Mayor David Miller correctly pointed out that may people view the decals as support for Canada's military presence in Afghanistan, which he termed "very controversial". Yesterday Miller was quoted: "There are calls from people saying, 'Why are you expressing support for war in Afghanistan?'" he said, adding he wasn't made aware ahead of time that the decals would appear on city vehicles."
This morning we learn that the mayor, caving to pressure, will keep the decals on city vehicles for some indeterminate period.
I'm not blaming Miller alone, although he could have shown a little spine. The City Council vote was 37-0 in favour of leaving the stickers on. Pressure must have been pretty intense, because those who wanted to vote against it absented themselves instead.
But unease with the motion, voted on twice, prompted a few councillors to abstain with their feet.
The first vote was 37-0, and a second was taken to give some who weren't present another chance.
Councillor Pam McConnell absented herself both times.
"My father died in (World War II) and so I was orphaned by the war. My nephew has returned (from Afghanistan) and I am aware this is a war," she said.
McConnell said she felt that though she supports the troops – "How can you not support people who are giving their lives?" – it was important to make a statement against the war in Afghanistan.
"In order to show my support for both my father, my nephew and other people who are being hurt, maimed and who have died in wars, I left the chamber. I felt it was the most important thing I could do.
"I was not going to vote against my conscience or my beliefs," she said.
Councillor Janet Davis, who said Tuesday she doesn't believe city vehicles should be used to "promote political messages," was present for the first vote but absented herself for the second. She later said she supports Canadian soldiers, but not extending the ribbon campaign.
Councillor Gord Perks, present for the first vote, left for the second, explaining later that he felt the subsequent vote was being used to embarrass those who were abstaining.
Sounds more like a small-town mob than the city council of Canada's largest city.
You all know how I feel about support-our-troops stickers. (I should invite Crabbi over. She's the most rabid anti-stickerite I know.) Here are a few questions.
Does putting a sticker on a truck mean you are more patriotic than the person driving a vehicle without a sticker?
What does "support the troops" actually mean? How are you supporting the troops by putting a sticker on your truck? The Star story says "Proceeds from the decal sales go to a fund helping Canadian military people and their families." That's pretty vague. But if you contribute to that fund, why do you need to advertise your contribution to the world? Wouldn't your contribution go further if there weren't an exchange of goods involved?
Why should a city-owned vehicle bear a political statement of any kind? And how can this possibly be viewed as apolitical?
Do I support the troops any less because I want Canada to bring them home now?
Can you tell me what Canada is doing in Afghanistan? Not what it's supposed to be doing, what it's really doing. What's being accomplished, besides death.
As an aside, this incident should (but won't) remind us to pause before we make these kinds of changes. Once you ramp up, it's very hard to reverse. That's why they're still singing "God Bless America" during the 7th-inning stretch at Yankee Stadium, and why we still have a news crawl on the bottom of our TV screens during news programs. Once the sticker goes on, it becomes an act of sacrilege to remove it.
As usual, the Star's Jim Coyle has the right idea.
If you support our troops and can't remember the names of any of the Canadian kids killed in the last year, get rid of the ribbons. If you support our troops but have never done so much as sent them a message saying so, have never sent a note of condolence and thanks to the bereaved families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan, lose the decals.
Ribbons have become symbols – once local and personal, now mass-produced – that in their ubiquity have less meaning, not more.
They're rather like the American flags plastered on every football helmet, baseball jersey and political lapel in that nation, an excess that speaks of diminished, rather than enhanced, self-confidence.
It's long past time, moreover, to put paid to the notion – which seems to have started in New York after Sept. 11 six years ago – that emergency services are the nearest thing to an arm of the military and, quite literally, vehicles for advertising.
Firefighters and paramedics have jobs to do and political commentary ain't it.
It goes without saying that they support the troops. They're entirely free to plaster their own vehicles with ribbons saying so if they choose.
But they really have no more business making political billboards out of equipment owned by their employers than I do hanging Ottawa Senators car flags from trucks that deliver the Toronto Star.
Here's some reader opinion from the Star. It's interesting to see the full gamut of opinion, from the staunch supports of peace to those too myopic to comprehend why anyone could possibly object.
No comments:
Post a Comment