Canadian Human Rights Commission

[Wild Bill]

The point you're missing is that hate speech/inciting violence against a protected group is not an individual insult. It encourages an environment where an entire segment of society is dehumanized and threatened for something beyond their control, in this case skin colour. It creates social harms against the entire group in ways that go beyond a single person having their feelings hurt. Keep in mind that the CHRC isn't there to bring charges against someone that's bumped into by a black person on the street and turns around to call them a racial slur of choice. It's designed for public denouncements of protected groups and calling people to arms against them. You can't be a public figure or in a position of authority and call on people to be violent against these protected groups.

You scare me sometimes, CC! You're talking about trying to control how people think! This is a cure far worse than the disease!

Doubleplusungood, indeed!

[Bob]

Have you folks not watched Ezra's "interview" with the HRT? It is fan-effin'-tastic. He rips this bureaucrat apparatchik to shreds. This is the first video:

Edited September 14, 2011 by Bob

[g_bambino]

It's hardly surprising that a bunch of middle-class white men have a problem with the Human Rights Commission.

You should be hauled before the Human Rights Commission for such a racist, classist comment!

[g_bambino]

It's designed for public denouncements of protected groups and calling people to arms against them.

Then why are they ruling on cases brought by a seeing-eye dog owner against an allergic hotellier? Or by a heckling, insulting lesbian against an insulting comedian? Or by an obese woman upset about her inconvenient parking space against the person who possessed the space she wanted and the entire condominium board? Etc., etc.

Nobody wants hate speech, and assault of any and all kinds is already outlawed. People should be put on trial for both. However, 1) everybody has the right to due process in a proper court of law, which HRCs are not, though they met out punnishment as though they were, and 2) HRCs now hear cases by people who were simply annoyed by someone else's actions, comments, or even opinions, and, even if they lose the case, the winner, as others have already pointed out, ends up the loser anyway, having to cover all related costs of defending him or herself while the complainant simply walks away.

[rm unintentional emoticons]

Edited September 14, 2011 by g_bambino

[Argus]

The point you're missing is that hate speech/inciting violence against a protected group is not an individual insult. It encourages an environment where an entire segment of society is dehumanized and threatened for something beyond their control, in this case skin colour. It creates social harms against the entire group in ways that go beyond a single person having their feelings hurt.

Well... that's the theory anyway. I have to wonder why then that things are far more strained between racial, ethnic and religious groups in western Europe given they have been far more proactive than Canada in terms of banning insults and offensive words and language, whether public or even private. Their zealous efforts at combating offensive language and words does not seem to have helped in the slightest. In fact, it may well have contributed to the toxic atmosphere of distrust in many places.

And unlike in Canada, most European nations now have far right wing political groups which are anti-ethnic/religious/immigrant which have growing support in their parliaments and assemblies. They didn't used to have, prior to these policies.

[Bob]

You should be hauled before the Human Rights Commission for such a racist, classist comment!

Haha! Exactly. My "rights" have been trampled as a "middle-class white man".

[Argus]

It's hardly surprising that a bunch of middle-class white men have a problem with the Human Rights Commission.

Are you suggesting something about middle class white men?

Would you make broadly unflattering suggestions or statements about, for example, young black men, or young Muslim women?

Because that could get you taken before the human rights commmision, ya know.

[Bob]

Are you suggesting something about middle class white men?

Would you make broadly unflattering suggestions or statements about, for example, young black men, or young Muslim women?

Because that could get you taken before the human rights commmision, ya know.

We're dealing with well-trained leftist, who despise certain ambiguously defined groups such as "middle-class white men". Don't forget, we're responsible for all social ills and must be made to pay penance.

[guyser]

n

Edited September 14, 2011 by guyser

[bloodyminded]

Have you folks not watched Ezra's "interview" with the HRT? It is fan-effin'-tastic. He rips this bureaucrat apparatchik to shreds. This is the first video:

Ezra is quite right; Mark Steyn was right about the HRCs as well.

