• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

UVIC threads on Recruiting, Protests & Students against War

Feral said:
One of the claims was that having military personnel in the student union building constituted "arming the campus".. I would love to get the permission to get every CF member, reg and res, to go to campus for a full day in uniform, in a show of solidarity.. Show the students how many around them have affiliations with the CF.

One time/place to do this is Remembrance day. Organize the service on campus and invite the student body to attend with the people who make freedom of assembly and expression possible. Make sure lots of vets are there too.
 
The whole thing reminds me of an event recorded by Sir Winston Churchill in the first volume of his History of WWII - The Gathering Storm. It took place in 1933.  The Student Union a Oxford University made and passed the following resolution.

"...that this House will in no circumstances fight for its king and country".

As WSC himself points out, only six years later many student at Oxford were doing just that, and many gave their lives in the cause.  The words of a misguided and foolish association of left-leaning students have little value compared to the valour and belief system of the individual. The UVSS does not speak for the students, and, as pointed out previously on this thread does not IMI not represent the student body as a whole.
 
I took a look at their current board of directors and recognize one of them. Her parents are very entrenched in the labour movement as well as left leaning civic and provincial/federal politics.
 
I've been following this on Facebook, and it's become a rather huge issue for the school. They've gained national prominence amongst student groups for this stunt, and support is pouring in from nationwide. There's a large and vocal student campaign supporting the CF, and they're petitioning to add a letter of welcome for the Cf and an invitation to recruit to the agenda of the next student society annual general meeting. It looks like they should be successful, too.

I'll keep you guys apprised.
 
NavComm said:
I took a look at their current board of directors and recognize one of them. Her parents are very entrenched in the labour movement as well as left leaning civic and provincial/federal politics.

So how is this connection made? From supporting labour movements to hating the military?
 
leftcoaster said:
So how is this connection made? From supporting labour movements to hating the military?

There's a lot more to it than that.  You should read some of their 'direct action' flyers and handouts explaining their group ideology and it becomes self-evident why they believe what they do.
 
GreyMatter said:
There's a lot more to it than that.  You should read some of their 'direct action' flyers and handouts explaining their group ideology and it becomes self-evident why they believe what they do.

- Many of us are a bit far removed from that.  Could you elaborate on this?
 
ArmyVern said:
Shannon Lucy, a third-year anthropology student, supports the UVSS decision.

"I'm not for censorship," said Lucy. "But since the Canadian Armed Forces is doing illegal things, they don't really have any business on a public site. We can't be endorsing them."

WTF??? Over ...

*Silly Hat on*

Unknown Call Sign, Unknown Call Sign. Check your means, check your means. Out.  :rofl:
 
Feral said:
Dr Keith Martin, MP to Esquimalt/Juan de Fuca, and some CF members who are UVic alumni are putting on a talk on Tuesday Oct 2nd, at 1400hrs in the Cornett building, room A129 at the UVic campus. This is being listed as a non-partisan event to inform the students about the issues surrounding the ban against the CF, and apparently about the CF in general (hopefully to dispel some of the myths held by many students). Should prove to be interesting.

If you find a text of the brouhaha, would you be interested in posting it?  I'd go as I'm always interested to hear what the doc has to say, but I've got a lab to deal with then.
 
>So how is this connection made? From supporting labour movements to hating the military?

Beats me.  Ask the people for whom the two behaviours go hand-in-hand how they made the connection.
 
leftcoaster said:
So how is this connection made? From supporting labour movements to hating the military?

While there is no 100% correlation, the Labour movement (as expressed by the Union movement, which is what I think is being implied here) has traditionally supported the International Socialist movement (indeed is a key part of it), and as such has been a vocal supporter of international disarmament, "peace" movements, the United Nations, multiculturalism, "customary International law" and so on.

The unifying themes are to dismantle or weaken the Sovereign State; free market capitalism; the Rule of Law and property rights. The justification is "group rights", lumping people into undifferentiated social or economic classes, with the Labour Movement representing "the workers".

Other variants of Socialism lump people into undifferentiated groups based on different arbitrary categories such as ethnic origin, or exalt different groups as being the true ruling class (such as Maoists celebrating the role of peasant farmers. Given the chance, they would take steps to ensure you become one too).

Since the Armed Forces are the ultimate guarantor of the State, standing between the citizens and external enemies, as well as having the potential to impose State power within the boundaries of the State, Socialists are not big fans of professional armies. Even in states where Socialists have assumed total power, they hamstring the professional forces with internal controls (like Soviet era Commissars) and also tend to create parallel forces like the National Socialist German SS or the Soviet MVD to ensure the levers of power are well defended against the masses.

While it may seem a long step from Jack Layton or Elizabeth May to Joseph Stalin, following the logic behind Socialism only leads in that direction.
 
"Shannon Lucy, a third-year anthropology student, supports the UVSS decision.

"I'm not for censorship," said Lucy. "But since the Canadian Armed Forces is doing illegal things, they don't really have any business on a public site. We can't be endorsing them."

In response to this a quote from the movies seems appropro.  Visualize,  if you will,  Jack Nicholson portraying Col. Jessup in A Few Good Men:

"I  have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."
 
TCBF said:
- Many of us are a bit far removed from that.  Could you elaborate on this?

At the risk of being called a conspiracy theorist...

Many of you are familiar with historical groups that went by the name of 'Direct Action' of which two are notable.  Im not talking about the plethora of 'Direct Action' out there since the Internet was created, but the original Direct Action from the 1960's/70's.  The Direct Action group from BC (aka the Squamish 5) and the Action Direct from France are the most famous, but other groups used variations of that name.  Although miles apart, these two shared common interests and activities, that being both were anti-military and both were terrorist groups that committed terrorist acts.

