Historicist: "The city that nobody loves"
Elsewhere in the Ist-a-Verse
Like you didn't know this was coming: after a lengthy protest that shut down University Avenue for several days at the end of last month, and Sunday night's Gardiner takeover, Tamil protesters have once again forced the closure of University Avenue southbound from Dundas Street West to Queen Street West. According to Toronto Police, the stretch of street "will remain closed until further notice." It's almost as though some Tamils are passionate about not having their friends and relatives destroyed in a brutal civil war or something, to the point where they would deem it acceptable to add a few minutes to some drivers' commutes. Animals, the lot of them!
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookTIP US OFF
Most Popular
Rocket Talk: Can Sunday Subway Service Start Sooner? (39)
This Shit is Steel Bananas (34)
Googling Toronto (28)
TTC Approves Fare Hikes, Extends Student Discount (26)
Polling Booth: The TTC Fare Increase (25)
Looking for Leonids (18)
Gender Studies Coming to a High School Near You (17)- Sound Tracks: “I Wish I Knew Natalie Portman” by k-os (16)
- Newsstand: November 19, 2009 (16)
Edgewater Hotel Sign Comes Down (15)
Apparently there are, as of a few minutes ago, no Tamils actually protesting right on University—they're up at Queen's Park, where they've been for the day—and University's closing was done preemptively. So, as of right now, while they have forced University's closure, it seems like it's only cops who are blocking the street.
While I'm sympathetic to their issues, they lost me when they started to toss bikes at cops and use kids in their demos.
In all fairness, that was a few of the bunch. Not the entire Tamil community. In fact, not even the majority of protesters.
It was like 3 young guys.
also in all fairness, I should probably add that mischief and property damage haven't been limited to the one or two incidents picked up by the papers. just in my circle of FB "friends" I've seen multiple cars with severe dents and missing side mirrors.
While I'm sympathetic to their issues, they lost me when they started to toss bikes at cops and use kids in their demos.
What does this even mean, they "lost" you? You were against indiscriminate slaughter of Tamil civilians but because they shut down the Gardiner for a few hours now you're for it?
I think this makes the point about the inconvenience people have incurred because of the various acts of civil disobedience. Prior to these inconveniences, the overwhelming majority of people didn't know what was going on in Sri Lanka. Now they do. But *nobody*, absent some levels of psychopathy, was sympathetic to the plight prior to the campaign of civil disobedience but has now turned against the point the Tamil community is trying to make.
If my relatives were being slaughtered I would be a wreck at home with my loved ones. Not in traffic.
Not saying that what is happening in Sri Lanka isn't a tragedy, but I don't see what stopping traffic has to do with passion and grief.
I don't understand what the protesters want from Canada. This conflict, that has been going on for decades, is not black and white, "terrorists vs. terrorist government". I would not want Canada to endorse Tamil Eelam since politically, it would put us in a tough spot - taking sides.
Stopping the violence would be something all Canadians should (and probably do) support. But the fastest most effective way of doing that would be having the Tamil Tigers surrender. I don't think that's what these protesters want.
This is a civil war, not a genocide. Has there been human rights abuses? Yes, from BOTH sides. It is a bloodbath? Yes. Would I support a cease-fire? Yes. Should Canada, probably. Should Canada support Tamil Eelam? I don't know. I don't think foreign policy should be dictated by a vocal minority, that's for sure, regardless of their grief and passion. Or else Canada will be taking sides in conflicts all over the world considering how diverse our country is. Besides, if that was the case, how many Sinhalese are there in Canada vs. Tamil? If there was a vote then the Tamils might not like the outcome.
"This is a civil war, not a genocide."
That's a false dichotomy—the conflict in Rwanda was both, as was the Bosnian War. Not to necessarily analogize those two events and the current war in Sri Lanka, but it is very possible for a civil war to be a genocide as well.
I would not want Canada to endorse Tamil Eelam since politically, it would put us in a tough spot - taking sides.
But we've (or, the Canadian government) already taken sides. We've declared the LTTE a terrorist organization, but maintain relations with the Sri Lankan government, including providing it foreign aid, as well as maintaining trade with it.
The Sri Lankan government has been democratically elected in fair elections, and the LTTE have murdered any competing/moderate 'Tamil' voices in N. Sri Lanka. As it stands now, it's the LTTE or bust.
Who elected the LTTE? oh right NO ONE.
