“But ’twas a famous victory …”

So, the public relations dust appears to be settling, a bit, and what now seems more or less clear is that, as the Star says, in an editorial, “The agreement reached over the weekend between the federal and B.C. governments on one side, and Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs on the other, amounts to a series of questions with no clear answers … [because the editorial writers ask] … What, exactly, does the “draft agreement,” arrived at behind closed doors and still kept secret, mean when it speaks of implementing the “rights and title” of the Wet’suwet’en to their traditional territory, a vast swath of central British Columbia? … [and] … How will the badly divided Wet’suwet’en arrive at a workable solution to an issue they have wrestled with for years: who speaks for them? The hereditary chiefs or their elected band leaders?

But the editorial, suggests, and I agree fully that: “On the face of it, the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs won a resounding victory. By standing firm while their sympathizers across the country disrupted the rails, they have moved the issue of their “rights and title” to the land from the backburner to the top of the Trudeau government’s agenda.” It was a kind of ‘Veni, Vidi, Addixi‘ moment for the feds: the federal government came to the table, after being jerked around, even humiliated a bit by the hereditary chiefs, they saw the chiefs and listened to their demands and, then … they surrendered.

The Trudeau ministers came to the table with a request: ‘Please,’ they begged, ‘tell your friends in Ontario and Québec stop breaking the law.‘ It had to be a request. because the government had already ruled out using the Army ~ a decision of such absolutely mind-boggling stupidity and irresponsibility that it could only have come from Justin Trudeau, himself.

The Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs seem to have offered self-satisfied smiles before they presented their agenda which had nothing at all to do with railway blockades. The government’s agenda was ignored; it was irrelevant because the Trudeau regime had already rendered itself irrelevant. Our man-child prime minister did that all by himself.

The Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs’ agenda seems simple enough to me. They don’t like the notion that the Wet’suwet’en people can elect band councils that might act for the good of the people and < quelle horreur > the people might even disagree with the hereditary chiefs. Some (male) hereditary chiefs seem to have managed to strip some other (female) chiefs of their titles Screen Shot 2020-03-03 at 07.43.08Screen Shot 2020-03-04 at 10.07.05because they, the female chiefs, sided with the elected councils. This is, in 21st century British Columbia, something of a replay of 17th century Europe and the end of the divine right of kings, except that the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs might succeed where Charles I and Louis XVI failed because they have the dimwits in the Trudeau cabinet on their side.

To make matters worse, as John Morris of the Canadian Press points out in an article published in the Globe and Mail, the government negotiated with the hereditary chiefs, only ~ with the people who broke the law; and they ignored the elected leaders ~ the people who played by the rules.

37_550x550_Front_Color-NAHow typically Trudeau: he surrenders, cravenly, to the reactionary, anti-democratic lawbreakers and, simultaneously, shuts out the elected representatives of the Wet’suwet’en peoples. Is that the Canada in which we all want to live? Is that the sort of ‘leadership‘ for which millions of Canadians voted in 2019? I think not. Justin Trudeau is both a fool and a coward and his party, the Liberal Party of Canada, has a duty to Canada: throw the bum out!

But, not to worry, the Trudeau regime’s propagandists press agents will tell us that it’s all good, we “won,” something or other … didn’t we? And who cares if we lost something nebulous like honour and responsibility? It’s all about reconciliation, isn’t it? What do trivialities like democracy and the national interest matter when really important things, like preserving the power of hereditary chiefs over elected councils, are at stake? But that reactionary system seems to have been strengthened, and so “It was a famous victory.”

One thought on ““But ’twas a famous victory …”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s