ?. I really don’t know where to begin. In all honesty, democracy is as much an evolutionary circle as it is a historical context. From that perspective, the day and age in which we live hasn’t changed very much. The words ‘bush’ and ‘freedom’ for example aren’t very popular these days, so I would suppose, that the same couple could have branded t-shirts with the slogans “We are the terrorists.” Maybe then it would’ve been less threatening? Again - I don’t know if there is justice in what I’m telling you. What I do know is that the question you’ve raised is fair. The couple were straight-forward and honest in taking responsibility for a world we share. The common ground would classify them as heroic in a sense. Think about it: couldn’t they have worked out a bargain with the authorities by admitting, “We really thought our shirts were cool and hostile. - Like Bush.” Or something nifty like that?? Truly unbelievable.
P.S. Tell me something - are you not adding another Winnipeg show? Ticket Master is sold out. Do it for Bush man.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:37 am
There was an interesting article in The Star yesterday which said that protesters were accusing police of using undercover agents to provoke violent confrontations at the recent summit in Montebello, Que. Apparently they videotaped the ordeal, whereby the alleged undercover agents (who had their faces covered in bandanas, and one had a rock in his hand) were asked to leave (unsuccessfully) by one of the protest organizers. The article goes on to describe additional evidence, and quite frankly from the sounds of it seems quite plausible. This is the first time I’ve heard of such a scenario, but if it is true, then I am (yet again) disappointed with the powers that be. When you think about it, what better way to devalue a cause then by degenerating a protest into violence.
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:01 am
“During the Republican National Convention in New York prior to the last Presidential election, protestors were kept blocks from the convention, blocked by barricades and police brandishing assault rifles. So how is one supposed to view these freedoms that are supposedly guaranteed the people when they are met with such resistance?”
How close should protesters be allowed to go??.. keeping in mind the security of the people who they are protesting against?
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:20 am
Here is the video of the police provocateurs at the Montebello summit, although it’s hard to tell whether this person is a cop, the fact that he went INTO the police line, is rather telling, rather then leaving or joining the other “anarchists”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow
The story of the t-shirt couple is rather old, i’m surprised more people haven’t heard the story. The loss of civil liberties is strident and quite apparent in our anti-terrorism bill, i suggest people read how broad a lot of the language is in the bill so they can see how much is lost. If you want to know about power check out the CCCE and their influence on Canadian politics!
Anyway, good post Matt
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:23 am
protestors should be allowed to participate.up close.dèmokratia.if one is a proven security risk,he should be dealt with according to what(and why)he did.if he’s been the cause of trouble,his action are not to be blamed on other protestors.its getting ridiculous and horrible.we need to stop feeding it.
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:33 am
“Fuck the people. I want the power.” -At Last There Is Nothing Left To Say
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:35 am
Hopefully this link works but here is a picture that also lends credence to the protesters claim that there were cops posing as anarchists:
http://supercanuk.gnn.tv/_var/blogs/24670-c24f30829b262f27737584fcb1174245.jpg
Here the “anarchists” have the same shoes as the police officers with yellow triangles on the bottom. Taken in with the video of them going INTO the police line instead of trying to escape is rather damaging. That said, it could all be a big misunderstanding and maybe they are anarchists who just have the same boots. Who knows at this point but makes for an interesting story nonetheless.
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:50 am
[quote comment="23701"]just for t-shirts, wonder whats next[/quote]
The colour of your skin and hair.
Man… I am so angry about this, especially the fellow who said that snipers were pointing guns at students of UBC. These kind of intimidation tactics cannot be tolerated!
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:26 am
Good eye on the boots! I’m sooooooooooooooooo ANGRY!
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:00 am
Have any of you seen “Zeitgeist”?
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:10 am
I’m going to say what a lot of people here are probably not going to say because it puts them in a bad light. Even though I can assure you that 90% of people are thinking the same thing when they read stories of protesters.
[quote comment="23693"]Maybe intimidation encourages apathy.[/quote]
I sure as hell don’t want to go to jail. I don’t want to be shot at with rubber bullets, and I don’t want to be tear gassed. Those three things, are a strong enough deterrent for me to pretty much for-go any protesting that will occur under the supervision of the police. I just don’t want to the trouble. I don’t want to be in pain. etc, etc.
