It makes me very uncomfortable to make speech and holding opinions (whether factual or not) illegal.
It sets a dangerous precedent and is a double edged sword. What if we’d declared criticizing internment camps or the 60’s scoop as hateful prejudice against Canada? What if the next government makes speaking against oil illegal?
Education and acknowledgement is the answer. We need to continue making everything about residential schools public. It should be easy to see evidence of their practices, know who ran them, how many children died and where they’re buried, etc. It should be obvious this happened and was awful.
Censorship should make us uncomfortable for all those reasons, but I think history has shown hate speech can’t be beaten with just reason. Whether this specific proposal is worth the precedent is another question on top of that, though.
I’m not against it for the tolerance/intolerence aspect, I’m against it for the potential weaponization.
Could a future government say “woke” speech is hate speech? That’s why I think we need to be careful.
Canada already has laws restricting hate speech, adding a law that adds a very specific definition is not going to lead down a slope more than the current system does.
This slope is not slippery at all. Denying holocaust has been a crime since
20021994 in Germany and yet Germany had no issues with upkeeping free speech in thetwothree decades since.edit: oops it’s actually older than I thought
TIL it’s that recent. I know there was at least some anti-Nazi laws from the start.
The slope gets slippery at some point, though, right? I don’t think it’s a stupid thing to worry about, even if ultimately this is the right choice.
The slope gets slippery at some point, though, right? I don’t think it’s a stupid thing to worry about
Sure. I wouldn’t like to see climate change denialism criminalized in this century and I’d be pretty worried if any government pushed for it - but we’re so so far away from something like that happening. We’re way closer to going backwards in reconciliation.
It gets slippery depending on who is in power, which is exactly what we have to defend against.
Well, any group in power has incentive to abuse it, and I think history shows they always will given the chance (at least in the long run).
I agree completely, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely”
I’d do better with just making such people laughing stocks and pariahs. I feel like criminalizing the behaviour gives it an aura of legitimacy and power it doesn’t deserve.
The US isn’t doing so hot by just making the fascists “a laughing stock”. More severe consequences are needed. However, there’s MUCH more misinformation they need to target than just this.
It’s not merely because it’s disinformation. It is an attempt to harm a recognizable [protected] class of people.
Those are the same thing. All modern disinformation has some political end involving oppressing minorities.
deleted by creator
Paradox of intolerance to some extent. Residential school denialism in politics and media is still negatively impacting public perception of indigenous people.
How are the lawsuits against the church going?
Nah, take a page from the Germans and make it a mandatory part of the curriculum of every school board, across every province, build memorials and fund films and cultural programs to institutionalize the memory. It will take 10 years but it will work better than any criminalization.EDIT: See comment below. Also, TIL: Holocaust Denial is criminal in Canada, too.
You say that like holocaust denialism isn’t actually also a crime in Germany.
They’ve done both.
Ah, then I’m wrong.
My mother was abused in a residential school. If there were anyone still alive that had anything to do with this I would gladly watch them set on fire… I am beginning to feel the same way about people who deny this happened.
Some say the cucumber tastes better pickled.
Given the way the political climate is going, in Canada, criminalizing residential school discussion at all is more likely.
We need less criminalization of speech, not more.
