What Are We Learning Today?

3.5 Analyze the extent to which the practices of political and economic systems reflect principles of liberalism.

The Will of the People • A

democracy

is a form of gov’t in which power is ultimately vested in the ppl. • Two forms that exist are direct and representative democracy. In

direct democracy

, the people participate in deciding issues directly. In a

representative democracy

, elected officials who represent the ppl make laws in their interests.

Direct Democracy • Direct democracy operates on the belief that every citizen’s voice is important and necessary for the orderly and efficient operation of society.

• Why doesn’t everyone use direct democracy if it’s more democratic?

• However, direct democracy can often be impractical. For it to effectively work it needs a relatively small # of ppl who can get together in 1 space to discuss issues, then make decisions based on the majority vote.

Initiatives • There are some characteristics of direct democracy that are found in the practices of many liberal democracies. They can exist in the forms of initiatives, referendums/plebiscites, and recalls.

• Citizens in the US use initiatives to create legislation. To create an initiative, a citizens’ group draws up a petition. If the petition is signed by a certain # of citizens, it can force a public vote on an issue. • Pg. 337-338

Referendums/Plebiscites • In referendums or plebiscites, all citizens may vote on whether to accept or reject a proposed piece of legislation. Referendums, in effect, refer the decision to the ppl. The word plebiscite literally means “the common ppl speak.” • There have been only 3 referendums held at the federal level in Canada’s history, yet numerous municipal and provincial plebiscites have been held over the years.

Recalls • In a recall election, a majority of voters may choose to remove an elected official or gov’t from power. This is usually initiated through a petition.

• In Canada, only BC allows recalls at the provincial level. If enough registered voters sign a petition to recall a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA), the Speaker announces the recall, and a by-election is held as soon as possible. Since recalls were enacted in 1995, over 20 recall efforts have been launched, but no one has actually been recalled so far.

Representative Democracy • Most modern liberal democracies, because of their size and complexity, use a form of RD.

• In RD, the will of the ppl is expressed in the selection of representatives to the gov’t during elections. RD ensure that those elected remain true to the will of the ppl through periodic elections, the presence of multiple political parties, the separation of powers among different branches of gov’t, an independent media, and the rule of law. These act as tools to establish basic citizen rights & freedoms, and to prevent abuse by those who exercise power.

Canada’s Parliamentary Democracy • • Copy figure 10-7 pg. 339 • There are many variations of rep. democracies. Canada has a parliamentary democracy that follows a tradition known as responsible gov’t.

Responsible gov’t

: a form of representative democracy in which the branch of gov’t that proposes the laws, (the executive branch), is dependent on the support of elected members, (the legislative branch).

• Pg. 339

Ridings/Constituencies • Because Canada, like most liberal democracies, operates on the basis of representation by population, the entire country is divided into electoral districts, ideally of 100,000 ppl, which are called ridings or constituencies.

• Canada’s electoral process is known as a

single-member constituency

, which means each constituency sends a single representative to the House of Commons in the federal parliament in Ottawa.

Why the further north you go do the constituencies get bigger? (pg. 340)

“First-past-the-post” • Our system is also sometimes referred to as

“first-past-the-post”

because, as in a horse race, candidates who pass a certain point in the race with the highest # of votes in each of their ridings win ). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmonton%E2%80%94St.

_Albert

Bicameral Legislature • Like many gov’t systems, Canada has a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature to provide 2 different forms of representation . Canada’s 105 member Senate is based on region rather than by population. • Senators are not elected; as a seat becomes vacant in the Senate, the prime minister appoints a new senator (who may remain until age 75) to fill it.

Is there a point to the Senate?

• Any piece of legislation that has been passed by the H of C MUST also be passed by the Senate before it can become law.

• It is extremely rare, however, for the Senate to reject a bill that has been approved by the H of C. This is why so many ppl don’t see a point to having a Senate. • It is, however, common for the Senate to recommend changes (amendments) to bills passed by the H of C, and to have the H of C consider and pass the bill as amended by the Senate.

The US’ Republican Democracy • Unlike Canada, which has a monarch, the US follows a republican system of gov’t. A republic is a country where the ppl are sovereign and there is no king or queen. • Like Canada, the US has 3 branches of gov’t: legislative, executive, and judicial. To ensure that the gov’t adheres to liberal principles, the US uses a system of checks and balances to make sure that no branch of the gov’t becomes too powerful.

Checks and Balances & Will of the People • This system was created based on the beliefs that checks and balances would keep the gov’t too weak to override the will of the ppl, and that the least intrusive gov’t provides more freedom to its citizens. • Essentially, this system allows the will of the people to be maintained and never gives any branch of gov’t too much power.

2 Chambers of US Congress House of Representatives – single-member constituency system – country is divided into electoral districts based on representation by population.

• 435 members elected every 2 years.

• Senate.

– Senate is elected as well. Each state has 2 senators, regardless of population, who are elected every 6 years. The elections for the Senate are staggered (1/3 of Senate seats every 2 years).

• ensures that there are always experienced senators who can carry on business & help initiate new senators.

http://politicalmaps.org/

How a Bill is Passed in the US • Legislation is voted on in both the House and the Senate, if it passes, it can be signed into a law by the president. • A president can choose not to sign a bill into law (veto). A vetoed bill is sent back to the house of Congress. • Here, the members of that house can pass a revised bill and submit it again for the president’s signature, or they can override his veto with a 2/3 rd ’s majority vote. Thus, a bill can be made into a law without the president’s approval.

