[OT] UNSC (not really anymore...)

Mr. Bell said:

I cannot believe that I forgot to mention my favorite example of how
things
usually change suddenly, not gradually.  In the late twentieth century,
a
former
colony of the British Empire with a long history of parliamentary
democracy
ordered the army to patrol the city streets to impose order and
suspended
all
civil rights in response to a terrorist movement.  Armed with new and
sweeping
powers, the police rounded up hundreds, if not thousands, of suspected
terrorists
and anyone who might be terrorist sympathisers and held them for weeks,
without
charging them with any crime and only on the the faintest shred of
evidence
(if
any evidence at all).  The surprising thing about the democratic nation
becoming
a police state over night is not that it happened at all, but that
everything
returned to normal in Canada after the FLQ crisis had passed.

Tomb says:

It isn't terribly surprising if you realize the broad scope of police
powers
and government powers in Canada, partly as a result of our former lack
of a
Constitution (well, at least a modern one) and partly as a consequence
of
our very British model of doing things. Seems to me that the Brits
always
had a notion that a lot of power should be vested in the Gov't for times
of
crisis and that the Gov't, being responsible, wou	ldn't abuse this
power. Strangely, for them it has worked (mostly) for a long, long time.
But
we in Canada got British governmental system and a lot of US influence
too.... (and French). So we ended up with a system based a bit on trust
of
public officials (and a strong tradition amongst said officials of
"taking
responsibility" - in theory anyway) and a bunch of public officials who
had
amongst their characteristics some corruption, some authoritarianism,
and a
big streak of self interest. We don't seem to have quite the same
traditions.... I have watched over my time on this Earth, a number of UK
ministers resign over things that didn't really seem to be their fault
(but
were, as a product of being in their ministry) their responsibility. In
Canada, I've watched ministers who _were_ at fault (and also were
responsible by ministry) DODGE, WEAVE, and PASS THE BUCK. A quick
cabinet
shuffle, and their transgressions go unpunished and the gov't goes on. 

The FLQ crisis was not our governmental high point (nor was the
internment
of Japanese Canadians during WWII). OTOH, our system doesn't come down
that
hard on creeps - guys who actually killed people with bombs during the
FLQ
crisis are wandering the streets today unrepentant. 

As you say though, it is interesting how some countries seem to be able
to
pull out the "hammer" and put it away again and revert to democracy.
Part of
that is a strong historical democratic tradition that won't probably
tolerate indefinite totalitarian rule, part of it is probably the
construction of legal and insitutional limits to the power of the
government
such that they can only pull out the "hammer" for short periods before
those
powers are automatically rescinded. Part of it maybe is that our
politicos
are so good at "blowing in the wind" and "serving public opinion" that
they
can tell what will and won't fly and realize where there interests lie
(and
trying to foist off a totalitarian regime for a long term period won't
fly).
Education probably factors in. 

It is fortunate that Canada runs largely despite its government in
Ottawa.
Assuming it doesn't screw up dramatically, most Canadians don't pay it
much
heed and life goes on. It's too darn cold up here to go out in the
streets,
riot and kill your neighbours (at least 6-8 months of the year) and
besides,
we got all that out of our system during the Stanley Cup and the Brier,
so
we all need a holiday in the summer.....