this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2025
439 points (97.2% liked)

Canada

8004 readers
901 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Iceblade02@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There's a fundamental reason why I very much dislike these kinds of things. When you've set the precedent that citizenships can be removed it legitimizes that same action when it is applied in the other direction.

What is considered "treason" is very much subjective - the state simply should not have the power to remove citizenship.

[–] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

When you say "applied in the other direction" - I read that as granting, rather than revoking, citizenship. Which doesn't really make sense? I assume you mean an evil government revoking citizenship of good people, rather than this proposal for a good government to revoke the citizenship of an evil person.

[–] Iceblade02@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

Yes. In this case it's a left wing gov:t pondering removing citizenship for a right wing individual.

As "good" and "evil" are subjective, in both cases it will be the "good" gov:t revoking the citizenship of a treasonous "evil" person.

[–] warbond@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

But surely there needs to be a way to insulate ourselves from the detrimental effects of an individual's influence.

All of these terms are subjective, too, but there has to be a line somewhere, right? A point at which to not act would be unconscionable? If revoking citizenship is off the table, what do you think a reasonable response would be? (I'm assuming hypothetical "objective wrongdoing" rather than looking for ways to get Elon out of the spotlight.)