[OT] UNSC (not really anymore...)

Mr.Bell said:

I cannot believe that I forgot to mention my favorite example of how things
usually change suddenly, not gradually. In the late twentieth century, a
former colony of the British Empire with a long history of parliamentary
democracy ordered the army to patrol the city streets to impose order and
suspended all civil rights in response to a terrorist movement. Armed with new
and sweeping powers, the police rounded up hundreds, if not thousands, of
suspected terrorists and anyone who might be terrorist sympathisers and held
them for weeks, without charging them with any crime and only on the the
faintest shred of evidence (if any evidence at all). The surprising thing
about the democratic nation becoming a police state over night is not that it
happened at all, but that everything returned to normal in Canada after the
FLQ crisis had passed.

Tomb says:

It isn't terribly surprising if you realize the broad scope of police powers
and government powers in Canada, partly as a result of our former lack of a
Constitution (well, at least a modern one) and partly as a consequence of our
very British model of doing things. Seems to me that the Brits always had a
notion that a lot of power should be vested in the Gov't for times of crisis
and that the Gov't, being responsible, wou ldn't abuse this power. Strangely,
for them it has worked (mostly) for a long, long time. But we in Canada got
British governmental system and a lot of US influence too.... (and French). So
we ended up with a system based a bit on trust of public officials (and a
strong tradition amongst said officials of "taking
responsibility" - in theory anyway) and a bunch of public officials who
had amongst their characteristics some corruption, some authoritarianism, and
a big streak of self interest. We don't seem to have quite the same
traditions.... I have watched over my time on this Earth, a number of UK
ministers resign over things that didn't really seem to be their fault (but
were, as a product of being in their ministry) their responsibility. In
Canada, I've watched ministers who _were_ at fault (and also were
responsible by ministry) DODGE, WEAVE, and PASS THE BUCK. A quick cabinet
shuffle, and their transgressions go unpunished and the gov't goes on.

The FLQ crisis was not our governmental high point (nor was the internment of
Japanese Canadians during WWII). OTOH, our system doesn't come down that
hard on creeps - guys who actually killed people with bombs during the
FLQ crisis are wandering the streets today unrepentant.

As you say though, it is interesting how some countries seem to be able to
pull out the "hammer" and put it away again and revert to democracy. Part of
that is a strong historical democratic tradition that won't probably tolerate
indefinite totalitarian rule, part of it is probably the construction of legal
and insitutional limits to the power of the government such that they can only
pull out the "hammer" for short periods before those powers are automatically
rescinded. Part of it maybe is that our politicos are so good at "blowing in
the wind" and "serving public opinion" that they can tell what will and won't
fly and realize where there interests lie (and trying to foist off a
totalitarian regime for a long term period won't
fly).
Education probably factors in.

It is fortunate that Canada runs largely despite its government in Ottawa.
Assuming it doesn't screw up dramatically, most Canadians don't pay it much
heed and life goes on. It's too darn cold up here to go out in the streets,
riot and kill your neighbours (at least 6-8 months of the year) and
besides, we got all that out of our system during the Stanley Cup and the
Brier, so we all need a holiday in the summer.....