People’s loss of power lead to Hitler’s dictatorship
Was only supposed to be a four-year period (temporary fix)
Since there was no power to go against Hitler, he was able to implement this act past its four year period
Not only violates the temporary clause but also demoralizes the rights and freedoms of all German citizens
An example of the appropriate use that was provisioned is demonstrated by the Canadian War Measure’s Act, which has only been put into play three times in the government’s history. Each of these times that this Act was put into play, it was temporary and was the rights and </li></ul>Second paragraph (supporting argument): War Measures Act (page 401)<br /><ul><li>Enabled Canada to suppress the rights and freedoms of individuals in order to protect them from potential danger in times of crisis.
During WWII the Canadian government made a negligent decision and applied this Act in order to breach the rights of specific Canadian citizens and immigrants- particularly the Japanese.
The Canadian government went as far as taking control over their possessions and property, as well as imprisoning any person with Asian appearances, such as the Chinese and Koreans. The government announced that they were suppressing their rights because they could potentially be a threat to their national security.
Canada unnecessarily blamed and imprisoned innocent people.
However, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Canadian government developed a well thought of plan to increase airport security by temporarily decreasing the rights of people while in the airport to provide a more secure democratic economy where people could continue to have their rights and freedoms.
War Measures Act was too general and the Canadian government began to realize this. They now developed a new act, called the Emergencies Act, which provides specific rules to the areas that are in danger. They didn’t feel that suppressing the whole nations rights and freedoms would be necessary if the threat was in one area of the country. </li></ul>Third Paragraph: Emergencies Act<br /><ul><li>This Act only is to protect the citizens when a situation occurs that could result in a danger to life or poverty, social disruption or an economic crisis that could be considered a national emergency.
1960’s the world, including Canada, underwent dramatic political, social, and cultural changes.
Quebecois wanted their language and culture to have more equal opportunities
The FLQ was a group from Quebec who resorted to violence and terrorism in order to find the independence they felt Quebec deserved
For this, Canadian government suspended civil liberties and imprisoned anyone who was suspected to be involved with these groups.
Controversial, many people though government acted on limited information
Trudaeu stated that even though people are unhappy with the response of the Canadian government, in order to maintain law and order, the society must take every means they can in order to defend itself against an emergency from a parallel power. (pg 400)
Soon after Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into play the government introduced the Emergencies Act, which included more safe guards to protect rights of citizens
Under this act, government must specify to which part(s) of the country this act applies to.</li></ul>Conclusion:<br /><ul><li>Rejection of liberalism is justified, only temporarily and only when that nation is in a time of a crisis.
Only in order to sustain a stable democracy, in this case people should be willing for the government to temporarily suppress their rights
The government should carefully consider which situations they should apply this act towards. If the situation is a high enough risk that they feel the need to enable this act in order to protect the citizens
The only reason for rejecting liberalism is to sustain liberalism in the future or when the high-risked situation is deemed safe, preserving democracy should be the essential focus of this oppression.