How is the President in the US Determined?

• In Canada generally, the party that obtains the most seats in Parliament becomes the gov’t, and its leader is the PM.

• In US, the ppl go to the polls and vote for the presidential candidate of their choice by voting for electors pledged to support their choice of candidate. The president is actually elected by a body known as the Electoral College.

• Pg. 342 & Figure 10-10

What are the advantages/disadvantages of a 2 party system?

America’s Two-Party System • The US has essentially a 2 party system. It is extremely difficult for a 3 rd party to win. • While this has the advantage of stability, it is virtually impossible to challenge the established parties to consider minority opinions. • However, the party with the most seats in Congress usually has the support of the majority of voters.

Proportional Representation • In Sweden and many other countries, the gov’t uses a different form of representation:

proportional representation

.

• In this system, citizens vote directly for a party, and then representatives are assigned based on the amount of popular support obtained. • The system encourages and legitimizes participation by a minority or marginal parties who would not obtain representation in the systems used in Canada or the US.

Proportional Representation & Minority Governments • Usually, countries using a prop. representation system have many more political parties than countries using a single-member constituency. • This often results in coalitions where 2 or more parties must work together to form the gov’t. On occasion, a minority gov’t might be formed.

• In Sweden, 4 major parties have had the most political control and have formed coalition gov’ts for years. • Pg. 343 & Figure 10-11

For Homework

• Read “Examining Proportional Representation” on pg. 344-345. • Answer questions 1-3 (you will need a calculator).

• Due tomorrow.

Challenges to the Will of the Ppl: Voter Turnout • Pg. 347 • Figure 10-14 • Figure 10-15 • Pause & Reflect

What is Authoritarianism?

•

Authoritarianism

describes a form of gov’t that vests authority in an elite group that may or may not rule in the interests of the ppl. It can take many forms, including oligarchies, military dictatorships, ideological one-party states, and monarchies.

Authoritarianism & Will of the Ppl

• Authoritarian systems of gov’t are generally regarded by outsiders as being unconcerned with the will of the ppl, but this is not necessarily true.

• Authoritarian gov’ts may claim that order and security are more important than freedom, and, like a wise father figure, will make decisions in the interests of the ppl.

Is a democracy necessarily always the best form of gov’t?

Why do you think we have been conditioned to think that it usually is?

Democracy Not Necessarily “Better” • Although it is easy for us to view democracy as “better” than any of the systems presented here – especially since many of the gov’ts that will be discussed are infamous for enforcing their laws through repressive and brutal measures – some of these systems have developed in response to particular historical conditions or as attempts to counter the challenges and problems faced by democracies that were discussed earlier.

• Many authoritarian gov’ts also believe that they are serving the best interests of the country.

Oligarchies •

Oligarchy

is a form of gov’t in which political power rests with a small elite segment of society. They are often controlled by politically powerful families who pass on their influence to their children.

• Present-day Russia has been called an oligarchy because of the power that some individuals, previously associated with the Communist party in the Soviet Union, gained after the fall of communism.

Some ppl have argued that all democracies eventually end up being run like an oligarchy. What do you think is meant by this?

(US: 2 party country: Clinton/Bush; Obama/McCain)

One-Party State • A

one-party state

is a type of system where only 1 party forms the gov’t and no other parties are permitted to run candidates for election. Some of the appearances of democracy exist but the absence of choice and the barriers against change eliminate the liberal democratic principle of the will of the ppl.

• One-party states are often communist states, but they describe themselves as a

people’s republic, socialist republic,

or

democratic republic

to indicate that they somehow embody the will of the ppl.

Pros of a One-Party State • Supporters of a 1-party state often point to the sense of unity, strength, and community that a single party gov’t can give to a country. They argue multi-party systems introduce too much division and conflict, which impedes economic and political development.

Cons of a One-Party State • Critics say that this system is not truly democratic, nor represents the will of the ppl, since a choice of only 1 party is really no choice at all. However, in some single party states, such as Italy under Mussolini, constituents often could choose for which candidates to vote, although they were all from the Fascist party.

Military Dictatorships • A

military dictatorship

, sometimes known as a military junta, is a form of gov’t in which political power resides with the military leadership. • Like any dictatorship, a military dictatorship can be official or unofficial, and sometimes mixed forms exist where the military exerts strong influence over those in power. Military dictatorships often come to power through a coup d'état, in which the existing gov’t is overthrown by military personnel.

How could a military justify taking over a country to it’s people?

Military Dictatorship Rationale • Some military dictatorships have justified their claims to power as a way of bringing political stability to their countries or of rescuing them from “dangerous ideologies.” • Military regimes tend to portray themselves as neutral 3 rd parties who can provide interim leadership during times of turmoil. This is seen as better for the ppl in the long run, even if the will of the ppl needs to be ignored or undermined in the short term.

• Figure 10-21 pg. 361

Techniques of Authoritarian Gov’ts: Vision • 1 of the most important aspects of any ideology, including those of authoritarian gov’ts, is a

vision

: an idea of what the country could be if led by a leader who could obtain the vision.

• Some visions revolve around security – protecting the country from some perceived threat.

