Turley: Free Speech As Roadkill
Jonathan Turley has an article at The Hill that addresses the Freedom Convoy phenomenon—and its significance. I haven’t read the article, but his three tweets say a lot about where we’ve come from and where we’re headed if something doesn’t give. As I said in a comment earlier today, ‘You break it, you own it’ still applies. The implications for the future could be huge:
What is most concerning now is the unwillingness to consider Canadian truckers as anything other than knuckle-dragging, racist insurrectionists...
Turley has a good conclusion that I think applies regardless of one's political persuasion:
"Acts of civil disobedience like these will remain part of political movements. However, if we want to reduce the impulse to take to the highways to protest, then we need to open up the information superhighway for full political expression and dissent."
That said, should the "information superhighway" now be considered the only legitimate means of political expression? What about, I don't know, public gatherings and speeches and signs and demands? I am curious as to whether the rights of free speech, association, and petitioning the government for redress of grievances exist in the Canadian constitution. I know they exist in ours (in the U.S.) but then again do they de facto apply here anymore?