Tonight's soap-box.

I was watching The Hour with George Stromboloupolous, and in a lead up to an interview with David Frasier, the Canadian Brigadier-General in charge of UN operations in what I think can reasonably be described as The War In Afghanistan, George played a clip of Prime Minister Harper saying,

I was very distressed to read suggestions by some Liberal MPs this week at the caucus meeting that they might want to question that involvement, that they might want to have a vote. You do not send men and women into harm's way on a dangerous mission with the support of our party and other Canadians, and then decide when they're over there that you're not sure you should have sent them. That's not the way this government is going to behave. link

Now, as you know if you've been reading the blog, I do not agree with the Conservative party on a number if issues; however, I do support them in some of their policies, such as increased funding for our military, which has been systematically underfunded for years. I also think that Canadian involvement in the removal of the Taliban and subsequent rebuilding of Afghanistan is largely tenable. Harper's comments, though, make me a little nervous. While anything less than a firm resolve when sending soldiers into a dangerous war zone where some of them will die would be reprehensible, Harper's assertion that it's not okay to change your mind or engage in a democratic vote is a little troubling. As a nation we must be willing to admit mistakes when they occur, and take real steps to correct those mistakes. I'm not saying that we've made a mistake, but war and nation building are complex operations, and we're human: mistakes will occur. To remain committed to a course of action uncritically--without dialogue-- is both foolish and dangerous, and when a government makes assertions which uncritically affirm military deployment, and question the patriotism of those who do, I can't but think that we've taken a baby step down the road to fascism.

If Harper's comments represent a baby step, the American government has taken a stride or two in its persistent unwillingness to engage in dialogue, even with its own citizenry, as well as in attempts to institute pervasive surveillance and act unilaterally. As has been said before, there is the feeling of 1914 in the air, and this makes it all the more important to engage in dialogue. While I doubt that the west would crumble before a wave a terrorist attacks if I'm allowed to leave my Canadian passport at home when I visit my neighbors to the south, we do need to discuss security, wherever we live. But the point is that we must discuss: not to discuss leads to the imposition of one ideology from the top down, which so far as I know has never has never given rise to a stable society in which the people have generally been satisfied; rather, it's given rise to dictatorships. Besides, if you're so sure you're right, why not discuss it... You might bring some of your detractors around to your way of thinking.

With that rant out of the way, I think I'll get off my soap-box and go to bed...