I personally hope that Canada stays far away from *both* sides in this conflict. I don't believe that Canada has endorsed this war, and in fact Minister Oda has asked SL to use restraint, but asking Canada to divorce itself from diplomatic ties with a democratically elected government is a silly proposition.
As I have told you before, these protestors should be calling for the surrender of the LTTE. The day the LTTE surrender, is the last day any innocent civilians die...
And this is just it. While I don't think the Ontario Government is in any position to effect change or even deliver what the Tamils want, the context of these people's protest is getting blown out.
Listen up people: While you're fuming in your Volvo because it's taking longer than usual to get back to your Leslieville home for your kid's soccer practice, these people's families are dying in Sri Lanka. Dying. Not missing yoga or showing up late for a lunch meeting. They are dying. Deceased. Bloodshed. All the gnarly shit that you and I can't even begin to imagine and consider so abstract is reality for them.
And the Tamil's feel so strongly about it, that they are willing to not only disrupt your day, but their own lives in hopes of achieving something. Whether or not they achieve anything is inconsequential. It's the fact that they feel so passionately about a cause that they are willing to do something about it.
That's a lot more than what many of us apathetic, middle class, entitled Canadians will ever do.
Hey, some of us were in Leslieville before it became hip. And what's wrong with soccer? Isn't that one of the few sports in the world that almost anyone of any social class can and does play?
So people who own Volvos, do yoga, live in Leslieville, have kids who play soccer, have lunch meetings, and are middle class should all feel ashamed of themselves? Ok, gotcha. Thanks.
What can they achieve by continuing to passionately block traffic? It's just going to alienate the public and hurt the message.
They've made their case, now it's the government's move.
But so long as both sides are willing to die for their cause, or send others to die on their behalf, peace isn't going to happen (until one side is wiped out or surrenders). Tamil Tiger supporters could be calling for their side to lay down their arms, which would go a long way to ending the Sri Lankan military response, logically. But they feel their cause remains worth fighting for. So, they have to take their share of the responsibility for the resulting civilian deaths. You can't have it both ways. If innocent people die because you choose to fight, you are to blame regardless of what the other side does.
+1. The four replies so far only further your point.
Oh come on, it's common sense. If you lobby the government with tactics that alienate the average joe or antagonize the police (no matter how right your cause), you're going to decrease your effectiveness.
The food drive this morning was a good way to counter potential criticism, for example.
But now that the message is in the media, on people's minds, and before the government, additional protesting (even totally peaceful, unobstructive protesting) seems like wasted energy to me.
Unfortunately, there is a catch22 at play. Civilians won't stop being killed in the civil war, until the Tamil Tigers lay down their arms and surrender. But, the protesters (appear) to support the cause of a Tamil homeland separate from Sri Lanka, for which the Tigers feel an armed struggle is the only means of achieving that objective. So, to save civilians, the homeland must be sacrificed (or, at least, by means of armed struggle). Continued support for the Tigers armed struggle against the Sri Lankan government is directly related to civilian deaths. The Tamil Tiger supporters, unfortunately, can't have it both ways. The focus of their protest should be directed towards withdrawing their support for the Tigers.
Civilians won't stop being killed in the civil war, until the Tamil Tigers lay down their arms and surrender.
I see, so the failure of the Tigers to surrender *requires* the shelling of civilians, including hospitals and the use cluster bombs? Or maybe you just have elevated levels of psychopathy.
I have no idea what is "required" by the Sri Lankan army in fighting their civil war. I'm pretty sure, though, that in this conflict I wouldn't be picking sides in the "who is worse for civilian casualties" debate. There is PLENTY of innocent blood on the hands of Tamil Tigers, and I don't recall any Tamil protests back then.
I don't support indiscriminate killings of civilians in war by one side or the other. But in war it happens. The quickest way to stop them from occurring is to stop fighting.
These circular arguments are dizzying.
Ideally, yes. However, the Tigers are a terrorist group, prone to using terrorist tactics. I imagine the Sri Lankan government is very hesitant to give them time to re-group and re-arm now that they are as close as they are to eliminating them. That being said, I, of course, would fully support a cease fire. And I know that it isn't likely to happen.
It takes two to fight. The Tigers are just losing.
What is worse: the use of cluster bombs or the use of suicide bombs, child soldiers, and hiding fighters among civilian populations so to use them as human shields?
I'm not sure of the validity of blocking major roads and highways, but the problem with the "right way to protest" - presumably meaning Queens Park or City Hall - is that it's the easiest to ignore.