• Hitler & Stalin

Propaganda • Propaganda is the use of a set of messages designed to influence the opinions or behaviours of large numbers of ppl.

• Propaganda is never neutral; there is no attempt to equally display both sides of the story.

• Figure 10-23 & 10-24 pg. 363

Controlled Participation • Controlled participation allows the population ruled by an authoritarian gov’t to feel as if it is contributing to the country in some ways.

• For example, by attending rallies, helping to spy on “subversives,” preparing for the war effort, becoming the “block boss” for the party – anything that will convince the public to buy into the accepted ideology and prevent the development of contrary opinions.

Example: Nuremberg Rallies of Nazi Germany

Directing Public Discontent • This is where the people are provided with an enemy on which they can safely unleash their frustrations. Threat can be foreign or internal.

• Stalin used show trials to convict dissidents in the SU, banishing those convicted to the gulags (prisons). This was to consolidate his power and remove anyone who might challenge him. Stalin would charge his targets with a manufactured crime and put them on trial. The trials were called

show trials

because the verdict of guilt was always assured through forced confessions or fabricated evidence.

What is the main message here concerning popular discontent?

Terror • Some authoritarian gov’ts use quick, brutal, and arbitrary violence to “disappear” dissidents. People simply vanished from everyday life, never to be heard from again. Relatives would search for them in vain, only to discover later that they had been tortured and murdered.

Strengths of Authoritarianism • Though many authoritarian gov’ts employ horrible acts of human rights violations to enforce their power, the visions many dictators paint for their countries often addresses the needs of the ppl and often resulted in positive circumstances for many. • Many Russians, for example, long for the days of the SU; under which communism they were able to obtain food for their families and heat their homes. Many of the “liberating” market reforms since communism have hurt the Russian ppl more than helped them.

Weaknesses of Authoritarianism • Just like a democracy, authoritarianism has its weaknesses. This willingness of authoritarian gov’ts to sacrifice individual citizens for the perceived needs of the country is clearly unacceptable on many levels. • Most authoritarian gov’ts also seem unable to change leadership in a peaceful manner. This often leads to periods of violence and misery during the transition from one leader to another. Also, if a dictator loses popular support and spontaneous opposition arises, violence, once again, is often the result.

How Do These Techniques Work?

• Most of these techniques can be effective, at least in the short term. If citizens subscribe to the government’s vision, if they are soothed by its propaganda, and if they feel they are contributing to the greater good, they may be less aware of the authoritarian nature of gov’t. • Authoritarian gov’ts are aware of the pros and cons of these techniques, and use them to varying degrees to meet their particular needs. Yet the goal in all cases is to create the idea that the gov’t is using its authority to protect the country, and the interests and will of the ppl.

Are there circumstances in which an authoritarian regime can be seen as an expression of the will of the people?

What Are We Learning Today?

3.8 Evaluate the extent to which gov’ts should promote individual and collective rights.

Rights in Liberal Democracies • In some countries, specific legislation, such as the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms (1982), is employed to entrench (establish) rights to life, liberty, and personal safety. • These rights are protected by law and cannot be modified without extensive consultation with the public and substantial multi-party support.

• This protection ensures that rights cannot be easily overturned, while still allowing a measure of flexibility that allows for the evolution of individual rights and freedoms in light of changing social conditions.

Are There Any Limits to Our Rights?

• The only limit to the fundamental rights proclaimed in the Charter is that they are “subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” • In other words, there are limits to individual rights. No individual has the right to infringe on the rights of others. Individual rights can and must be balanced to the interests of preserving the rights of everyone in the community.

The Quebec Charter of Human Rights & Freedoms • The Quebec Charter of Human Rights & Freedoms is a statutory bill of rights and human rights code that was passed by the National Assembly of Quebec in 1975. • Having precedence over all provincial legislation, the Quebec Charter stands at the pinnacle of Quebec’s legal system. Only the Constitution of Canada, including the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, takes priority over the Quebec Charter.

Criticisms of Rights Legislation • 1 criticism of rights legislation is that it can have unforeseen negative consequences. For example, documents such as the Charter of Rights & Freedoms focus almost exclusively on the rights of individuals, possibly at the expense of the rights of the community. • A great example is industrialization and laissez faire capitalism in many countries that had theoretical individual rights, but became meaningless due to the enormous economic and political gap between industrialists and workers and the poverty of the working class.

Only Words?

• Another criticism of rights legislation is that the words in some of these documents contain very little real power.

• In some countries, especially dictatorships or totalitarian regimes, individual rights and freedoms have been subjugated to the needs of the state, even though those countries may have a constitution or other documents that protect individual rights.

Cuba • Cuba is a great example because the dictator and ruling elite have all the political and legal control. The gov’t alone interprets and implements its Constitution, and controls any changes made to it. The result is very little protection for individual rights and freedoms.

The Promotion of Collective Rights • • One responsibility charged to the gov’t is the promotion of collective rights and stability.

Collective rights

: rights guaranteed to specific groups in Canadian society for historical and constitutional reasons.

• In the context of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, “collective rights” refer primarily to the rights of official language groups and Aboriginal peoples.

Why Are Collective Rights So Important?

