Today I walked right up to the Canadian parliament building and touched it. I was not shot nor arrested. Guard dogs did not come out to rip me to shreds. Black suited government agents did not rush out and throw me to the ground. In fact, there's a rather nice park around parliament. You can stroll right on in. I think I saw one police officer out front.
As an American I find this both delightful and sad. Delighted that a western nation can still have a government which does not wall itself off from its citizens. Sad that the US government works from a premise of paranoia. I wondered when it was that the US started valuing safety over being close to those they govern. Reagan has been suggested, both from his Red Scare tactics and getting shot at point-blank range. Though I was told a similar incident happened in Canada's history with different consequences. A would-be assassin broke into the house then PM Jean Chrétien. His wife beat the crap out of him.
Last I checked you could still walk up to the U.S. Capitol and touch it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. My wife and I just requested tickets to the inauguration, though, so maybe we'll try to test that hypothesis in January. Incidentally, I should think that allowing rank and file citizens to attend the inauguration implies maybe we are not so paranoid as you think. Remember back in June when average Americans from all over attended Reagan's funeral. People could walk right on in and pass by the coffin.
I'm not sure what touching the Canadian Parliament building proves, nor how it differs from security in the U.S. I'm sure there are reasonable security measures in place regarding getting close to high Canadian officials, just as there are in the U.S.
It wasn't so long ago you could drive right in front of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I was reading tonight that that changed on a temporary basis after the Oklahoma City bombing, and that the temporary restriction was made permanent after September 11th. Given that you can still drive pretty close to the White House, what exactly is unreasonable here? Can you get that close to the Prime Minister's residence in Canada?
In a related tangent, I understand that earlier this year protestors in Britain beaned the Prime Minister in the head with condoms filled with purple flour, right in the middle of a session of Parliament. I think the U.S. is probably just about as accessible. No, we're not going to try that in January.
What, exactly, are you not able to do in the U.S. that you want to do? Yes, there's a lot of security right now, but in what specific way is your government inaccessible? The only example you offer is probably applicable for the U.S. as well.
Re:Huh?
2shortplanks on 2004-11-09T09:31:10
There's a huge fence around the Capitol to keep everyone at least five hundred meters back (Or at least there was when I was there a week before the election)Re:Huh?
schwern on 2004-11-10T20:28:14
I was thinking more of the White House with its high fence and street closed in front and how the temporary security measures have become permanent. How press conferences are orchistrated affairs in a special room. How Bush has broken the tradition of walking to the inauguration and is likely to do it again. The president is supposed to be first among equals but we're starting to revere him as something like royalty. And the gap is growing in the name of security measures. This is a problem for democracy. I'd rather see the president assassinated than set up as superhuman.
At the Canadian Parliament I felt like I could sit down and have a picnic on the lawn. At night. And nobody would raise an eyebrow. There's a colony of stray cats on the hill. The grounds of the Supreme Court building just down the road are equally open. Press conferences are held outside on the sidewalk. Across from parliament hill are a bunch of pubs where the MPs go. And they're not ritzy, Ottawa.pm used to meet at Darcy McGee's. Hey, they let me in.
;) Its a series of intangibles that remind you that MPs are just people doing a job and they go out afterwards at the local pub to have a couple beers. There's not so much that false veneer of respect. That's the feel I get and from talking with Canadians they seem to agree. The PM is just another MP; equally ordinary, corrupt and replacable. I think that's an important distinction. I could just be totally biased. If you've ever watched C-SPAN and caught a session of the UK parliament and compare it with our congressional sessions you might get some idea of what I mean.
It just makes me think why the US is so different, what have we done to make ourselves us this way and why are we so accepting of it.
Can you get that close to the Prime Minister's residence in Canada?I didn't go to the PM's residence so I don't know what that's like. But that isn't really a part of the working government as the White House is, its just where the PM lives. So I could understand if you couldn't just walk onto the grounds.
Last I checked you could still walk up to the U.S. Capitol and touch it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. My wife and I just requested tickets to the inauguration, though, so maybe we'll try to test that hypothesis in January.I don't know what access to the US Capitol building is like. Looks like its under construction at the moment. I'll be interested to hear how close you can get and how comfortable you feel doing it. I'll also be interested to hear what attending the inauguration entails.
