Was Ludicrous Justified
Although these workers had been facing many hardships, their actions during the demonstration had been ludicrous.I believe that the actions of the authorities had been justified. This is because, the authorities and government had the fear of a communist uprising much like that of Russia in 1917, the potential conflict between the two sides with and against the argument, and the strikers had been causing many cases of property damage.
Firstly, the reason the actions of the authorities had been indeed justified, is due to the fear of a communist revolution much like that of Russia’s in 1917, overthrowing the Russian emperor Tsar Nicholas II and his entire family from the power. The fear of Canada becoming a communist country had irradiated from many political figures, this is because a communist nation lacks creativity, rights, and has reduced incentives to work hard. Communism is considered to do more evil than good, it gives everyone an equal opportunity regardless of the effort one puts in over another, it also lacks andy type of creativity as everyone works the same, and …show more content…
lastly the rights of each citizen are non existent, such as communist Russia which had redistributed all of its land and property for the good of the national community. This had left many distraught, since many had worked hard to own large epicentres of land, and later have it taken away and redistributed to another individual.
Secondly, another reason why the authorities actions had been justified, is the induced conflict between the two sides, opposing the union and with the union. An example of this had been the overturn of a non-union workers car, which had implied that the union-workers had been furious and very abusive toward the non-union workers. By using impending force upon the strikers, the authorities had been able to suppress the striker’s force, until they had arrested ten strike leaders and jailed them in Stoney Mountain Penitentiary. This had caused a backslash among the strikers known as bloody Saturday where veterans led a march protesting the arrests, which had been a cause and consequence of the jailing of the ten strike leaders. Therefore, the authorities had taken the most immediate action, although the “Bloody Saturday” that had injured thirty strikers and left two dead could have been easily avoided by the authorities taking much more tactical action, nevertheless their prompt action had surely suppressed the conflict between the two parties, but not the strikers with the union.
Lastly, the strikers had been causing countless acts of property damage. This in par with the very abrasive action, had led the authorities to try to control the conflict. An example of this had been damage done by the protests, through the predicament to city property such as sidewalks, roads, infrastructure, as well as the damage done to local businesses by theft or physical damage. It has become clear that the authorities actions had been very fulfilling as they had been capable of ending the strike, shortly after “Bloody Saturday”, on June 26th. But it had become evident that some workers had not been able to come back to their jobs, after the strike, and many who wished to come back could not be part of a union, seemingly they had no labour rights protecting them from harsh work conditions, low wage, and long work hours.
Conclusively, these workers had been facing many hardships, and their actions during the demonstration had been ludicrous.I believe that the actions of the authorities had been justified.
This is because, the authorities and government had the fear of a communist uprising in Canada to impose the union, the potential conflict between the two sides with and against the worker’s union, and the strikers had been causing many cases of property damage.Therefore, the authorities had taken the most immediate action, much like the“Bloody Saturday” that had left thirty strikers injured left two dead could have been easily avoided by the authorities taking much more tactical action, nevertheless their prompt action had sure suppressed the conflict between the two parties, but not the strikers with the union. I can justify that the authorities actions could be justified for the aforementioned
reasons.
Firstly, the reason the actions of the authorities had been indeed justified, is due to the fear of a communist revolution much like that of Russia’s in 1917, overthrowing the Russian emperor Tsar Nicholas II and his entire family from the power. The fear of Canada becoming a communist country had irradiated from many political figures, this is because a communist nation lacks creativity, rights, and has reduced incentives to work hard. Communism is considered to do more evil than good, it gives everyone an equal opportunity regardless of the effort one puts in over another, it also lacks andy type of creativity as everyone works the same, and …show more content…
lastly the rights of each citizen are non existent, such as communist Russia which had redistributed all of its land and property for the good of the national community. This had left many distraught, since many had worked hard to own large epicentres of land, and later have it taken away and redistributed to another individual.
Secondly, another reason why the authorities actions had been justified, is the induced conflict between the two sides, opposing the union and with the union. An example of this had been the overturn of a non-union workers car, which had implied that the union-workers had been furious and very abusive toward the non-union workers. By using impending force upon the strikers, the authorities had been able to suppress the striker’s force, until they had arrested ten strike leaders and jailed them in Stoney Mountain Penitentiary. This had caused a backslash among the strikers known as bloody Saturday where veterans led a march protesting the arrests, which had been a cause and consequence of the jailing of the ten strike leaders. Therefore, the authorities had taken the most immediate action, although the “Bloody Saturday” that had injured thirty strikers and left two dead could have been easily avoided by the authorities taking much more tactical action, nevertheless their prompt action had surely suppressed the conflict between the two parties, but not the strikers with the union.
Lastly, the strikers had been causing countless acts of property damage. This in par with the very abrasive action, had led the authorities to try to control the conflict. An example of this had been damage done by the protests, through the predicament to city property such as sidewalks, roads, infrastructure, as well as the damage done to local businesses by theft or physical damage. It has become clear that the authorities actions had been very fulfilling as they had been capable of ending the strike, shortly after “Bloody Saturday”, on June 26th. But it had become evident that some workers had not been able to come back to their jobs, after the strike, and many who wished to come back could not be part of a union, seemingly they had no labour rights protecting them from harsh work conditions, low wage, and long work hours.
Conclusively, these workers had been facing many hardships, and their actions during the demonstration had been ludicrous.I believe that the actions of the authorities had been justified.
This is because, the authorities and government had the fear of a communist uprising in Canada to impose the union, the potential conflict between the two sides with and against the worker’s union, and the strikers had been causing many cases of property damage.Therefore, the authorities had taken the most immediate action, much like the“Bloody Saturday” that had left thirty strikers injured left two dead could have been easily avoided by the authorities taking much more tactical action, nevertheless their prompt action had sure suppressed the conflict between the two parties, but not the strikers with the union. I can justify that the authorities actions could be justified for the aforementioned
reasons.