And I don't even like these smarmy little creeps.

In the U.S., Harper's magazine also published the cartoons. What's the problem? Well, we can answer that, thanks to the hindsight of history: no problems. I prefer the American stance on free expression issues. Because what has Canada gained from this?

If the HRC's even have a purpose, at the very least I think it's pretty clear they moved well beyond their mandate many years ago.

Edited September 14, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Bob]

Ezra is quite right; Mark Steyn was right about the HRCs as well.

And I don't even like these smarmy little creeps.

In the U.S., Harper's magazine also published the cartoons. What's the problem? Well, we can answer that, thanks to the hindsight of history: no problems. I prefer the American stance on free expression issues. Because what has Canada gained from this?

If the HRC's even have a purpose, at the very least I think it's pretty clear they moved well beyond their mandate many years ago.

Definitely, freedom of speech is the way to go in Canada. The HRTs have become a political tool for those interested in playing the game of minority/identity-politics. I hate it.

[bloodyminded]

Definitely, freedom of speech is the way to go in Canada. The HRTs have become a political tool for those interested in playing the game of minority/identity-politics. I hate it.

I agree, identity politics at their worst.

Harper's had the right idea: this is an intellectual Leftist publication, in which I have little doubt the editors and writers probably did not much like those cartoons. (I'm guessing, yes, but trust me, I know lefties.) And that's fine; you don't have to appreciate the cartoons. You can think they're not a great idea.

But you publish them anyway. Why? Because virtually no one would. If everyone was doing it, ok, there's no point, really.

But in publishing them, Harper's was taking a political stance, and a principled one.

Support the right of expression of ideas you don't like....or you don't support the right at all. Period. In North Korea, everyone has the "right to free speech." You can insist on Jong-ils magnificence to your heart's content.

Edited September 15, 2011 by bloodyminded

[cybercoma]

You scare me sometimes, CC! You're talking about trying to control how people think! This is a cure far worse than the disease!

Doubleplusungood, indeed!

Not allowing people to start lynch mobs is worse than lynch mobs? I beg to differ.

[cybercoma]

Are you suggesting something about middle class white men?

Would you make broadly unflattering suggestions or statements about, for example, young black men, or young Muslim women?

Because that could get you taken before the human rights commmision, ya know.

I'm suggesting that it's a bit arrogant for middle class white men to complain about a commission that has been setup to help foster accessibility for groups that perhaps are not thought about or represented in the decision making processes in this country. A middle-class white man without any disability does not face the accessibility issues that the disabled, ethnic minorities, women, and the LGBT community faces. Whining about how unfair it is that white men aren't represented by the Human Rights Commission is ridiculous because they are represented when they have some characteristic that is limited by a society that could be more accomodating, such as a disability, criminal record, etc.

[Zachary Young]

The Canadian Human Rights Commission represents a dangerous trend in our society to censure speech and limit free expression. We should abolish this monstrosity immediately. It is a grave danger to our liberty.

[cybercoma]

The Canadian Human Rights Commission represents a dangerous trend in our society to censure speech and limit free expression. We should abolish this monstrosity immediately. It is a grave danger to our liberty.

Supporting the freedoms of minority groups is not at all the same thing as limiting your freedom. Sorry, but you don't have the right to oppress others.

[Zachary Young]

Telling me what I can and cannot say is absolutely limiting my freedom of expression. The real minority group is the individual - how can you claim to support minority rights but not support individual rights? The government should not be allowed to censor unpopular speech. You really don't see how this is a problem?

[g_bambino]

Telling me what I can and cannot say is absolutely limiting my freedom of expression.

Nobody living in a society has absolute freedom. There have been long-standing limits on your freedom of expression for a century or more before HRCs even existed: uttering death threats, for example, has been illegal for a long time.

