Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
I wonder how vulnerable the city councilllors would be to cancel culture. I'd guess it depends on the councillor. Municipal politics are grounded somewhat in that you talk directly to your constituents, something we need more of in society, although it's a lot of work. You are not completely beholden to ads and social media where you can easily be vilified and must share a very simple message.
They also have the ability to punt on the issue by collecting more feedback. The committee was, I'm guessing, very palatable to council because they didn't want to have to make a call. I doubt Cornwallis is high up on the list of priorities for councillors one way or the other; it's not a hill they want to die on (for most, their political career is the top priority; there isn't necessarily anything wrong with that since the voters decide when and when not to give them the boot!).
|
I think we've just seen that Council is very prone to cancel culture. Remember, the Cornwallis issue was sparked by a group of activist demonstrators threatening to damage/destroy the statue, and the Mayor and CAO (on a Saturday!) quickly moved to have it relocated out of sight, using the risk of rioting as their excuse. This council, being dominated by the "progressives", is very prone to such knee-jerk acquiescence, just as we have seen in places like Seattle, Portland and even NYC that have similar political majorities.
Certainly they saw the committee as a way for them to evade responsibility and perhaps save their skins, just as we saw them roll over to all of the recommendations made in the report with barely a whimper. But there is an election in just a few months, and if this is made into an issue, hopefully many of them will lose their jobs.