As we all know the Truck Frudeau protests in Canada Truckistan are causing significant disruption. Justine Castro aka the Duplicitous Ken Doll has emerged blinking into the sunshine to project massively and complain that the protestors are REEEEE (Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein have a hilarious tiktok video in their podcast which dubs that audio onto video of the actual protestors – starts about 8:15)

Since that’s not causing the protests to stop, obviously the Canadian authorities need advice. Apparently they disagree with the Occasional Cortex about the point of protesting:

(It is likely that the Occasional Coretex disagrees with her previous post when it comes to dirty truckers)

And so on twitter, that fount of wisdom, a professor from Harvard University no less, has deigned to offer a solution:

The convoy protest, applauded by right wing media as a “freedom protest,” is an economic and security issue now. The Ambassador Bridge link constitutes 28% of annual trade movement between US and Canada. Slash the tires, empty gas tanks, arrest the drivers, and move the trucks

This is absolute genius. Right along with the BLM slogan: Burn then Loot then Murder.

Slashing tires is a genius way to make it easier to move trucks. It’s also completely safe because truck isn’t moving. You only get those exciting blowouts that throw bits of tire all over the freeway when the truck is speeding, right? And in fact, if you slash the tires then the airbrakes release and the antigravity drive enables so even a small child can just push them to one side. I think that’s right? I mean that’s not how trucks work here in Japan, but maybe the ones in North America work that way. Obviously a HARVARD PROFESSOR would know, being an expert at everything. Particularly since she’s also an occasional CNN Mistress Analyst and a former DHS official under the Holy Obama

Plus emptying the gas tanks is clearly a way to handle a safety hazard that had not been thought of, though I do kind of wonder where the fuel from the emptied tanks goes? These trucks have quite large tanks so unless they are nearly empty we’re going to need a large tanker truck to hold the former contents of the dozens of trucks that are involved. I mean we have to put it in a tanker because spilling it out on the road would pollute mother earth (not to mention being somewhat of a fire hazard). So you need long hoses and pumps and people who know how to do it properly. That latter shouldn’t be too hard. I mean it’s not rocket science (though pumping fuel does play an important part in rocket science) and AAA has tons of people who can fill an empty fuel tank from a jerry can so obviously they can do the reverse, right? And if the AAA people can’t do it then I’m sure we can go get some Harvard students to do it because they are so smart…

Going back to the moving of the trucks. Other people have noted elsewhere that (unless you follow the Harvard trick of slashing tires and emptying the gas tank) moving a truck that is unpowered is a specialist job that needs specialized, expensive and rare tow trucks:

Towing a Big Rig is an expensive job. Typically it is a minimum $1000 for a quick, simple, short distance tow. Plus, you can’t tow a big rig backwards any distance. On those city streets, just turning a Prime Mover towtruck around without the use of a clear intersection may not be possible, due to their wheelbase length and corresponding turning radius.

Those size towtrucks are not common, as they are very expensive to build and operate. They can cost $500k-750k.

The brakes are air controlled, and without air pressure, each wheel pair has springs that lock the brakes, requiring each one to be manually caged to allow them to roll. Cutting the air hoses is a quick job. Time consuming to just get the truck ready to move in this case. Cutting the tire stems so the tires are flat REALLY adds time to the attempt to move the truck, as the wheels have to be removed and the tires taken off the rims to access the stems for replacement. Flattening all the tires on a fully loaded rig MAY destroy the tire carcass as the rim may damage it from folding.If the truck is empty, it MAY be possible to move it with a medium duty tow truck, but if loaded, nope.

Which is a problem even if the operators of said tow trucks wish to assist the government. And that may not be the case

How many trucks can Trudeau tow, if the tow trucks won’t tow trucks?

Back to Harvard

However our Harvard genius didn’t stop there. Having dealt with the initial problem of the roads being blocked she then went on to try and get to the root cause of the problem so that it wouldn’t happen again:

Trust me, I will not run out of ways to make this hurt: cancel their insurance; suspend their drivers licenses; prohibit any future regulatory certification for truckers, etc. Have we learned nothing? These things fester when there are no consequences.

I, for one, am glad that Harvard is aware of a hitherto untapped pool of fully-vaccinated but unemployed truck drivers champing to get back behind the wheel. Perhaps they will start by delivering replacement tires for all the ones slashed when the blocking trucks were moved. One does however wonder why this pool of drivers was not recruited to solve the LA port supply chain crisis.

Could it be that, for some reason, the pool doesn’t exist? I feel bad for doing about 10 seconds of DuckDuckGo-ing and finding articles like this or this (from NPR, so a Harvard prof might be aware of it) that mention the problem the transport industry has in retaining drivers.

There’s so many systemic issues that exist in trucking. And I think driver turnover is serious, right? It’s not just about recruiting drivers. It’s, what is it that we need to do to keep those drivers? Well, the issue is this. The trucking industry does not provide no flexibility to truck drivers. Truckers are spending, on average, 250 nights away from their family. Three to seven drivers are suffering from diabetes. They have the highest rate in divorce than any other industry. When you put all of that together, who in their right mind would want to be a truck driver in today’s age – to go spend 30 days on the road – with no upward mobility in sight?

And of course banning actual truckers from making a living after they’ve spent thousands of dollars on licensing and certifications just makes the job so much more attractive to new entrants and those thinking about returning.

Well apparently it does in Harvard. Where tenure means that you don’t get fired for teaching your students things that don’t apply in the real world. As she herself said:

Have we learned nothing? These things fester when there are no consequences.

Sadly the answer in this case is almost certainly negative. Our Harvard professor is almost certainly not going to face any consequences for demonstrating her idiocy on twitter, indeed she might even get paid to appear on CNN and repeat her ideas to the half dozen people watching.

That’s interesting because under other circumstances slashing the tires of vehicles and emptying their fuel tanks are crimes. Posting on a public platform suggesting that this happen is tantamount to “incitement” or soliciting a criminal act, which can be a crime. As a lawyer one would hope that our Harvard professor was aware of the relevant statutes and would not be shooting her mouth off in this way without having consulted a relevant legal authority.