• “Collective rights are the cornerstone on which Canada was built. Without the guarantees made to groups and minorities, it is unlikely that the peoples of Upper and Lower Canada, so different from one another, would have joined to form a country.” – Supreme Court Justice Beverly McLachlin

Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms vs. American Bill of Rights • One of the primary differences between the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the American Bill of Rights is our inclusion of collective rights.

• Quote pg. 378

Recognition of Collective Rights • Including collective rights in the Charter on the one hand and having gov’ts in Canada promote or even recognize these rights on the other hand are, however, two different things.

• Since the Charter came into being in 1982, some groups in Canada have had to fight to have their collective rights respected.

Francophone Schools in Alberta • In the 1980s, some Francophone parents took legal action that went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada to have the province of Alberta provide Francophone schools and school boards for their children.

• This collective right was included in Section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Minority Educational Rights), but it took a 1990 Supreme Court decision in favour of the parents before Alberta allowed Francophone school boards to be established to administer Francophone schools.

Aboriginal Hunting Rights • Section 25 of the Charter and Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, recognizes and affirms the aboriginal and treaty rights of Canada’s Aboriginal peoples (First Nations, Métis, & Inuit). While these rights are constitutionally guaranteed, it has taken many efforts to have certain Aboriginal rights recognized.

• In the case of hunting or harvesting rights of Canada’s Métis ppl, there continues to be a struggle to have these rights recognized.

The Ruling of Steve Powley • In 1993, Steve Powley, an Ontario Métis, and his son hunted and killed a moose, and were charged for hunting without a license. • 10 years later, after the case had been appealed through the Ontario court system, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 9-0 that the Métis of Powley’s community in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, did indeed have the aboriginal right to hunt, as do “any Métis who can prove a connection to a stable continuous community.”

Ongoing Métis Disputes • However, despite the sections in the Charter and in the Constitution Act and the 2003 Supreme Court decision, many Métis are still fighting to have their Aboriginal right to hunting and harvesting recognized.

• In 2004 in Manitoba, Métis hunter Will Goodon was charged for duck hunting without a license. He did have a Métis “harvester” card issued by the Manitoba Métis Federation, but the province failed to recognize the card.

Métis in Alberta • In 2008, the Métis Nation of Alberta took legal action against the Alberta gov’t in order to have the harvesting rights of Alberta’s Métis recognized, as charges continued to be laid against Métis hunting without a provincial license. • As one can see, having collective rights included in the Charter does not necessarily mean that gov’ts will recognize or promote these rights.

What Are We Learning Today?

3.6 Analyze the extent to which liberal democracies reflect illiberal thought and practice.

Should Liberal Democracies Always Follow the Principles of Liberalism?

• In February, 2008, Canadian soldiers fighting in Afghanistan were urged to use caution when using popular websites such as Facebook when communicating with friends and family.

The Facebook Dilemma • Soldiers were warned not to share photos of themselves in uniform or of the battlefront. • According to the Defense Department, “the insurgents could use this information to determine their success or their lack of it…and determine better ways to attack us.” • Yet others believe this is an example of censorship more than anything else. • Should the Defense Department be allowed to censor the Facebook pages of it’s soldiers?

What is the War Measures Act?

The War Measures Act • The War Measures Act has been invoked (used) only 3 times in Canada’s history. • In each case, the federal gov’t to some extent suspended, restricted, and/or limited rights, freedoms, and the basic principles of liberalism.

What excuse might the Canadian federal gov’t give to invoke the Act and take away our freedoms?

War Measures Act Rationale • The following reasons have been given in the past to justify the Act’s use: – It was necessary for the overall good of society. – It was justified because of the threat or severe nature of the situation.

– It was essential to protect, retain, or secure other principles of liberalism.

Rule By Decree • The War Measures Act gave the federal cabinet emergency powers for circumstances where it determined that the existence of war, invasion, or rebellion, real or apprehended, existed.

• The real distinction of this Act was that it allowed the cabinet to govern by decree (law) rather than through discussion and debate in Parliament. The federal gov’t had increased powers under this Act: powers that could be used immediately once the Act was invoked.

• Figure 11-13 pg. 395

When was WW I?

Which countries were Canada’s enemies?

WW I and Enemy Aliens • The first use of the War Measures Act in Canada came during WW I. Canada was still part of the British Empire, and Britain and the Allied Powers were at war against the Central Powers. • Under the War Measures Act (1914) immigrants from these countries already residing in Canada were considered

enemy aliens

: non-citizens who come from an enemy country.

WW I & Enemy Aliens • The first use of the War Measures Act in Canada came during WW I. Canada was at war against the Central Powers: Germany, Austria Hungary (which included parts of Ukraine), and the Ottoman Empire.

• Under the War Measures Act (1914), immigrants from countries that were at war with Canada already residing here were considered enemy aliens.

• Why would Canadians consider these ppl enemies?

What civil rights were stripped from these “enemy aliens” in Canada?

Enemy Alien Restrictions • Due to this Act all enemy aliens were required to register with the Canadian gov’t and carry their gov’t-issued ID cards at all times. • In addition, they were not permitted to publish or read anything in a language other than English or French, to leave the country without exit permits, to possess firearms, or to join any group the gov’t deemed dangerous.