I definitely have some issues with the Tamil protests, but if you're really passionate about something, it doesn't seem nearly enough to "protest" in an isolated area where you inconvenience no one and can be safely ignored by the majority of the population.
The "right way to protest" is "right" because it's *safe* and because it doesn't cause havoc for the general public. And how can disrupting traffic in Toronto, a provincial capital, possibly stop people from being killed in Sri Lanka? It can't. The argument that inconveniencing us is fine because people somewhere else are getting it worse is logical absurdity. And the actual result of these attempts to gain public attention to their cause has not been increased sympathy or increased pressure from non-Tamil Canadians on government here to act.
Instead, these protests have backfired: they have *lost* sympathy for the protesters themselves, made it *harder* for government to act (anything the government does to intervene in Sri Lanka now can be seen as giving in to illegal protest actions by supporters of a group the government has declared a terrorist organization -- a precedent no reasonable government wishes to set), and they have stolen news space from the very atrocities they wish to draw our attention to.
When we talk about the "right way to protest", we have to be clear on whose perspective we are talking about.
The typical car user in Toronto presumably thinks the "right way to protest" is one in which he/she is not affected - the Tamils can go hang out in front of Queen's Park for all they care.
From the perspective of the protester, there is a different definition: one that achieves results. Congregating in front of Queen's Park, yelling slogans, is a particularly ineffective way of getting what you want. How many protests have there been at Queen's Park in the last year? Probably scores, right? We likely have no idea what most of them were about (or even that they occurred).
Faced with a desperate situation, the Tamils have resorted to different measures. That's what civil disobedience is about (oth, there is no "right" to civil disobedience - undertaking it runs the risk of arrest and prosecution).
And I have to disagree that these methods have been ineffective. To begin, whereas 2 weeks ago 95%+ of Torontonians had no idea what was going on in Sri Lanka, I'd guess that today that number is considerably lower. And, in return for abandoning the Gardner on Sunday, the Tamils got Michael Ignatieff to promise to raise their concerns with the government. I don't see how it can be fairly argued that there is less pressure on the federal government to take actions today then there was 2 weeks ago (such actions can include stopping foreign aid the Sri Lanka and sanctions). And the idea that some people who favoured such steps previously, but now *don't* because they were inconvenienced in traffic is pretty silly.
A problem with the protests is that they are asking for an end result that the Government can't give: support for the Tamil Tigers.
(which only increases the protesters' frustration and fuels larger and more prominent protests)
hearing fellow canadians chanting "our leader, prabhakaran" is so, so disturbing. there seems to be something of a pr push among "organizers" to distance themselves from LTTE (i.e. the flag argument), but if you've been around any of these protests, you know LTTE support is absolutely rampant.
From the comments I've seen on TV news reports and particularly on the internet (especially the disturbing Toronto Star comments sections), people sure seem colossally more worked up about Tamils disrupting their commute than they were when the truckers did it (multiple times).
It would seem simplistic to point out the Tamils are generally browner than the typical trucker. But then again, some things really aren't complicated.
I don't remember the truckers blocking traffic for WEEKS...!!? Stop bringing in race when the issue is about duration...
I don't hear very many bourgeoisie complain about the United Way fundraising walk-a-thons that blocks the same stretch University ave, when they CLEARLY benefit the poor. Now a 5-day blockage from the United Way... you might see the same responses.
Traffic update! 680 News says that "Parts of University Ave. and College St. are closed. Protesters expected to reach Yonge St. slowing down traffic in the core for possibly several hours."
The irony of this situation is that the people who are demanding international action to stop the killing in Sri Lanka are themselves in the best position to actually do something about it. Tamil expatriates have been providing moral and financial support to the Tigers for decades. If they were realy so concerned about the innocent lives caught in the crossfire, they could withdraw that support and send a clear signal to the LTTE that it is time for them to surrender (or, if that is too "dishonorable," commit suicide).
Make no mistake, though: The protesters are not fighting to save human lives, but to keep the Tigers alive. This is not a goal that should be acceptable to Canadians. One would have to be completely blinkered by racial hatred to regard the LTTE as anything other than a fanatical, ethnocentric bunch of terrorists of the very worst sort.
It is time for Canada's Tamil community to state explicitly that the LTTE must surrender for the sake of the innocents they are now holding hostage. They must not be permitted to continue terrorizing the people whose rights they profess to defend.