Repeating my comment from the other thread I saw about this survey:
I would rather he be prosecuted for treason, though I acknowledge that would require us to already be at war with the US (so he could be shown to be aiding the enemy). Too many innocent people (especially activists) could be affected by the precedent this would set-- especially the next time a Conservative government comes to power, though I could even see the Liberal Party mirroring Europe’s recent police harassment of Palestinian-friendly journalists if not Trump’s deportations of activists for Palestinians’ human rights that Poilièvre would likely copy. Despite seeing myself as Canadian all of my life and being here for decades, I already feel less safe in this country, considering rising fascist sentiments like these out there. I’m not eligible for citizenship in the country of my birth either. I know the backlash from just stripping him of his citizenship outright would be directed to people like me.
Any measure used to remove the rights of one repugnant wealthy person introduces a needless threat to politically inconvenient non-wealthy people.
Petitions like these are why I’m glad the government doesn’t listen to petitions. Who does this help? What does this accomplish? It’s asinine and petty. I really don’t want citizenship to depend on upvotes.
Despite how poorly thought out this one seems to be, I don’t think all petitions are bad. They’re just a check on how popular an idea is. Obviously there should be further research and input from experts before anything a successful petition supports can happen. For example, there’s probably a compelling case experts could make for the public interest in relation to another petition I saw referenced on here recently.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Repeating my comment from the other thread I saw about this survey:
Any measure used to remove the rights of one repugnant wealthy person introduces a needless threat to politically inconvenient non-wealthy people.
Petitions like these are why I’m glad the government doesn’t listen to petitions. Who does this help? What does this accomplish? It’s asinine and petty. I really don’t want citizenship to depend on upvotes.
Despite how poorly thought out this one seems to be, I don’t think all petitions are bad. They’re just a check on how popular an idea is. Obviously there should be further research and input from experts before anything a successful petition supports can happen. For example, there’s probably a compelling case experts could make for the public interest in relation to another petition I saw referenced on here recently.