While modern liberalism values individual rights and limited government, these principles may need modification during times of crisis. Suspending some rights through measures like the War Measures Act in Canada and the Patriot Act in the US has allowed governments to more effectively respond to terrorist threats by detaining suspects and monitoring communications. However, any suspension of rights must be limited in scope and duration to avoid overreach and maintain public support for these extraordinary actions. More recent legislation in Canada has imposed tighter restrictions on who is affected and for how long to address these concerns. Temporarily curbing rights in a focused manner can thus help preserve national security and modern liberal democracy during political emergencies.

1. Politically Enforced Suspension of RightsHumanities 30-1Mr. Kabachia 06/10/2010Danea Twa<br />Each ideology present in our world today abides by certain principles that they believe will make their society run smoothly. There are times when ideological principles that are normally upheld in a society come into question and may need to be modified. A society which normally abides by principles of modern liberalism would believe that there should be minimum government control and that the power really does belong to the people. The source was given by a supporter of modern liberalism who believed in government intervention in times of need in the society. He or she stated the fact that rights and freedoms are required in order to maintain a democracy, but they went on to say that there may be an exception to this principle. In times when a democracy is in danger of becoming lost, a suspension of specific rights and freedoms needs to be enforced in order to preserve that form of government. Modern liberalist principles need to be embraced to the extent of making slight sacrifices of rights and freedoms in times of political crisis, but those suspensions also need limitations.<br />Many believers in modern liberalism would strongly argue the suggestion of the government suspending any rights or freedoms that would typically be entitled to them. This is because rights and freedoms are strongly protected within modern liberalism and the government has very little control over the people. One of the most current examples of this argument is Omar Khadr, a prisoner of Guantanamo Bay. When Mr. Khadr was accused of being supporting terrorist actions and throwing a bomb at American forces, he was arrested under suspicion of terrorism toward the United States and taken to Guantanamo Bay where he was imprisoned for seven years. He is now on trial because these accusations were unable to be proven to be true. However, when thinking historically, if too many rights and freedoms are given to an individual, a door to disaster is opened. During Hitler’s rise to power, the government did not suppress any of his rights. He was given extreme freedom by the liberal government of the time and he took advantage of the system. While in possession of his many rights and freedoms he built up the S.A. which became his own personal army that was a force almost stronger that the government, and because the government was strictly following the principle of human rights at the time, Hitler was able to carry on until he was in complete power. On the side of the government, once a terrorist attack has occurred, it is too late to stop the action. By taking potential terrorists to Guantanamo Bay, they are preventing as much possibility of being attacked as they possibly can.<br />When embracing modern liberalism, rights and freedoms are crucial for the people of the nation and should always be included. However, there are times when a society is in crisis or in danger and the government needs to intrude on society and suspend some of those rights. The War Measures act has been set in motion a total of three times in Canada in response to terrorist related occurrences. The last time this act was invoked was in the October Crisis of 1970. The FLQ, in hopes of making their point that they were in need of more protection over their culture within Canada, kidnapped two political leaders. They held the two men captive for quite some time and in the end murdered one of them in hopes of getting what they desired for their nation. The government realized that they needed to forgo the modern liberalist principle of rights and freedoms and suspended many rights across Canada in order to move quickly and efficiently in finding the dangerous group and restoring order and safety to Canadians. The Patriot Act was enacted in the United States after the unfortunate events of 09/11. The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center threw the society into a state of chaos and the government embraced the responsibility to protect the members of that society. The Patriot Act suspended some of the rights of U.S. citizens in relation to the actions they took and what they were able to do as individuals. One of the main ideas that was enforced in the U.S. was the No Fly List, which was composed of names of suspected terrorists. Most currently a man that was across seas in the East was not on a No Fly List there, but he was on the No Fly List in America because he was suspected of terrorism. He got on a plane flying West and the United States government was able to stop the plane from arriving at its intended destination and take control of the situation before the man could cause any harm. These two acts have aided the government in acting on terrorist threats and keeping civilians safe by keeping better track of suspects and providing a way to better monitor communication, but many innocent people had to forfeit some of their rights and freedoms to make these acts successful.<br />While the government was right in bending the rules of modern liberalism and suspending rights and freedoms in times of crisis, these suspensions must have limitations as well. Since the War Measures Act the Canadian government introduced the Emergencies Act in 1988. This act was implemented to have the same effect of the War Measures Act in preventing political destruction, but there is a limit placed on this act that was not present in the first. The Emergencies Act works by suspending rights and freedoms, however, there are now restrictions placed on who these suspensions will affect, rather than widely spread across Canada. Something similar to this as well was the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act in 2007. This act worked the same way in putting limitations on only certain citizens’ rights but there was also a limit on the time in which this could affect those citizens. These acts have also aided the government in stopping terrorism and protecting the country of Canada, but there is now less controversy amongst the supporters of modern liberalism. People do not feel quite a persecuted by suppressing only the rights of potential threats and they know that the government is only intervening in order to keep them safe.<br />Modern liberalism has worked successfully in both past and present societies when necessary actions are taken in times of political threat. Although rights and freedoms are extremely important when embracing modern liberalism, there are times when the government needs to take a role with more control than they would normally fill in the society and suppress the rights and freedoms of the citizens in order to prevent political destruction and sustain the safety of the nation. Although these suspensions may be necessary, there also must be limitations placed on these restrictions so that it is more fair to innocent citizens and more clearly focused on the problem area. By doing these things the government can maintain a healthy modern liberalist government, while keeping the majority of the people satisfied with their rights and freedoms, even in a time of crisis and suppression.<br />