letters

Foster doesn’t speak for this law-abiding Canadian

Should we condemn the “Slave Rebellions”, the women’s suffragette movement, WWII resistance fighters

Foster doesn’t speak for this law-abiding Canadian

I challenge Perry Foster’s assumption that “Violence used for political ends is unacceptable.” I take personal offence to his statement “Law abiding Canadians understand this, and that is why we are shocked and disappointed when we find that either side of the political spectrum has employed violent acts to achieve their ends.”

As a law abiding Canadian, I want to assure Mr. Foster he most certainly does not speak for me and I find his blatant and gross generalizations a testament to his very narrow views and self-serving declarations.

Foster goes on to say, “But violence in every form should be condemned. We can’t be selective, ignoring violence on one side while condemning its use by others.” Or can we? Should we condemn the “Slave Rebellions”, the women’s suffragette movement, WWII resistance fighters, labour movements, to name just a few? All of whom were employed in violent acts for political ends. All of whom have provided us with many of the rights and privileges we enjoy today. All of whom would not have realized success had violence not been applied. I do not condemn these people’s actions. I am thankful and humbled by their sacrifice and bravery.

I can only draw two conclusions from Perry Foster’s writings. Either he is ignorant of the struggles that are endured by people and groups where an unbalanced power dynamic exists and is being exploited, or he laments the eradication of his ability to own slaves, abhors that women have the vote, and is disgusted by basic labour laws. Maybe we will be lucky enough to have Mr. Foster explain which is accurate.

Perry Foster is absolutely entitled to his opinion. He is not entitled to make statements regarding “Law abiding Canadians…” opinions.

Dara Quast

Cobble Hill

Letters