[yarg]

I'm suggesting that it's a bit arrogant for middle class white men to complain about a commission that has been setup to help foster accessibility for groups that perhaps are not thought about or represented in the decision making processes in this country. A middle-class white man without any disability does not face the accessibility issues that the disabled, ethnic minorities, women, and the LGBT community faces. Whining about how unfair it is that white men aren't represented by the Human Rights Commission is ridiculous because they are represented when they have some characteristic that is limited by a society that could be more accomodating, such as a disability, criminal record, etc.

Our all too often claimed privilege does not excuse over punishing us. It certainly should not warrant government funded witch hunts and decisions made by obviously biased arbiters of what is 'fair' in the context of history. I am not at fault for the past misdeeds of my race no more than anyone else is. Believe it or not, but there are a lot of white people who wonder where all this privilege is, perhaps the recently announced Mcguinty government plan to fund jobs for 'new Canadian' to the tune of $10,000 a piece says something about all this privilege. But I suppose as long as us privileged white males continue to work and pay the bills in this country it's all good for those who seek to tear us down.

[Bob]

Not allowing people to start lynch mobs is worse than lynch mobs? I beg to differ.

Who is starting lynch mobs?

[Bob]

I'm suggesting that it's a bit arrogant for middle class white men to complain about a commission that has been setup to help foster accessibility for groups that perhaps are not thought about or represented in the decision making processes in this country. A middle-class white man without any disability does not face the accessibility issues that the disabled, ethnic minorities, women, and the LGBT community faces. Whining about how unfair it is that white men aren't represented by the Human Rights Commission is ridiculous because they are represented when they have some characteristic that is limited by a society that could be more accomodating, such as a disability, criminal record, etc.

Excuse me, but "middle class white men" are discriminated against all the time in all sorts of situations. Whether it be racist affirmative action/quota systems in the public service that give "bonus points" to certain ethnic/racial/religious groups, or such people being fair game in dangerous minority-ethnic neighborhoods.

Women face accessibility issues in Canada? Is that some sort of sick joke? Women are overrepresented in all sorts of positions and professions. Also in many universities and colleges. Also in sections of the government and associated bureaucracies! What world are you living in?

As far as disabled people facing challenges... well, that's life with a disability. Deal with it. Canada is far too accommodating, as it is, for example consider building regulations which mandate privately owned properties to have certain accessibility options.

People with a criminal record face challenges? Is that supposed to be some sort of problem we need to fix?

I can't stand this whining from people like yourself who pretend to bear the mantle for these allegedly disadvantaged groups. This country is as free and equal as it gets. I can't stand listening to these lies about a racist, sexist, and intolerant Canada where these groups you listed off are somehow unfairly treated in our society. It's pure shit. I lived in Canada virtually my whole life, and the only discrimination I experienced was when I was assaulted THREE SEPARATE TIMES by Muslim Arabs who knew I was Jewish. If anything, I saw pathetic and sickening pandering from the "middle class white men" crowd towards certain minorities and groups.

[bloodyminded]

I can't stand this whining from people like yourself who pretend to bear the mantle for these allegedly disadvantaged groups. This country is as free and equal as it gets. I can't stand listening to these lies about a racist, sexist, and intolerant Canada where these groups you listed off are somehow unfairly treated in our society. It's pure shit. I lived in Canada virtually my whole life, and the only discrimination I experienced was when I was assaulted THREE SEPARATE TIMES by Muslim Arabs who knew I was Jewish. If anything, I saw pathetic and sickening pandering from the "middle class white men" crowd towards certain minorities and groups.

Ah!...so there really are victimized and disadvantaged groups. Or, to be precise: there's one.

Edited September 16, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Zachary Young]

The most discriminated against minority in our society is the businessman. He is harassed, insulted, stolen from and berated constantly.

[guyser]

We get it bob, you're an angry white guy who got beat. Probably by a disabled criminal woman no doubt.

I'd be angry too! More like embarassed but thats just me.

Edited September 16, 2011 by guyser

[g_bambino]

We get it bob, you're an angry white guy who got beat.

And is that acceptable?