Flyer theft and demonstration

CHRONICLE – Let’s admit it straight away, we are far from chic. Taken with your pants down, the other would say. The one and only time of the campaign? Some would be, according to the game of probabilities, naive to believe it. The apologies transmitted, remained to clear off. I laughed last night imagining hundreds of candidates making a mental list of sins committed since kindergarten. Cough, cough.

The surge of hatred, pillorying and other lynchings would, that said, suggest something more serious. Not that the larceny is insignificant or not condemnable. Only that in the hierarchy of unforgivable faults, let’s say that we don’t tear the tops, here. In comparison, at least, to a number of other behaviors if not passed over in silence, at least stifled ipso facto in the oblivion of popular condemnation. Is our collective indignation, in other words, precisely proportional to the immorality of the prank? Permission to doubt it.

What is more serious, for example, between stealing a leaflet and… the repeated failure to pay taxes, as in the Duhaime case?

Videos of candidates with cuckoo sauce, like an Yves Beaulieu proudly publishing a video whose script cannot be reproduced in a serious newspaper?

Multiple and severe condemnations by the Ethics Commissioner, as in the Fitzgibbon case?

Masterful slaps from the Superior Court on the fingers of a minister personally arrested for constant violations of the rule of law, as in the Jolin-Barrette case?

In short, while some acts call for the political death penalty, others, more imperative, pass like a letter in the mail. Existence is absurd, said Camus. Ditto for the punishment.

And beyond the personal characteristics or behaviors of our politicians, what about our level of tolerance for public, deleterious measures adopted? Still comical, here again, to see the gap, on the popular judgment side, between the theft of a leaflet and various murderous policies. Let us think, first and foremost, of the fight against global warming.

Many, to take up the idea above, were scandalized by the fact that some CAQ candidates, ministers Charette and Fitzgibbon included, had to leave last week’s demonstration. As soon as he retreated, Charette summoned manu militari GND to « condemn the violence and intimidation of young people », as if the latter could only be of united allegiance, necessarily guided by the Che Guevara of 2012.

Uh… how to say? That first of all, that being told swear words, like “bouuuuuuuhhh… déscalez, the CAQ!!”, is probably unpleasant, but undoubtedly concerns freedom of expression. That then, if we are looking for real violence, it lies more in the idea of ​​ruining the hopes of future generations by refusing the climate emergency, and nevertheless going to suck the votes in their demonstration. That thirdly: what the hell are you doing there, the CAQ ministers?

Some, to this last effect, will reply: yes, but EVERYONE must be included. I’m sorry, but no. Because a demonstration on the climate emergency, essentially, consists mainly of putting our governments on trial, whose refusal to act will drag us straight to the grave.

In short, what the hell is he doing here, Charette? Isn’t it the one who solemnly swore to us that it “was impossible to do more, on the GHG side”? Isn’t it the one who defends, tooth and nail, a 3rd link project having the effect of garroching 50,000, 60,000 more tanks, daily, in our traffic? His main achievement? The bottle deposit. So fool us.

As for Fitzgibbon, the one who recently claimed that « no one was going to die » from the abnormally high nickel levels in Abitibi, let’s give him the benefit of the doubt: he probably took the wrong demonstration, or lost his way, direction Chamber of Commerce.

In other words, a CAQ government in a pro-climate demonstration is a bit like Colonel Sanders in a group of pro-freedom chickens, or Gilbert Rozon in a rally against sexual violence. creepyhypocritical and unwelcome.

But OK. Not serious. We must include everyone. As long as he doesn’t steal flyers, of course.