Internment Camps • Several thousand enemy aliens were deported or sent to internment camps. Their property was confiscated and often went missing during their internment or was not returned afterwards. The internment camps did not close until 1920, 2 years after the war had ended. • The released internees often had no possessions or property. At that time, the federal gov’t did not offer an apology or compensation to the ppl who were interned. • Figure 11-15 & 16 pg. 398

WW II and Japanese Internment • During WW II, the Canadian gov’t invoked the War Measures Act again to intern individuals and place restrictions on the freedoms of Japanese-Canadians.

• Nearly 23,000 (the vast majority of whom were native-born Canadians from the Pacific Coast), were placed in internment camps in early 1942.

Removal from BC • Pg. 398 • At the conclusion of WW II, the federal gov’t decided that all Japanese-Canadians (JC) should be removed from BC. They were given the choice between deportation to Japan or relocation east of the Rocky Mountains.

• Although 4,000 JCs chose to leave the country, the majority opted to move to the prairies, Ontario, or Quebec. JCs could return to BC in 1949, as they had regained the right to live anywhere in Canada, but most had already chosen to live elsewhere.

Why do you think the gov’t took these extreme measures? Why might a gov’t continue to use such actions after the war had ended?

Overdue Public Acknowledgment • In the 1980s some JCs and their families sought redress for the actions of the Canadian gov’t. Although not all JC supported this action, the action challenged the federal gov’t to act on its commitment to a multicultural society and the new Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

• In 1988, PM Brian Mulroney publicly acknowledged the unjust actions and Canadian gov’t awarded compensation packages of $21,000 for each individual directly wronged. • Quote pg. 399

Do you agree with the gov’ts decision to issue compensation to each Japanese-Canadian directly wronged by internment? Why or why not?

What were the 1960s like in Western countries?

The 1960s • Canada and the world underwent significant political, social, and cultural changes during the 1960s. Many reforms were prompted by individuals and groups seeking less gov’t control, greater freedoms, and increased power over decisions affecting their lives. • Examples include the women’s liberation movement, the anti-war movement, and pressures to end poverty, discrimination, and abuses of power.

Quebec in the 1960s • Some Francophone Quebecois strongly desired greater protection of their language and culture and wanted equal opportunities for participation in the economy of Quebec, which was dominated by an Anglophone minority.

• This led to the

Quiet Revolution

: a time of rapid social, economic, and political modernization in Quebec. This was a revolution aimed at enhancing opportunities for Francophone Quebecois within Quebec society.

What allows an event to be called a “revolution?” How can a revolution be “quiet”?

Huge change evolved but without violence, force, or direct conflict.

The Quebec Liberation Front • Some ppl felt the pace of change was too slow, however. These ppl supported the use of violence, terrorism, or other illegal means to achieve their goals.

• The Quebec Liberation Front (FLQ), founded in 1963, was committed to the independence of Quebec, and was a group that was willing to resort to terrorism to make that happen.

FLQ Terrorist Acts • During the 1960s, the FLQ used a series of bombings and armed robberies to further its goals. It was responsible for the deaths of at least 5 people. • On October 5, 1970, the FLQ abducted British trade commissioner James Cross. Ransom demands were made, most of which were not met.

• So, 5 days later, the FLQ kidnapped Pierre Laporte, a popular Quebec cabinet minister.

The FLQ Gains Support • In the following days, FLQ leaders held meetings to increase public support for their cause. • Consequently, a general strike involving students, teachers and professors resulted in the closure of most French-language secondary and post-secondary academic institutions. On October 15, 1970, more than 3,000 students attended a protest rally in favour of the FLQ. Demonstrations of public support influenced subsequent government actions.

A Cry for Help • Within days, the Canadian Armed Forces were sent to protect politicians in Ottawa.

• Quebec premier Robert Bourassa requested that troops be sent to support local police.

Trudeau Invokes War Measures Act • For the third and final time in Canada’s history, Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau invoked the War Measures Act on October 16, 1970.

• Civil liberties were suspended, and the FLQ was formally outlawed. Anyone attending an FLQ meeting or speaking favourably of the organization were presumed to be a member. Nearly 500 ppl were arrested without warrants for expressing their pro-FLQ views and could be held in jail for up to 90 days; many of the ppl arrested were artists, journalists, teachers, and other supporters of Quebecois nationalism.

Why was invoking the War Measures Act such a risky political move for Trudeau?

• This was the only time in Canadian history that the federal Canadian gov’t used the powers of the War Measures Act during peacetime. • Invoking the War Measures Act was a risky move for Trudeau as there was a strong possibility that Trudeau might have lost popular support among Quebec voters.

A Risky Move

Laporte Murdered!

• On October 17, a Quebec radio station announced that Laporte was murdered. They also gave the location of a map which led to the discovery of his body. With the body came a list of demands by the FLQ for Cross’s release.

• Demands included the release of 23 “political prisoners”, $500,000 in gold, an aircraft to take the kidnappers to Cuba or Algeria, the ending of all police search activities, the rehiring of 450 Lapalme postal workers who had been laid off for their support of the FLQ, and the broadcast and publication of the FLQ Manifesto.

A Huge Controversy • The actions of the federal gov’t during the October Crisis raised a great deal of controversy. • Although an overwhelming number of Canadians supported the gov’ts actions, many Quebec nationalists and advocates of civil rights criticized the use of the War Measures Act as “excessive and too broad.” • What do you think is meant by this?

Excessive & Broad?

• Excessive: There was no need to go these extremes for a case involving 2 kidnappings and a murder, issues that would normally be dealt with by the police and existing laws.

