Despotism, imperialism and religious fundamentalism - realities that have dominated history and that still characterize vast regions of the world - are also fairly "inimical to the long term health and vigor of democratic institutions", by the way.
And not a single one of them ever achieved a lick of success without the backing, support, and often instigation of a military apparatus willing to stifle internal opposition. You think the military and its backers "requesting" name changes that raise their profile is small beer. And it is. For now...
Democracy in the world is recent, rare and fragile, and is preserved through public awareness and voting, and also through the willingness and ability of a democratic nation to defend it.
And where does it not exist? In places too weak to defend themselves? No, there are plenty of despotisms in the world all too able to defend themselves and to inflict cruelty on others. A strong military is not the hallmark of a safe, stable democracy. Any country can have one, and most do. No; the hallmark of a
democracy is one that maintains a distance and distinction between the military and civilian spheres of life, with the military aspect of it openly and unmistakably subordinate to the civilian. And where the military intrudes into the civilian aspect of everyday life, where that is freely allowed and welcomed by the starry-eyed and unblinking, the institutions of democracy are eroded and the democratic urge is squelched.
As mentioned before, Canada gets a free pass on this - relatively speaking - due its proximity to our great protector south of the border.
Who protect us from what? Pray tell. That one always makes me laugh when I hear it; it's like listening to someone praise their elephant charm for keeping Canada free of marauding elephants. The only country on Earth capable of mounting a credible military threat to Canada is the United States itself. So if you feel obliged to fawn all over them for protecting us from all those elephants, by all means, be my guest. Pardon me if I excuse myself from the adoration party.
Still, some Canadians get to revel in the self-delusion
Oh, evidently, yes.
You seem to be able to read into the minds of the government, and all Canadians and all Torontonians, quite amazing that!
There's nothing amazing in realizing the reason the city didn't respond was that it was a bad idea but they didn't need grief from the likes of you in stating it plainly. What's amazing is that you apparently aren't perceptive enough to get that.
What's more, the government's concern for traffic confusion hardly demonstrates this great fear of the rise of facism that you seem so conerned about.
No; rather, it constitutes a diplomatic excuse for saying "no" aimed at defusing a needlessly prickly situation that the government would not have been subjected to in the first place by a military establishment truly respectful of democratic prerogatives, rather than trumping up its own.
I'm equally disturbed that a simple request to commemorate Canada's military veterans, or the simple voicing of support and respect for the them, is perceive by some - and gratefully only a few - to herald the loss of the nation to facism.
Good, you're
meant to be disturbed by it. It's
meant to be provocative. It SHOULD be alarming that people are suggesting this. If nobody does, it's over. We'll simply go from "request" to "request". Canada would hardly be the first country to go down this slippery slope. And incidentally, if you're going to toss "fascism" around so freely in your discourse hereafter, be advised there's an "s" in the word. It comes from the Latin "fasces", a bundle of sticks, the symbol of the power of the state that was eventually subsumed by the army in the person of the emperor at the death of the Republic. That didn't happen overnight either, but in slow, incremental steps that no patriotic, right-thinking Roman could have objected to. Or so they were told, each and every time another "request" was made of the Senate.
The military goes where it is told to go, and does what it is told to do.
And if we tell it and its champions no, we're not renaming the road, quit asking?
Glorifying firefighters is not glorifying arson, and glorifying our military personnel and the work they do is not glorifying war, it is glorifying the sacrifice made in the name of our democracy. Shame you cannot see that.
And injecting the word "hero" into our daily discourse until it's utterly flabby, bland, and devoid of meaning other than "guy in a uniform" is to, all at once, trivialize the efforts of exceptional people truly worthy of recognition and to elevate the mundane (yes, fine, I'll say it) to a status beyond what is merited. If we build a society where simply sticking on a jacket that looks the same as a hundred thousand others is all that it takes to require of the people who don't an exceptionalistic status where rights, rules, and privileges are concerned -- and we are already partly down that path as it is -- then we're not a democracy. We're a place where just putting on special clothes and promising to kill people makes you better than everyone else; where the only way to be "equal" is to join them. This would hardly be a unique situation in human history, and the shame is yours, not mine, for whistling in a graveyard.
As you say, the military is there to defend our freedom. This is worthy of commemorating, imo.
Certainly. With Remembrance Day. Vimy Ridge. Cenotaphs. Parades. Poppies. Not, however, the papering over of the everyday civilian aspects of life with military themes, evocations of war and triumphalism and the tacit encouragement of elevating one's self by engaging in warcraft. There's a line between these two threads that should be obvious: one keeps it remarkable, unusual, with people awed by the very unfamiliarity of it all. The other makes it commonplace, pervasive, and ubiquitous. It's the difference between indulging in a fine wine at a special occasion and swilling liquor as your daily fare; between a healthy recognition and a pernicious obsession.
but do not question the people who do what you or I are not willing to do, giving you the freedom and luxury to sit at your computer and vent your abhorance at a request made to change a road name.
They don't GIVE me anything. It's MINE. They're employed to PRESERVE it, not GRANT it. If someone comes to take it, you better believe I'll be "willing" to make them think twice or die trying. BLOODY willing. But you're demanding we wallow in it, every day, just driving to work. No, I won't agree to that. And I won't submit to slick emotional blackmail that demands we repaint anything someone else wants camouflage khaki, or to being lectured about duty by someone who's just admitted that his own "sacrifice" likely amounts to nothing more than the $4.95 for the "support our troops" magnetic ribbon on his bumper.
