[defaultname]

"In just three weeks of honking, blocked streets and bridges, bouncy castles and flag waving, this peaceful protest"

Aside from a billion dollars+ in trade blocked when the protest -- having achieved nothing terrorizing the residents of Ottawa and blasting horns/setting off fireworks around the clock -- branched out to trying to block international borders, they harassed schools, healthcare workers, anyone wearing a mask, and attacked reporters from venues they don't like. The vast majority of businesses in the affected zone shut down entirely because the lawless, selfish crowd at this rally proved such a massive liability that simply closing was a better option.

But they set up a bouncy castle and brought children as shields (stated tactical plan of the group), so I guess that is okay.

They fawned over a Fox News reporter, and then spit on and slurred an MSNBC reporter. You might notice a correlation with another group South of the border, and that isn't accidental. Just as it shouldn't surprise that the main "stage" of this operation's daily speeches were chock full of QAnon gibberish (utterly indisputable -- the crowd cheers as conspiracies about the WEF, the Rothschilds, Bill Gates, 5G, and so on were given the daily reading). Appearances by "Canada First" flags, Red Ensign flags (an old Canadian flag repurposed by white supremacist), and more unfortunate correlations. This isn't accidental. Livestreams and discussions with many of the protestors betrayed just a cosmically misinformed, ignorant group, and it's a perilous demonstration of the future we all face as groups fracture off, conveniently declare anything but a few grifting sources "fake news", and then feed off of each other.

To call this an anti-mandate protest is to seriously miss the plot. If it was -- if it hadn't constructed noise-terrorism devices that saw people measuring 100db+ in their apartment -- and actually saved the "Fuck Trudeau" signs and QAnon conspiracies, or that whole seditious "we're not leaving until the government resigns and the Governor General declares us the new government" bit of nonsense, they could have inspired sympathy. Instead it was simply political terrorism, and is grotesquely anti-democratic. 93% of Canadians wanted this shut down weeks ago.

"Martial law"? After three weeks, weeks past being declared an illegal occupation, they were sent home in the gentlest way possible. After weeks of warnings, then days of warning of an action, the police did their job. The only thing above and beyond normal policing they did was that the Emergency Act allowed other regions to add to the police force without the whole normal process. Calling this Martial Law is *gross* and makes DHH look like a clown, though the entire piece manages that so it's consistent. It should offend anyone with any functioning reason.

"First the Ottawa police department got GoFundMe to confiscate donations with the intention of redirecting them to other causes"

GFM was made aware the cause was being used to fund literal crime breaking (indisputable), so they cancelled it. Good for them. And if someone crowdfunded to have crimes committed against DHH or his property, I hope they would be even quicker (but hey, at least his detractors will have crypto, right?). What GFM decided to do then was entirely on GFM's side.

Now the government wants crowdfunding with targets or sources in Canada to report large or suspicious transactions to FINTRAC, given that currently it is a gap in the financial system. There is nothing surprising or bizarre in that.

And before someone cites BLM or "ANTIFA" thinking that's some sort of "haha got you leftist" retort, a lot of us -- those of us who don't frame everything as "right" or "left", and have remotely consistent values -- are against unlawful blockades and occupations fullstop. "CHOP" areas -- terrible, shut them down. Railway blockades -- terrible, shut them down. Bridge blockade -- terrible, shut them down. City blockade and criminal harassment for three weeks -- terrible, shut it down. Trying to undermine or usurp a democracy through criminal action -- terrible, shut it down.

I am embarrassed for DHH. Another hot take bit of nonsense filled with clear lies, all so he could claim that crypto could be the answer? And this trash will see upvotes by crypto enthusiasts who don't realize it's yet another American giving their unwanted, unneeded, ignorant hot takes about a situation about which they are grossly misinformed (or they're just a liar and don't care, because again they know they're talking to an audience that will eat it up).

As one aside, he tries to shame someone who called for them to lose their commercial license, commercial insurance, etc. Imagine if you will that a pilot at JFK airport didn't like....who cares, something, anything...so they taxied their A360 out to an active runway and then shut it down and locked the doors. Until they were satisfied with whatever their cause was, they weren't moving. Now tell me what you think the chances are that this person would maintain their pilot license, employment, or would ever fly a plane again?

[csee]

> trying to block international borders, they harassed [people]

Then arrest the specific people doing this and charge them with a crime.

[defaultname]

You're 100% right. The moment someone blasted their horn -- much less their modified, multi-horn noise-terrorism device -- they should have been warned, fined, and then charged/arrested for mischief. The moment they blocked roadways illegally with regulated, commercial vehicles, they should have been warned, fined, and then charged/arrested, the vehicle towed. The moment the first person stopped near a bridge they should have been...etc.

So we agree, law breakers should have been charged. Police action should have been constant and aggressive.

But it was an occupation. Police barely operated in their lawless zone at all. That's the whole point, and was the intention of the group. It was a bully group, and their rhetoric and claims were often that they would die before they left. There are connotations to that.