• Broad: The gov’t acted on limited information and treated all separatist supporters as potential terrorists.

The Interview • In what is one of the most famous Canadian interviews of all time, Trudeau had an unrehearsed and spontaneous conversation with a reporter on the steps of Parliament on the issues of the FLQ Crisis and the War Measures Act.

• • It was during this interview that Trudeau uttered an iconic phrase, which today has a place in current Canadian history books that deal with Trudeau and his legacy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= 7_a2wa2dd4&feature=player_embedded

The Aftermath • Early in December 1970, police discovered the location of the kidnappers holding James Cross. His release was negotiated and on December 3, 1970, five of the terrorists were granted their request for safe passage to Cuba by the Government of Canada after approval by Fidel Castro.

• Why ask to go to Cuba?

Laporte’s Kidnappers Found • In late December, four weeks after, the kidnappers of James Cross were found. The kidnappers and murderers of Pierre Laporte were found hiding in a country farmhouse. They were tried and convicted for kidnapping and murder.

• The events of October 1970 contributed to the loss of support for violent means to attain Quebec independence.

Did the War Measures Act Work?

• By December 29, 1970, police had arrested 453 persons with suspected ties to the FLQ. Some detainees were released within hours, while others were held for up to 21 days. Several persons who were detained were initially denied access to legal counsel. Of the 453 people who were arrested, 435 were eventually released without ever being charged.

Homework • The actions of the federal gov’t during the October Crisis can appear very different to us today than it did to Canadians at the time. • Taking what you now know of the FLQ Crisis, do you believe the federal government’s actions were appropriate? What, if any, alternatives could Trudeau have used to deal with the FLQ without rejecting the principles of liberalism during the crisis?

• 2/3rds to a full written page due tomorrow

How has your life been affected by 9/11?

Restricting Freedoms Subtly • Following the events of 9/11, gov’ts, individuals, and groups have developed a different understanding of security, terrorism, and mobility. • Despite the threat of terror, many ppl question the appropriateness as well as the effectiveness of increased security measures.

• Supporters of increased security often point out that the restrictions are minor and certainly not as serious as the potentially devastating consequences.

The USA PATRIOT Act • The US gov’t has responded to the need for increased security by introducing the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act.

• This act’s purpose is to “deter and punish terrorist acts in the US and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes.”

Civil Liberties vs. The Gov’t • Negative reaction to this legislation quickly followed. Groups challenged the federal gov’ts power to issue National Security Letters, a provision of the USA PATRIOT Act, and won in court. • National Security Letters permitted the gov’t to obtain sensitive customer records from Internet service providers and other businesses without first obtaining a search warrant from a judge. The court ruled that this was an unconstitutional limit to the freedom from unreasonable searches.

USA PATRIOT Act Controversy • The intention of the USA PATRIOT ACT was to protect the security of the American ppl from acts of terrorism. • However, some ppl feel that the act undermines the civil liberties of the American ppl and subverts (undermines) the rights of minorities, especially those who share the same ethnic heritage as those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks. • Figure 11-20 pg. 402

What is your reaction to the USA PATRIOT Act? Is there a better way to address the need for national security that does not involve actions that infringe on individual rights?

Canada’s No-Fly List • 1 of the increased security measures in Canada is a no fly list. This is a list of ppl the gov’t has identified as potentially posing a threat to aviation security. Ppl on the list are barred from flying on domestic flights in Canada. • Canada’s initiative is modeled after a similar one in the US. While the US list contains more than 44,000 names, the Canadian list is believed to have less than 1000. However, it is not publically available, so many ppl on the list will not know that they have been barred from flying until they try to do so.

No-Fly List Criteria • An individual who has been involved in a terrorist group and who, it can reasonably be suspected, will endanger the security of any aircraft, or the safety of the public, passengers, or crew members. • An individual who has been convicted of 1 or more serious and life-threatening crimes against aviation security.

• An individual who has been convicted of 1 or more serious and life-threatening offences and who may attack or harm an air carrier, passengers, or crew members.

Is the no-fly list criteria adequate/fair? Is it too vague? Is it too limited?

• Pg. 403-404 Maher Arar

Post 9/11 vs. War Measures Act • The Canadian gov’ts post-9/11 security measures are less intrusive and restrictive than the examples from Canada’s history when the War Measures Act was invoked. • Yet the restrictions still constrain ppl’s freedoms and challenge the principles of liberalism, however, in less obvious ways. Despite this subtlety, the new policies are clearly illiberal measures.

Extremism • Extremism refers to a belief system that is outside the mainstream spectrum of beliefs, and it may advocate actions that are considered socially or morally unacceptable, such as the violent targeting of those perceived as innocent civilians. • Generally, those who are considered extremists by others do not see themselves as extremists. Thus, the judgment of “extremist” depends entirely on one’s point of view.

The Justification for Extreme Ideas • It is important to note that extremists avoid referring to themselves as extremists not because they do not view their actions as intolerant or extreme but rather because they believe that they are acting our of principled beliefs.

• There can be extremist views on both the right and left ends of the political spectrum, but in many cases, labeling a group or ideology as extremist is a political act to make a group’s beliefs appear to challenge the status quo.

Example of Extremism • An example of this might be labeling ppl as eco-terrorists if they threaten to spike trees that are to be logged in an environmentally sensitive area. • For some, this is an act of desperation in defense of a principle; for others it is an act of extremism.

