Resistance Is Futile: All Effective Protests Will Be Put Down

Posted on Monday, September 12 at 11:49 by chall
"We are hearing from members in all Atlantic provinces," said Stephane Robichaud of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business in an interview with a local newspaper. "Dairy farmers are having to throw away milk because they can't move it out; stores have no bread or milk left on their shelves because the supplies can't get in; gas stations are starting to run out of fuel in parts of Atlantic Canada, and countless businesses are being affected because of transportation disruptions." Shoppers also told reporters they were angry. "I'm mad at the truckers because there's no bread, no vegetables, no nothing," said Louise Carrier, a grocery store customer in Moncton. "It's the population who are hostage right now." Eric Bijeau, spokesman for the protesters, estimated that at one point as many as 1,000 trucks were been stopped in the northern New Brunswick blockade, a figure the police disputed. He said he hoped the protest spreads to other provinces and into the United States. "We are being screwed by the refineries," Bijeau said. Bijeau said the group he represents, the New Brunswick Northwest Truckers Association, sent a letter to Prime Minister Paul Martin asking that the federal government step in and stop profiteering by the major refineries. "We are asking you to intervene at the refiners' level, where it is clearly demonstrated that the refiners' profit margin has increased from .09 cents per litre to .43 cents per litre," the truckers stated in their letter. "The costs are too much. They are driving people out of business. We have to do something... This is a clear case of the rich gouging the poor." The traffic stoppage affected only trucks- cars were able to use the highways as usual, although there were some slowdowns around the truck blockades. As the economic impact of the protest mounted, Premiers of three Maritime provinces and Quebec held an emergency conference call to discuss the "paralysis" on the Trans-Canada Highway and called for an end to the truckers' protest. There was solidarity among government leaders that the blockades must be found to be illegal and dealt with quickly. And so they were. After being advised that the truckers were in violation of a minor traffic regulation that carries a $168 fine, a grim-faced, angry New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord saw his opportunity and announced on September 8 that the truckers' blockades had to come down by the end of the day and that the RCMP were authorized to use "whatever means necessary." "The blockade is not acceptable and must end immediately," Lord told reporters during a break in a provincial Conservative caucus meeting in Alma, N.B. "The RCMP has the full support of the government to proceed forcefully. The RCMP have the mandate to enforce the law, and it's clear that the government has indicated to the RCMP, that we're fully supporting of their efforts to enforce the law," said Lord after the meeting. The truckers ended the protest that day. Now, as the realities of Peak Oil, the coming energy crisis and inevitable economic collapse become more and more obvious to all and are starting to seriously affect us here at home instead of just the poor, exploited people of other countries, the New Brunswick provincial government has clearly stated their position that they will tolerate absolutely no form of effective protest or civil disobedience and will use whatever means necessary (implying the possibility of the use of deadly force) to continue business as usual. Our politicians have said outright that they do not favor or support reducing the taxation on fuel, have no intent to do so and say they are powerless over the oil companies and world markets. Any assistance they have proposed, although well-intentionally aimed at low-income families, does not even begin to alleviate the current increases, let alone the inevitable future ones. Because of Hurricane Katrina and the record fuel prices it helped create, the gloves are now off and the laws and policies the governments (both in the U.S. and Canada) have put in place since 9/11 under the guise of "the war on terrorism" and "national security" will be used to ensure that any effective protest or civil disobedience about any serious issue will be put down- by deadly force if all else fails. What has happened to the independent truckers in New Brunswick will also happen to any other group or organization that decides to make an effective stand. As we plunge further into the bleak future and economic chaos of Peak Oil, martial law will be the only way for the government to deal with the economic refugees that will be created. The politicians know this and have actually been preparing for it behind closed doors for many years now. What is being played out on the highways of New Brunswick and in the "evacuee centers" of the American Gulf Coast after Katrina are simply practice sessions for when the trouble really starts. As more and more economic refugees are created by the effects of global warming or as people default on their mortgages, go into bankruptcy and lose everything they worked so hard for because they have to buy fuel to go to work and heat their homes, there will be an inevitable and righteous undercurrent of anger that is going to boil to the surface. The government now wants you to know in no uncertain terms that they will not tolerate any crap from you if you have a problem with being broke, freezing and homeless and they will grasp at any straw and do anything they have to in order to maintain the status quo: Larger, growing profits for big business and larger, growing pressures on ordinary citizens to continue to provide them. Those truckers were not just protesting for themselves, they were protesting for us too. Now, Louise, exactly who's holding who hostage? [Editor's note - I couldn't find any links for this story. If anyone has one, or if the anon who posted it wrote it, I'd apppreciate knowing that in the comments. Dr. C] [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on September 12, 2005]

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by chall
    Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:02 pm
    My apologies for not simply cut-and-pasting news articles and links verbatim. This is my first submission to the site. This is an op/ed piece, not a regurgitation, and the quotes and reference information I have included in ths article I read in my local newspaper, "The Telegraph Journal", published in Saint John, New Brunswick and saw on my local television news channel ATV, broadcast out of Halifax. All editorial content (which I feel to be the meat and potatoes) is my own opinion.

  2. Mon Sep 12, 2005 7:44 pm
    Excellent, and thanks for posting it here. We need to hear from all parts of Canada, if we can ever stand together. The problem I see is that the truckers took a stand for all of us, but the people couldn't see the long term problem, they just want what they want today.

    We need to support those who are willing to speak up, even if we don't feel we can do it, at the very least don't complain that their protest is hurting you today, because tomorrow it will really hurt. People should have joined these truckers and sent a message not to remove the blockade but reduce the price of oil and gas. It seems easier to attack the little guy than for gov to take on the refineries, Canada should be insulated from world events, and not tied to it. This is ridiculous.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  3. Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:09 pm
    It doesn't seem to me that the government used anything other than a traffic violation to stop the protest. This was not visions of the Canada Patriot Act or any legislation or mindset of a post 9/11 world.