[nameisname]

Why would you treat this group of protestors so much more harshly than ones that, say, block railways? Also, I think a lot of what you're saying is very narrow minded. To get a group of people together to protest anything is a miracle and to expect them all to behave like their some sort of hive mind is just willful ignorance. There will always be bad actors, even with proper leadership. I think you need to spend some time reflecting on your world views or how you view groups of people and compare these protestors with others in Canadian history. I also think your news sources are a little biased.

[defaultname]

"Why would you treat this group of protestors so much more harshly than ones that, say, block railways?"

Me? I found the railway blockades intolerable lawlessness. Trudeau took well-earned criticism for the soft-handed approach to them, and it cost him a majority government. It had far less of a negative impact on Canada (and touched on a very sensitive aboriginal issue), but those of us with actual value-based positions -- instead of just tribalistically flexing our positions to justify whatever we think "our" group are doing, as seen by DHH here -- are pretty consistent on this.

But can you point out any other protest in Canada that set up hot tubs on city streets, abused commercial vehicles and commercial privileges, terrorized residents, squatted on city parking lots as command and control systems, and operated a lawless zone? Pointing to some CHOP in the US (also GROSSLY unacceptable) isn't an example. Pointing at BLM isn't a counterpoint.

"expect them all to behave like their some sort of hive mind"

Among any group there will be bad actors. The constant citing of a Nazi flag appearance was just boring nonsense...at least until I repeatedly saw Canada First and Red Ensign flags (which are a subtler way of saying the same thing). QAnon nuttery would be just some fringe...if it wasn't the majority of content on their main stage and repeated by the main organizers constantly. The guy saying the flurry of incredibly ignorant misinformation would be just some nut, if it wasn't the same thing that came out of almost every participant's mouth.

"I also think your news sources are a little biased."

Sure. I mean, my news sources don't involved many QAnon blogs, but during the protest I had a video window playing most days featuring one of the sympathetic live streamers who constantly walked up and down the protest, interviewing participants. ZOD, the travel fun guy, some machine guy, etc. It is the words of the participant, and hearing their rhetoric at their stage, that gives me my opinion of this group.

[csee]

> That's the whole point, and was the intention of the group.

That's a point you are making, and it's a point I completely agree with.

But don't dismiss the unrelated point that DHH is raising, which is a concern over the power to freeze anyone's assets without due process, and the power of crypto to prevent that from happening.

Even if DHH is categorically wrong that it's a "peaceful" protest or whatever, his core point still stands.

[defaultname]

DHH's piece is clearly just a pro-"trucker" piece -- he has posted others previously -- and he decided to add a crypto narrative as some weak editorial justification. Add that he knows crypto enthusiasts are now going to distribute this nonsense widely. It's a pretty easy group to pander to.

But sure, he brings up classic arguments for crypto. There is nothing new in them. "Avoid government control - use crypto". Sounds great when it's for a cause you support, and DHH supports chaos and lawlessness in foreign cities he has no interests in, so why not. Kind of falls apart when that same mechanism is used for causes you're against.

[csee]

It's a mistake to think this article is just a rehash of the classic arguments for crypto. The Canadian response is the first piece of hard evidence we have seen that such arguments aren't just fanciful theoretical speculations that could never apply to wealthy, liberal democracies. It is good and useful to point this out. Even if the rest of the piece is ideologically motivated, we shouldn't then close off to this important nugget of truth.

[landemva]

Cypress closed their banking and did forced bail-in. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/03/everyth...

Anyone paying attention has some btc just in case.

[defaultname]

>The Canadian response is the first piece of hard evidence

For two decades the US has frozen and seized accounts in the hundreds of thousands -- billions of dollars in assets -- often with little oversight or checks. Civil forfeiture is rampant. Whole political groups have been declared "terrorist affiliated" and any correlation at all can lead to extremely unpleasant outcomes. No fly lists are flippant and casual.

And you think Canada using financial tools, primarily motivated by large external contributions to illegal activities, is the example?

It's maybe an example, sure. A weak one to me, but sure. It's certainly no precedent. To use this as the kick off point for some crypto advocacy seems...pernicious.

[john_moscow]

>Aside from a billion dollars+ in trade blocked when the protest -- having achieved nothing terrorizing the residents of Ottawa and blasting horns/setting off fireworks around the clock

I don't think, it is entirely fair to blame it all on one side. What the government could have done is meet with the protestors and solve the problem diplomatically. Agree on a reasonable compromise, like suspending some restrictions conditional to hospital utilization. The protestors with reasonable demands [0] would have then condemned the complete nut jobs, most general public from both political camps would have supported the peaceful resolution and Trudeau would have been known as a good diplomat. After all, it's his direct job - negotiate terms on behalf of people he represents.

Instead, he decided to basically threw a tantrum and declared that it's below his royal highness to go negotiate with some pesky trucker plebs, quickly passing emergency regulation barring public assembly on the Parliament Hill and near "official residences" [1]. This is the most divisive and nonconstructive way of handling the situation, and I do think this is done on purpose.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8tzXazvyHQ&t=44s

[1] https://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2022/2022-02-15-x1/html/s...

[BoGs83]

No we do not meet with terrorists. That is what the occupation was, terrorists harassing, intimidating and torturing the businesses and residents of Ottawa.

