Last week, the Olympic Torch arrived in Victoria to begin its journey around Canada before coming back to Vancouver in time to open the 2010 Winter Olympics — one of the longest torch relays ever planned and, if the protests of the first days are any indication, one of the most convoluted as well.
Fallout from that first day, where protestors blocked a road and forced a diversion of the torch route, was swift. Protestors were immediately condemned as uneducated and not understanding the value of the Olympics. Premier Gordon Campbell dismissed them out of hand as “people who feel the only way to express themselves is through vandalism, property damage and frightening little children.”
Many people were caught up in the emotion of the day, with some even calling for banning Olympic protests or having protestors thrown in jail for having the temerity to ruin their day. The focus was mainly on the 10 torchbearers who didn’t get their chance to run — not on why 200 people felt it was necessary to block the torch route in order to make their point.
While they were depriving a few of their opportunity to enjoy the torch relay, the protestors were willing to face legal consequences in order to get their message out about the poverty and other issues faced by many British Columbians as the provincial government increasingly redirects services and funds to support the multi-billion-dollar games. The reckless actions of a few protestors can’t be allowed to silence the message that the vast majority wanted to send.
We disagree with taking a protest to the point of blocking the torch route or preventing people from participating in what, for many, would be a once-in-a-lifetime experience, whether running or just watching the progression of the route.
But we also disagree with quashing the right to protests before they even get started. Because the right to protest, or even to participate in civil disobedience, is far more fundamental to our society than the lead-up to a sporting event.
+More Opinion Headlines