Official statement of the Libertarian Party of Canada (LPoC) on the Freedom Convoy 2022 protest in Ottawa
The LPoC wishes to express its support for the legitimacy for the protest taking place in Ottawa as long as it’s done without violating the non-aggression principle and private property rights. We applaud that, with a few minor exceptions, it has been done in that manner.
We recognize that the protestors have very legitimate concerns. Contrary to the constant misrepresentation by the government and main stream media, this is not an anti-vaccination protest but rather an anti-mandate protest. This is attested by the fact that the majority of the protestors are vaccinated. What people want is their freedom and liberty back. We completely support this desire in light of the following evidence.
- A few months ago, Douglas Allen of Simon Fraser University published the result of a study that found that:
- The lockdowns have had, at best, a marginal effect on the number of Covid-19 deaths and
- the cost/benefit ratio of lockdowns in terms of life-years saved was at least 3.6. That is, for every life-year saved, 3.6 were lost.
- In January, Johns Hopkins University published the result of a meta-analysis of the impact of lockdowns on Covid-19 deaths and stated: “While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument”
Justin Trudeau made the classic mistake of acting on a narrow scope (Covid-19 deaths) as opposed to a comprehensive and holistic approach that would have included all aspects of life. Therefore, his actions were and continue to be completely inappropriate.
We also strongly condemn his on-going efforts to demonize the protestors who, as we just showed, have perfectly valid concerns particularly since many countries (UK, Netherlands and Denmark to name a few) are now lifting most restrictions.
Also, his efforts to dismiss them as a “small fringe” betrays his appalling lack of knowledge of history and ethics. According to his world view the only acceptable opinion is that of the majority. Let us remind him of a few instances where movements that became accepted by the majority started out as fringe movement:
- Nelson Mandela and the resistance to apartheid
- William Wilberforce and the resistance to slavery
- The White Rose movement and the resistance to the Nazi regime
In doing so, he’s confusing what is legal with was is moral. The examples above ought to remind him of how often that has not been the case.
We strongly oppose his describing the protestors’ views as “unacceptable” particularly when mentioned in a sentence about freedom. Apparently the irony is lost on him. Freedom includes the right to be able to express views that are disagreeable to others. We also note that, given Trudeau’s many instances of ethics violations, black face incidents, groping episode and his praises for totalitarian regimes like Cuba and China, he has zero credibility to appoint himself judge of what is acceptable.
Finally, we urge him to show some courage and meet with the protestors. His cowardly behaviour is unacceptable.
Let us end by quoting Sophie Scholl (White Rose movement) who a few moments before being executed by the Nazi at the age of 21 said: “How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause?”
We recognize the sacrifices made by many of the protestors and support their efforts for freedom and liberty. Your cause is a righteous one. God speed.