Terrorism & al Qaeda • Terrorism as practiced by groups such as al Qaeda, however, is clearly extremist. Even the supporters of al Qaeda may agree that they use extreme measures.

• Yet they may claim that in a world of injustice where power is concentrated in the hands of a small group (Western powers) and used to keep others powerless, that extreme measures are the only way to arrive at justice.

Economic Extremism • Extremism is also used by some ppl to characterize economic activities that strictly adhere to a set of principles despite their perceived adverse effects on a population.

• For example, during the Cold War, the economic practices of communist countries were seen as extremist by the US gov’t and some other free-market countries.

Extremism & Civil Liberties • 1 major challenge that extremism presents to modern liberalism is that gov’ts threatened by extremist actions may curtail civil liberties of all citizens in an effort to maintain security.

• Examples: – War Measures Act during the FLQ/October Crisis in 1970 – USA PATRIOT Act in the US. – In the case of the FLQ Crisis, the limiting of individual rights was temporary. Most of the provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, however, eventually became permanent.

Consumerism as a Liberal Issue

Area of Spending

Cosmetics in US Ice cream in Europe Perfumes in Europe & US Pet foods in Europe & US Entertainment in Japan Cigarettes in Europe Alcoholic drinks in Europe Narcotic drugs in the world Military spending in world

US$ Billions per year

Consumerism Cont’d

Area of Spending US$ Billions per Year

Basic education for all Water and sanitation for all Reproductive health for all women Basic health and nutrition for all

Colonization & Liberal Democracies • In the brief history of liberal democracies, economic freedom has helped create some very powerful individuals and companies.

• Beginning with colonization of Asia, Africa, and South America, consumers in liberal democracies were given greater access to increasing varieties and amounts of goods. Bananas, coffee, chocolate, silk, and cotton are examples of such goods.

Globalization of Liberal Companies • In more recent decades, companies from liberal democracies have entered into economic relationships with countries such as China, Japan, Korea, and Mexico to make technological gadgets, toys, and entertainment goods available in large quantities at relatively low cost.

• The pursuit of economic freedom in liberal democracies has brought increased personal choice for consumers in some countries but not all.

Unequal Distribution of Wealth • Therefore, unanticipated consequences of economic freedom and development have developed within countries and on a worldwide scale. First, the wealth and resource development produced by economic liberalism did not benefit many of the ppl in former colonies to the same degree as they benefited ppl in more industrialized countries.

• In fact, many colonized countries were forced to reduce their own food production in order to grow cash crops such as coffee and bananas for export.

A Double Standard • Second, citizens of colonized countries were not treated in ways that reflected the principles of liberalism. Differential laws governing ownership of property and land, access to education and health care, and other aspects of life often restricted the pace of development in these countries. • Such treatment led to negative sentiments within these countries between members of various races or ethnic groups.

Illiberalism & Terrorism • Third, such feelings have also created conditions that support violence, illiberalism, and terrorism. The unequal treatment of some countries and their citizens by liberal democracies – especially those most closely associated with the principles of democracy – has left a troubling legacy in many former colonies.

• Liberal democracies have become targets of this dissatisfaction. The US, Great Britain, France, and even Canada have experienced terrorist threats and attacks.

Environmental Change & Activism • During the latter half of the 20 th century, scientists, environmental activists, and other groups began to place increasing pressure on gov’ts around the world to consider the quality of the environment and to limit the human impact on the environment.

• Liberal democracies now face a dilemma: How can they support principles of liberalism such as economic and personal freedom while also promoting the modern liberal principle of a highly quality of life for all members of society?

Greenhouse Gases • • There is, according to Greenpeace, approximately a 30-year delay in the impact of emissions. In other words, we are only now feeling the effects of the greenhouse gas emissions of the 1970s.

Greenhouse gas emissions

are gases, from both natural and artificial sources, that are released into the earth’s atmosphere. They change the way the earth’s atmosphere absorbs and emits radiation, which affects the temperature of earth.

• Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol

– an agreement reached at an int’l convention at which world leaders met to discuss climate change and create a plan for reducing greenhouse gases – is an example of how liberal democracies and other countries have approached challenges of climate change.

• The concept of climate change was, up to the early 2000s, rejected by neo-conservative gov’ts and business leaders. It has recently been almost universally supported by scientific studies and is now no longer a matter of much debate.

Significance of Kyoto • The Kyoto Protocol is the 1 st , and to date the only, binding int’l agreement that includes specific goals for individual countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

• It came into effect on February 16, 2005, but the countries ratifying the protocol have undertaken their goals with varying approaches and degrees of commitment.

Ratifying Kyoto in Canada • In 2004, the gov’t of Canada, led by Liberal PM Paul Martin, announced a broad plan for dealing with greenhouse gases, one that was based on voluntary participation and tax incentives for companies that complied.

• The plan also included mandatory emissions reductions for factories and power plants, improved fuel efficiency in Canadian vehicles, etc.

Harper & Kyoto • One of the complicating factors in most liberal democracies is that when different political parties come to power, changes to int’l agreements can and do occur.

• Such a situation occurred in Canada in 2006 when the Conservatives became the new gov’t under Stephen Harper. They altered funding to climate change programs and instituted a new climate change plan focusing on additional consultations with industries and businesses.