You nailed it, intimidation encourages apathy. The average person just does not care enough about any particular cause to put their body on the line for it, their reputation, and possibly their freedom (jail time). I know that I can’t think of one thing (and there are many things that I passionately oppose) that I would do any of those three things for. Call me what you will, but there are millions like me.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:16 am
[quote comment="23713"] You nailed it, intimidation encourages apathy. The average person just does not care enough about any particular cause to put their body on the line for it, their reputation, and possibly their freedom (jail time). I know that I can’t think of one thing (and there are many things that I passionately oppose) that I would do any of those three things for. Call me what you will, but there are millions like me.[/quote]
Sounds like you (and me, and the millions like us) just dont have the right motivation. If say your child was conscripted for a war you considered illegal, I think you might show up to a protest, physical threats be damned.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:16 am
I think you guys are missing something really vital here…I mean, seriously, THINK about this:
1 t-shirt plus 1 non-permanent-on-record arrest plus A few hours of inconvenience = EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS!
Screw work, I’m going to become a career Bush protestor!
;)
D
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:27 am
Question is, what should we do about it?
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:47 am
It ws interesting to see Bush comment on the Iraqi PM. He mentioned the will of the Iraqi people deciding such a matter. The will of the Iraqi people, as shown repeatedly in polls, is that the US get all troops out of Iraq.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:54 am
if true justice and freedom isnt important enough for you to sacrifice,it will be taken from you.from us.we shouldnt wait anymore.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:06 am
Toronto Star story about the suspected agents provocateurs at Montebello, which mentions the “protesters” talking with police, as well as the identical footwear with yellow triangles on the soles:
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/248608
an excerpt:
‘The three do not appear to have been arrested or charged with any offence.
‘Police confirm that only four protesters were arrested during the summit – two men and two women. All have been charged with obstruction and resisting arrest.
‘Veteran protester Jaggi Singh, who is helping to circulate the video as widely as possible, said all four of those arrested are known to organizers and are genuine protesters.
‘”But we see very clearly in that video three (other) men being arrested . . . How do (police) account for these three people being taken in, being arrested? Where did they go?” Singh said.’
The story seems of little importance to the Star, as one has to navigate through the main page, to the News page, scroll down to the subsections, choose the Canada page, then scroll down a lot more, in order to find it. I can’t find mention of it elsewhere: not CBC, not the Globe and Mail. Certainly not in the print edition of the Ottawa Citizen that I read this morning.
An earlier CBC story that raises some interesting questions about the police response to the early protests in Ottawa the previous week:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2007/08/13/ot-arrested-070813.html
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:50 am
heh makes me want to break out my “Drop Acid Not Bombs” tshirt
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:52 am
Nothing to see here… move along.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:02 am
I wonder how long the lies of the government will last before people catch on and take action… seriously, they were only TWO people wearing t-shirts it’s not like they were armed with missiles.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Well I would make two comments here.
First of all I would say that this may be the case in the states but it certainly isn’t in Canada. I know this because for the last 8 years or so I have been designing my own clothing with my own slogans on them. The slogans are extremely political and highly biased to the point where I have more than a couple of articles of clothing I have been reluctant to actually wear, convinced that it would end in me getting jumped.
Not the case at all. For all of my dissident wear, the worst thing that has happened is that I have had people trying to buy them off of me while I’m wearing them. I have had cops comment on them and usually they say that they are interesting or true and I have only once gotten some strange looks from police officers.
Secondly, for everyone who has asked what to do it’s easy. Make a shirt that says something true. Costs about $15 to do on your own but if you’re feeling lazy there are dozens of places (like the rocket) who will do it for you.
Why wear a logo or show a brand when you can wear something that might make people think?
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:44 pm
i agree with captain fantastic…go out and make shirts, people! there are TONS more people waiting to be offended by what you think!
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:02 pm
“So how is one supposed to view these freedoms that are supposedly guaranteed the people when they are met with such resistance?”