    Coming from a logistics background, I can totally agree with the truckers regarding gas prices. However, I think their choice of protest was somewhat flawed. As your article stated:

    ""Dairy farmers are having to throw away milk because they can't move it out; stores have no bread or milk left on their shelves because the supplies can't get in; gas stations are starting to run out of fuel in parts of Atlantic Canada, and countless businesses are being affected because of transportation disruptions."

    Shoppers also told reporters they were angry. "I'm mad at the truckers because there's no bread, no vegetables, no nothing," said Louise Carrier, a grocery store customer in Moncton. "It's the population who are hostage right now." "

    Hurting the little guys is not the way to go. They need to find a better venue for airing their dispute. Farmers and consumers are also reeling from high fuel costs (not as much as independent truckers, and not as quickly, but they feel the pain as well). Blocking Parliament, blocking oil headquarters, and basically focusing on the actual enemy would be a better tactic. It may not get as much play in the media, but you wouldn't be alienating yourself.

  4. Tue Sep 13, 2005 3:14 am
    There are also other sides to the story. Keep in mind there were other quotes difficult to find, for example this was no union, the 'Association' name was just made up. These guys are freelance truckers whose central problem is lack of unions. In northern New Brunswick the forestry companies negotiate among the truckers, where there is heavy unemployment. Most trucking unions negotiate clauses which pass on excess fuel costs to customers, which obviously get passed on to us. Because these guys are independant, the forestry companies can use the excess unemployment to their advantage and beat down truckers to the lowest possible deal (sort of a passtime in New Brunswick).

    The other point is that the law isn't quite as draconian as it seems. If truckers were even CHARGED with a crime it would disqualify them from crossing the border, something necessary in their work. So just the threat was enough, and the government knew it.

    However the other issue mentioned is a relevant one, how do canadians join together when they are never together. Obviously canadians aren't THAT upset, however, it was maintained that 9 out of 10 drivers actually signed the petition. However, what exactly IS effective rebellion? Canadians not only will not join environmentalists or the homeless, in fact actively join against them.

  5. Tue Sep 13, 2005 3:15 am
    There are also other sides to the story. Keep in mind there were other quotes difficult to find, for example this was no union, the 'Association' name was just made up. These guys are freelance truckers whose central problem is lack of unions. In northern New Brunswick the forestry companies negotiate among the truckers, where there is heavy unemployment. Most trucking unions negotiate clauses which pass on excess fuel costs to customers, which obviously get passed on to us. Because these guys are independant, the forestry companies can use the excess unemployment to their advantage and beat down truckers to the lowest possible deal (sort of a passtime in New Brunswick).

    The other point is that the law isn't quite as draconian as it seems. If truckers were even CHARGED with a crime it would disqualify them from crossing the border, something necessary in their work. So just the threat was enough, and the government knew it.

    However the other issue mentioned is a relevant one, how do canadians join together when they are never together. Obviously canadians aren't THAT upset, however, it was maintained that 9 out of 10 drivers actually signed the petition. However, what exactly IS effective rebellion? Canadians not only will not join environmentalists or the homeless, in fact actively join against them.

  6. Tue Sep 13, 2005 3:20 am
    <blockquote>Canadians not only will not join environmentalists or the homeless, in fact actively join against them.</blockquote> <p>Marcarc, <p>Expand on this. I'm interested in what your saying here. But want to make sure I understand what your saying. <p>Thanks! <p>Kevin<p>---<br>Acoustic Guitar: This machine will kill facist.- Woody Guthrie

  7. Tue Sep 13, 2005 9:28 pm
    Perhaps I was a little too extreme there, and should have said the people's REPRESENTATIVES will act against them, although watch a documentary on Oka and you'll see disturbing images. However, take any squat you've heard about and inquire as to how many 'regular canadians' showed up to keep cops at bay. I know from experience that it isn't many, that's why I've latched onto the direct democracy thing, because even though canadians, like americans, generally agree with environmentalists-once facts are out, they will rarely hit the picket lines for them. I've met very few canadians in my area who supported the american war in Iraq, yet the local turnout for the demonstration was about 400 in this city of 100,000. Yet in specifics they are remarkably constant, the days of the 'militant environmentalist' is well behind us (meaning environmentalism isn't seen as an extreme any more).

    This is why direct democracy is my preferred method of activism, if people have the information they will generally make very similar decisions, particularly when you get to the governmental level, meaning the detail level. On broad issues it seems people are very divisive, but when you actually get down to actual legislation you find people aren't nearly so far apart. I find this very often just in discussions online, when you actually talk specifics and not vague ideologies there are remarkable similarities. Canadians don't ACT, because there's no point to activism, they see no good can come from it and that there are risks to it. But canadians are as generous as anybody else, just watch the Terry Fox specials on now, or take a look at any natural disaster. I found a local book on the drought of several years ago out west where farmers from the east packed up as much hay as possible and trucked it out there.

    However, when you have 'negative' media, portraying people as crooks and liars and cheats, then people in Canada will vote for tougher prison sentences as fast as any american. But when you get down to actual legislation and specific cases, it's usually a different story. Hope that's even more muddier.

  8. Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:34 am
    I sold my truck a few years back when my wife ended up paying the fuel bill out of her paycheque. I got nothing for it. 18 years of sacrifices to just keep afloat. The best protest for a trucker is to throw in the towel. Those left may be able to demand enough to survive. If a carrier thought trucking was profitable, there would be no owner/operators.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news