I think everyone has a right to protest, peacefully, and many have in Ottawa. None of them terrorized the city for 3 weeks. Before you say that it was a "peaceful" protest note that there are many types of terrorism [0] and this occupation fits into "Civil disorder – A form of collective violence interfering with the peace, security, and normal functioning of the community.".

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism#Types

[alricb]

The Federal government can't agree to compromises on healthcare matters; that's provincial jurisdiction. It can't agree on compromises on border vaccination; that's US jurisdiction.

[defaultname]

YouTube videos are not citations. No one is going to watch them or try to read the tea leaves of some third party's interpretation. The literal demand of the organizers of the group (a separatist and a white supremacist) were that the government resign en masse. The trucks are emblazoned with "Fuck Trudeau" flags and signs. The rhetoric coming from the various participants has been aggressive and apocalyptic.

No, Trudeau should never have met with them. I'm no Trudeau fan, but there was zero value in ever meeting with this group. They should have been swept up the moment they broke the first law.

"like suspending some restrictions conditional to hospital utilization"

Like almost everyone who has takes on this here (including DHH), you seem to know perilously little about the actual situation, yet you've got a lot of takes. The vast majority of mandates are provincial, for instance, not federal, just as health systems are managed at the provincial level. Ontario (the province that Ottawa is in), actually has a conservative leader, but the so-called "truckers" didn't target him at all, and their minimal foray into Toronto was immediately squashed by a much more capable police force. Nor did they do much about any other premier. Because it had little to do with mandates. These people simply don't accept democracy. They don't like Trudeau, therefore he's got to go. I mean, they literally said it over and over again. That's cool, but we just had an election so they can take their mini insurrection and go home again.

[john_moscow]

The linked video has ~750K views and features Benjamin Dichter, one of the 3 convoy leaders, outlining 2 very realistic demands:

1. Abolish federal vaccine mandates for border crossing.

2. Abolish ArriveCAN - the app used to track health/vaccination status during border crossings.

Both are very specific demands. Both will have close to zero effect on the actual COVID deaths. Both are within the federal government's jurisdiction. Both are extremely hard to defend in the public's eye. So what does the government and the news agencies do? Completely ignore the reasonable take, pick up much crazier demands made by a different person, that are easier to refute, and play the usual guilt by association game, implying that everyone against the mandates are supporters of the nuttiest imaginable cause.

[defaultname]

The video was made February 15th, weeks into the blockade, and long after it was painfully clear that the public was turning dramatically against the convoy. At this point the Premier of Ontario and the federal government were openly discussing measures to squash the occupation.

A week earlier the organizers had quietly dropped their memorandum of understanding's insurrection demands.

"Completely ignore the reasonable take, pick up much crazier demands made by a different person"

What I described were the demands in effect by the organizers for weeks. In interviews with convoy participants, zero of them seemed to believe that removing a border vaccine requirement (completely and utterly irrelevant given that the US government has their own mandate that makes Canada's extraneous) would be enough for them to go home.

[john_moscow]

In other words, the organizers managed to agree between themselves and come up with reasonable demands, but the government showed complete unwillingness to reason. So Benjamin Dichter showed himself as a better diplomat than Justin Trudeau.

[defaultname]

I am just in awe at this. Astonishing.

After a three week long insurrection based on profound ignorance, and thousands of instances of criminality, you think the government -- just as it was about to have the resources available to put it down -- should have shook hands and said "you win" to these people? And just to be clear, even if we though the army of QAnon aficionados would go for it, I assure you they would have expected amnesty.

No, I don't think so. It was *way* too late to suddenly try to eek a win out of this.

[landemva]

Tyrants understand local police may be hesitant to act against their neighbors under questionable orders. This is why tyrants bring in non-local police who don't have local connections. Outside police will crack skulls and not care because they and their families live elsewhere.

'... Emergency Act allowed other regions to add to the police force without the whole normal process.'

Yes, outside enforcers were needed because local police were not doing it.

Trudeau is one of Schwab's young leaders and has embarrassed Canada. https://www.weforum.org/people/justin-trudeau

[defaultname]

"Yes, outside enforcers were needed because local police were not doing it."

Ottawa is a relatively small city. They were grossly overwhelmed after letting an occupation setup base. Further, you clearly know absolutely nothing about Canada, or Ontario, or the police involved, or the politics, so your various takes are nonsensical.

"Trudeau is one of Schwab's young leaders and has embarrassed Canada."

A current QAnon conspiracy on HN, stated with a straight face. How absolutely embarrassing.

So everyone else is aware (although this ridiculous stupid essay from DHH thankfully got flagged off the front page, so this post is largely only being seen by "the faithful"), the WEF conspiracy came about because some people with incredibly poor critical skills have derived an inverted relationship between a group and its members. Basically a tail wagging a dog assumption. The world's powerful all are members of Davos / WEF basically as a networking and "say nice things", so the especially gullible conspiratorial swap that relationship and now the WEF is actually the master puppeteer pulling the strings. It's a conspiracy literally beyond parody, and I'm still caught up in Poe's Law, unsure if the above comment is sincere, or some sarcastic example of insanity.