When you look at the material on the current Direct Action website, you can see that the materials says the same thing that these groups used to say.  That the military (and NATO) is a bloodthirsty machine, that its all the fault of fatcat capitalists, and that the only way to solve the problem is to directly confront the capitalist leaders and NATO war machine.  Nothing has changed in 30 years.  This is exactly what the previous Action Direct in France used to say, along with the Italian Red Brigades, German Red Army faction, and like groups in Belgium, Spain, and other European countries of that era.  Thats why these historical groups targeted leading industrialists and NATO officers for assasinations and bombings.  Further those historical groups were created, acted and organized in the exact same way.  Groups formed on a university campus, gather together a groups of friends, trust no one unless youve had a chance to question them,  covert communication and meetings, etc. etc.... oh and who just happens to be there associated with all these groups?  The local communist party in one form or another, who promoted 'up the proletariat, workers unite, and down with captialist military fascim'.

So the connection.  Its all based on communist-created material that dates back from the end of WW2.  This type of material has always stated two things; workers should throw off their chains and unite (via unions) to confront their capitalist oppressors, and that NATO is the cause of war, thus must be dissolved.  Its not that the two are linked by argument, but by political goals of the nation who started and supported so many of these university based terrorist groups.  Im sure they have a complete dialogue explaining their argument handy somewhere, but its not worth looking at.  Other evidence?  Look at their website and read the material for yourself, and surprise surprise, they also have a spot saying they are united with the Youth Communist Party, what a coincidence...

Now is the big bad bear behind this?  Who knows. They started the ball rolling, but it is more likely that the concept has taken on a life of its own.  Even if its not under their control anymore, its still a great forum for finding people who are: wlling to use violence, know how to form covert organizations, conduct meetings, understand security precautions, plan resistance efforts, are opposed to the current government practices, are against global capatilism, and against NATO - in other words, perfect recruits for future sympathisers, safe house owners, agents, provacateurs, spies, or fifth columnists. All you have to do is convince them to use weapons and youve got a whole bunch of home-grown terrorists.
 
Funny isn't it, that the deadliest, most blood soaked ideology in history (the twins, socialism and communism) preach all their thought in the name of peace, love, humanity and understanding...  Yet their legacy was nations turned into prisons, horrible human suffering vast poverty and a class (party) system so pervasive and invasive that it touched virtually every aspect of the peoples lives
 
leftcoaster said:
So how is this connection made? From supporting labour movements to hating the military?

Sorry I wasn't online on the weekend to answer this.

I see it's been explained very well (thank you to those who did it much more eloquently than I ever could), so I won't bother going over it again.

modified to add this link: http://www.martlet.ca/view.php?aid=39668

A couple of items in this article popped out at me:

Tim Fournier from Students Against War spoke against the Canadian military recruiting on campus. He agreed that any law-abiding group should be allowed on campus, but argued the military committed illegal acts.

He doesn't have any proof of this but he does say that the CF tortures Afghanis and uses depleted uranium. When asked to substantiate these allegations he says that he can't and that the military lies.

and the best quote of all IMO is:

Director-at-large Christine Comrie said it was important to ban the military from recruiting because some students are ignorant about the issues. "A lot of students don't know about the issues and don't know about the facts,she said. We have to make this decision for students."
(emphasis added by me)

Me thinks they have become what they profess to disdain.
 
Editorial from today's Halifax Chronicle-Herald (shared with usual disclaimer)

Article link

Free to recruit

THOSE who disagree with the role today played by the Canadian military, such as the Students Coalition Against War, have every right to say so in this country.

That’s fundamentally their due, based on the cornerstone concept of freedom of speech.

But that same right also belongs to all other Canadians, including those who don’t agree with the coalition’s views, such as the military itself.

The coalition recently announced plans to protest against military recruitment efforts on university and high school grounds in this province, part of a nationwide "counter-recruitment" effort by similar groups to dissuade young people from enlisting. Fair enough. There’s nothing wrong with would-be military signups hearing some alternate perspectives before making an important decision.

But we object to efforts to ban military recruiters from school grounds altogether. Counter-recruitment organizers are no doubt convinced they are in the right, but preventing those you disagree with from having their opportunity to present their point of view is not how free speech works.

For example, one member of the executive of the University of Victoria’s Student Society, which recently voted to ban military recruiters from job fairs at the school’s career centre in UVSS buildings, was quoted by the school paper as saying the ban was justified because some students were ignorant of the issues.

That statement reflects an arrogant assumption some students can’t be trusted to make decisions for themselves. Nonsense. People make the best decisions when weighing all information available, not just that deemed appropriate by someone else. Protests against the UVSS decision have since forced an open vote on the issue at a society meeting Oct. 18.

Thankfully, spokespersons at Dalhousie University and the Halifax regional school board have indicated they trust students can think for themselves.
 
You know what I like about United States? Their radio. You can listen to so many outrageous viewpoints. There is absolutely no fear of saying crazy stuff. However, when somebody tries to physically influence opinion like what is happening at UVIC, they should have to deal with the law.
 
'Talk Radio' and 'Bloggers' are two very potent tools in the democracy toolbox.

Satellite radio will eventualy disenfrachise most AM/FM listeners, and the looming Internet controls (ala China, Burma, etc.) will hobble the Bloggers.
 
Back
Top