Well, any would-be assassin is a little late by then.Remember back in June when average Americans from all over attended Reagan's funeral. People could walk right on in and pass by the coffin.:) Re:Huh?
jdavidb on 2004-11-10T21:18:21
I think you are looking at a result that is not solely from recent trends, but the end result of over 200 years of development. Going back to the time of Andrew Jackson, you actually had a mob celebrating his inauguration at the White House, such that President Jackson had to leave and stay at a hotel, while the aides lured the crowd outside with booze.
:) Security has obviously tightened since then, and while the September 11 attacks certainly hastened it, the trends were well underway. (As I observed earlier, Pennsyvania Avenue initially closed in front of the White House after the Oklahoma City bombing, ten years ago and during Clinton's administration.) Let me mention that yesterday Pennsylvania Avenue reopened to pedestrian traffic. No, it will probably never carry vehicles again (although I think that applies only to the stretch in front of the White House
... we'll see). The tradition of walking to the inauguration is a little overstated. Thomas Jefferson did so. Many, many others did not. Just so happens I've done a lot of reading the past few days on inaugural history.
:) Unfortunately I can't find references to everything I've read, so bear with me. I do understand that the President traditionally walks part of the parade route before taking the stand to view the parade, or something like that, so perhaps that has changed. The president is supposed to be first among equals but we're starting to revere him as something like royalty. And the gap is growing in the name of security measures. This is a problem for democracy. I'd rather see the president assassinated than set up as superhuman.
Surely you don't think that those who disagree are being unreasonable? Assassination of the President could cause all kinds of danger and chaos. Protection of the President and extreme concern for clear protected succession goes back at least to the beginning of the Cold War; it's nothing new in our generation. Those who would prefer protection against assassination generally do so not because the President is not a first among equals, but because his function is vitally important as commander in chief.
[Regarding Reagan's funeral]: Well, any would-be assassin is a little late by then.
:) Well, yeah, but there were a lot of other people there who were pretty approachable. I presume they were protected, but it was also possible to get close to them.
I just can't help but ask, somewhat tongue in cheek, what exactly is it you want to do (other than assassination) that you can't do now? I understand the symbolism and how that feels to you, but is there any practical way in which you feel your access to the government has been restricted through high security? We haven't been able to have a White House where just anybody can drop in in well over a hundred years. That would be the case just by sheer numbers of our population if not for security. You can still call or write your congresspersons, write the President, and run for office, right? Maybe doing one of these would make you feel that the system is a little more accessible. (My wife's mother has a letter from Barbara Bush written in response to a letter of protest she sent her after Mrs. Bush misrepresented an issue in a speech.)
I don't know what access to the US Capitol building is like. Looks like its under construction at the moment. I'll be interested to hear how close you can get and how comfortable you feel doing it. I'll also be interested to hear what attending the inauguration entails.
Keep an eye on the journal.
:) Plane tickets are purchased and we're making hotel and transportation arrangements. We'll have a couple of extra days after the inauguration, too, to wander around. At the moment our tickets to the inauguration itself have only been requested; I have no idea what our chances of receiving them are. We'll be in the city, at least, and apparently some Americans will be getting these tickets. :) Re:Huh?
jmm on 2004-12-17T16:07:48
Curiously, when George Bush visited Ottawa recently, security within the parliament building became so tight that some of the MPs were prevented from getting into theor seats in parliament to vote on ongoing legislation.There was quite an uproar. It was actually illegal for the security forces to prevent MPs from reaching their post, but the main issue was that the high security was obviously set up in a hurry and the relevant process was poorly communicated to all the affected parties.
The debate is simmering quite a bit, since we've traditionally had public access to the commons - people accessing government and all that. Now we have a "ring of steel". Ho hum.
Is the Capitol under siege? Is Washington, DC under siege? Depends. You can believe either, and make an argument that will convince about half of the country, and aggravate the other half as just spreading lies.
Me? I live in the area. It doesn't feel anywhere nearly as bad as you make it out. Earlier this year, I had an interview at a Senate office building. I got on the shortest line to enter the building, walked through the metal detectors (wearing a raincoat, and carrying a laptop), wandered aimlessly until I was thoroughly lost, got unlost, got lost again, and eventually found the office where I had my interview. Walked into a few areas marked "Senators Only". Walked backwards as soon as I saw those signs.
I fully expect that if I wanted to talk to my Senators, I could. If I wanted to do something stupid, like walk into a closed committee meeting, the friendly security guards would kindly guide me away. If I really insisted on barging in, the friendly security guards would most certainly subdue me post haste. I don't see anything wrong with that.
Just another observation. It's not all as bad as the hype.