Again, let’s face it. . . that this^ in question really is the answer we seek in all of this. However, we might not all seek the truth so objectively speaking. In a perfect world, we’re made to suffer the consequence unabiding freedom. Think of that as you must. ~ I’m speaking of the nature in a world we live in and believe there is a cause to sacrifice what source of freedom (i.e. Bush) truly means?
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:42 pm
[quote comment="23713"]I sure as hell don’t want to go to jail. I don’t want to be shot at with rubber bullets, and I don’t want to be tear gassed. Those three things, are a strong enough deterrent for me to pretty much for-go any protesting that will occur under the supervision of the police. I just don’t want to the trouble. I don’t want to be in pain. etc, etc.
You nailed it, intimidation encourages apathy. The average person just does not care enough about any particular cause to put their body on the line for it, their reputation, and possibly their freedom (jail time). I know that I can’t think of one thing (and there are many things that I passionately oppose) that I would do any of those three things for. Call me what you will, but there are millions like me.[/quote]
The real power in protest lies in knowledge. Knowing that you stand up and represent those who, for whatever reason, are not able to stand beside you in person. Knowing that you will be made fun of. That you may be shoved around. That you may be arrested. But that the issue at hand is so important that your fellow citizens deserve to have a voice, even if they won’t/can’t/don’t use their own.
I wouldn’t agree with your statement that the average person doesn’t “care enough”. Fear and intimidation don’t result in immediate apathy.
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:50 am
[quote comment="23800"][quote comment="23713"]I sure as hell don’t want to go to jail. I don’t want to be shot at with rubber bullets, and I don’t want to be tear gassed. Those three things, are a strong enough deterrent for me to pretty much for-go any protesting that will occur under the supervision of the police. I just don’t want to the trouble. I don’t want to be in pain. etc, etc.
You nailed it, intimidation encourages apathy. [/quote]
The question of apathy is a highly contentious issue. If you remove yourself from the “. . . are we being apathetic” issue for a moment, then you might begin to realize it’s a Jeckyl-Hyde type of thinking. Kind to think of it, authorities are probably promoting the apathy thinking: “Look at all of these apathetic people, we must use force to keep the peace. . . before their apathy gets out of control.” Something like that.
On the one hand apathy does not direct our intentions. On the other hand. . . (and this is where it gets to be something of a psychological nature) one could argue that over the course of time apathy results in a desire to change within promoting freedom. I believe my intent is to promote my intent to the world. Therefore, my cost of living the ‘good life’ (is in a manner of speaking) not devoid of those things we establish unabiding to rules that reinforce my true sense in a world which we gain character or autonomy as most important. In other words, virtue to me = freedom = demonstrating my sense of self as one’s duty or honor.
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:54 pm
I think it can and should be noted that standing up for the freedoms that Canadians are afforded at birth is not something you routinely get thrown in jail for, beaten up by cops for, tear gassed for, (insertexcessivepoliceactionhere). At least….it shouldn’t. Which is the point of the blog.
The fact that it happens should be shocking and embarassing to the citizens within who have let their government get away with such disgusting things while spouting such lines as “proud to be living in (insertcountryhere)”. If we, as citizens, can’t be proud of something that the government cheerfully tells us we should be (or even worse, that we *are*), it should motivate us all to stand on street corners with placards, to shout slogans at those who would strangle our rights, and to gather ourselves to ensure that we are able to make the biggest impact in front of the right audience. At the very least it should force us to rethink and retool our own lives to ensure that we live the way we should. Free. And I have no respect for the people who know it is happening, but refuse to do anything about it.
I’ll stand up for you, even if you slap me in the face for it. That goes for your millions too.
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:09 pm
Thomas D’Aquino quote via the CBC:
“I do not say to myself, ‘If I don’t get an hour with the prime minister in the next six months, I’m going to go out and protest and reject the system outright. I don’t do that because civilized human beings — those who believe in democracy — don’t do that.”
Protesting is undemocratic and uncivilized. And that from the mouth who makes a living ensuring people don’t get to experience democracy through his uncivilized climb up the ladder. Why on earth do these people get to say utter bullshit like this without having it immediately contradicted by the very foundations of our history?