Missing the Target • It is highly unlikely that Canada will meet its Kyoto targets. Canada’s emissions in 2004 were 27% above our 1990 level, and our Kyoto target for 2008 was 6% below that 1990 level.

• Since the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, very little progress has been made by either political party leading Canada.

Pandemics • A

pandemic

global scale.

is an outbreak of a disease on a • Pandemics are highly potent diseases that create borderless paths of infection from which ppl have little or no immunity and for which there usually is no vaccine. • Pandemics usually spread easily from person to person, cause serious and sometimes fatal illness, and infect a country, continent, or even several continents in a relatively short time.

Examples of Pandemics • Swine Flu • Bird Flu • Black Plague • SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) •

Outbreak

book (it’s informative!)

Pandemics & Globalization • Globalization has been both a positive and a negative for pandemics.

• Positive – mass communication has increased our awareness of pandemics.

• Negative – the ease of int’l travel has also precipitated their spread.

Liberal Democracies & Pandemics • Liberal democracies are faced with a difficult situation when attempting to address pandemics. On 1 hand, limit travel and restrict visitors, tourists, and new immigration to a country can provide greater protection against pandemics.

• On the other hand, such actions will hamper trade and development, severely restrict the basic freedoms of citizens and potentially create other issues related to human rights violations.

Health Organizations • Int’l health organizations like the

World Health Organization (WHO)

as well as national health organizations (Health Canada & the Centers for Disease Control in the US) monitor established protocols and work on distributing up-to-date info. regarding pandemics.

• Distribution of info., tracking of outbreaks, and establishment of means of treatment become a shared responsibility for all countries under this system, regardless of from of gov’t.

How can liberal democracies and organizations such as WHO balance ppl’s freedoms with the need to curb the spread of disease?

Postmodernism

• Postmodernism is another ideological school of thought that challenges liberalism.

• It is the period that follows modernism in the fields of art, literature, and philosophy, largely in Western societies. It is also a school of thinking that questions and rejects the principles of liberalism.

Central Concepts of Modernism • Some of the central concepts of modernism , which began during the Enlightenment , include: – Science provides universal and eternal truths – Knowledge will lead to progress – Freedom consists of obedience to laws that are based on reason – Reason and rational thinking are the ultimate means of establishing what is true

Postmodernism vs. Modern Liberalism • Postmodernism calls into question the central ideas of modernism. It sees modern liberal ideology as dominating many aspects of life to the exclusion of other ways of thinking. • They believe groups that have traditionally been left out of the dominant social structure have their own legitimate ways of making sense of the world, and these ways of making sense may make more sense than those prescribed by liberal tradition.

Postmodernism & “Discovery” • A postmodernist would be skeptical of the modern liberal idea that society can be “improved,” that there is “progress” in civilization.

• They would critique the nature of knowledge and argue that it is relative to language, social, and historical contexts. Examples would be that Columbus “discovered” the New World.

Another example is that we are often unaware of our own prejudices or biases until we step outside of our normal lives, like when we travel.

Primary vs. Secondary Sources • •

Primary source

– an artifact, document, recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information. – (Ex: interview with some about 9/11 who was an actual witness and saw the collapse of the World Trade Centre in person)

Secondary source

– usually cites, comments on, or builds upon primary sources. – (Ex: a reporter writes a book or article on 9/11, but never experienced the actual event themselves)

The Call to War • In times of conflict, what are the citizen’s rights, roles, and responsibilities? And does that change if he or she does not accept the gov’ts decision or reasons for going to war?

•

Pacifism

, the commitment to peace and opposition to war, is practiced in a variety of ways.

• Pg. 469

Pacifist Groups • Pacifists include members of many diverse non religious peace group and of religious groups that have traditions of opposing war. • Pacifists vary in how they interpret and act on their pacifism. Some are pacifist in an absolute sense, rejecting violence of all sorts, while others are specifically anti-war or against a certain war but not all wars.

American Drafting • In contrast to its policies during the Vietnam War, the US has not drafted young Americans into the military to serve in Afghanistan and Iraq.

• However, in case the American gov’t decides it needs additional citizens for military service, it does maintain a registry of young men. Pacifists can apply to be classified as conscientious objectors.

• Pg. 471

Conscientious Objection • The United Nations supports the right to

conscientious objection

: the refusal to perform military service on moral or religious grounds. • The UN also monitors how conscientious objectors are treated. Some countries, such as Finland, Germany, and Israel, require military service but offer alternative service options. • Figure 13-14 pg. 472

• • The Vietnam War • • The War against the Vietnam War, pg. 485-490

Anti-war movements

: organized campaigns against war. The Vietnam anti-war movement gained public support during the late 1960s and contributed to the US ending the war.

Draft

: conscription or compulsory military service.

Draft dodger

: someone who avoids conscription or compulsory military service, usually by fleeing to another country.

A Just War?

•

Just war

: the idea that a country is right to go to war for certain reasons, including self defense, defense of another country that is under attack, protection of innocents, and punishment for serious crimes.

• The anti-war movement had a profound impact on foreign policy for the US. President Johnson and, later, President Nixon both had to deal with widespread public sentiment. Rallies and protest marches, which had limited participation early in the war, grew to immense proportions.

Canada & Afghanistan • Pg. 490