No place for bans, walls or fences

Re: “Fences are the answer to tent-city disruption,” comment, Feb. 2. In Stephen Hammond’s commentary, he writes about the suffering of “his” neighbourhood throughout tent city’s stay. And while Hammond is supposedly “mad as hell” that the province continues to leave many in poverty and homelessness, his words speak volumes. He justifies using fences to protect “taxpaying citizens” from people living in homelessness.

Hammond’s rhetoric pits “ordinary” citizens against Victoria’s homeless. At his argument’s core is the idea that some people are deserving of resources (including access to space, either public or private), while others can be left behind. His same logic has been used by governments for decades to slash health and social services.

While he criticizes governments for leaving communities without resources, he advocates denying those he deems undeserving.

The way we talk about one another matters. As people are emboldened by U.S. President Donald Trump’s discriminatory rhetoric, we watch in horror as hate crimes against minority groups rise across the United States and Canada. Many thought Trump was “just words.” But words matter.

When someone calls a group of people dangerous, they send the message that it’s OK to say that group doesn’t belong in “your” neighbourhood or “your” city. This idea should not have a place here, or anywhere.

There should be no immigration ban in the United States, no wall separating Mexico and no new fences in Victoria.

Flora Pagan Victoria