And while I'm here, you know what really ulcers my stomach? It's a child who, while benefitting from his/her forebears' moral courage, repudiates it.
One of the critics, Blair Suffredine, MLA for the Nelson-Creston region, was born in 1951. The other, Jim Gouk, MP for BC's Southern Interior, was born in 1946. Both were of, what we called back in Texas "fightin' age", when shooting in Vietnam was hot -n- heavy. Search their bios all you like, and if either of them walked south to join the US Army due to their heartfelt support for America's involvement in Southeast Asia, they are remarkably silent about it.
And do you think, had Trudeau been a Blair-like poodle for Johnson or Nixon, either of them would have not been yanking every string available to avoid combat? Ya, sure.
Compulsary military service is a form of slavery. Those who resisted it in the 60's and 70's, and who, by their resistance, helped to bring about the end of the Vietnam War and on its heels, the American military draft, deserve recognition. Because of them, my brothers were not drafted (they volunteered). I was not drafted (though for a time I was listed as 4-F, a true comedy of bureaucratic error). Suffredine's and Gouk's children, when they came of age, were more subject to alien abduction than they were to a draft.
Now, more than ever, one would think that should count for something.
5 Comments
Regardless of what people may think of the draft dodgers themselves (the one I met, my Grade 11 math teacher, was an entirely decent chap), they *are* a part of our shared history so I think some kind of monument to their legacy is entirely appropriate.
But our government has spent a great deal of time and money building monuments to those who fought and fell in war and I have no particular issue with that. But isn’t it nice, for a change, to recognise those who, because of their conscience, chose not to.
As for the MLAs, well, maybe they’re objecting because they’re angling for a friendly spot on The O’Reilly Factor, which I understand may be heading North after all.
See also: the famous anecdote involving Pearson and Johnson and Vietnam War (second item).
for a time I was listed as 4-F
Huh?
Fox broadcasting in Canada? Ew. I’m so glad we ditched cable. But if that what those guys want, a kid-gloves treatment from O’Rielly, they have sadly decieved themselves. The Canadian Alliance is too liberal for Fox.
Christina, that was my reaction at the time. It was noted on my pay stub, along with a reason code. I looked up the code, and it was the one for being a ‘sole surviving son’. I didn’t know if this was a local draft board error based on my SSN, or just a Personnel error, but I was able to get it fixed after a few weeks.
“The Canadian Alliance is too liberal for Fox.”
Oh, but give them time. They’re trying. Why, young Mr. Harper himself went on “The O’Reilly Factor” to apologise to the USA for Canada’s decision not to go to war in Iraq.
I have no particular problem with Fox news in Canada as I don’t really think CRTC should think they can decide what kinds of news channels Canadians can and can’t watch. I won’t subscribe to it or anything. I don’t even have CNN. I’ll stick to Newsworld and, much to the consternation of Fox News, the French-language Radio-Canada-International.
Why, young Mr. Harper himself went on “The O’Reilly Factor” to apologise to the USA for Canada’s decision not to go to war in Iraq.
That should have sunk his political career right there.
I have no particular problem with Fox news in Canada as I don’t really think CRTC should think they can decide what kinds of news channels Canadians can and can’t watch.
There’s a limited number of slots, and no public interest, compelling or otherwise, to assign one to a corporation raking in the big bucks promoting Murdoch’s fascist agenda. At the very least, they should be reserved for promoting home-grown fascism.