what i found interesting was the concept that "minoities" had won so many victories and were in such a prominent place in Canada that they no longer need free speech. I have felt over the last few years that we are being ruled by minorities, not only in voting federally but in power over government. The Liberals are completely obsessed with each passing social fad and demonizes anyone who speaks out about them along with their alllies in the mainstream media. Urban liberals ARE terrified of the broader public's free speech because it undermines their power over what is acceptable and what isn't in this country. Personally I have traditionally been on the left and always respected those that rallied for free speech and I haven't changed much at all in that regard although the makeup of the left HAS changed significantly and their priorities as well. I feel politically homeless in a time of weak opposition to Trudeau, and where the elites in Canada have revealed themselves to be quite focused on shutting us all up by calling people racists. It's disgusting.
I find it sadly ironic that you published your comment under what appears to be a pseudonym.
I agree with everything you say. I would consider myself mildly right of centre in some ways and mildly left of centre in others (whatever that means these days) which I think speaks to the importance of free speech in itself, in that my often-shifting positions on this or that issue are the product of free and full debate of each. It’s little wonder that these attempts to stifle debate about what the facts mean, and yes, even what the facts are, are polarizing people and fomenting further extremism on both ends of the spectrum.
What troubles me most is that the legacy media, of which I was once a member, is complicit in all of this, and I still can’t figure out if they realize that or not. I hate that they have adopted the terms ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ as if they weren’t some form of Orwellian newspeak. Let governments and left-wing activists use and attempt to define what pieces of information fall into either category, but the media should steer clear - or at least modify the words with ‘so-called’ the way they did with the freedom convoy.
Thank you, Tara, for the interesting and insightful interview. I was particularly struck by this idea of “dangerous speech.” I have not read Susan Benesch’s description of this concept, but will certainly do that. However, I did scan through some Canadian mainstream media articles focusing on this idea that “calling the trucker protest peaceful plays down its non-violent dangers.” These articles appeared to me to be coming from the one-sided place of negatively framing and slandering the protest on the basis of a few isolated incidents which are not at its core at all. I haven’t been in Ottawa during the protest, but the objective and non-biased footage and news reports of it show a very different picture than what is portrayed in the mainstream media. All one has to do is look at the crowds of people lining the overpasses on the truckers’ route across Canada, waving their Canadian flags in frigid weather, to see and understand the heartfelt and unifying intent and force behind this protest. Is this expression “dangerous speech”? On the other hand, there has been very little in the MSM criticizing Trudeau’s characterization of the Canadian citizens as “championing hate, abuse, and racism,” calling them (us) a “small fringe minority of people holding unacceptable views,” and calling people who choose not to be vaccinated “racist and misogynist extremists” and “science deniers.”
Here’s another gem: “ It’s a very small group, but that doesn’t shy away from the fact that they take up some space.” You bet we do! And yet another: “ This leads us, as a leader and a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?” Might these statements of Trudeau be considered “dangerous speech,” or does he somehow get a free pass on “free speech” because he’s in a position of power?
IMO, the comments in your last paragraph are clearly “dangerous speech”. Just think of the possible undertones of these comments and especially the source. He’s demonstrated bigotry and racism and even vaccinism over and over. He’s clearly unable to meet the integrity requirements of this position. He should be removed from this position of power considering his “dangerous speech”. I never voted for Trudeau but now I feel stuck with him.
Wow, I’ll have to remember that one for a Scrabble game! What astounding ignorance, arrogance, and lack of good judgement he displays in making such statements. He has done more to divide this country than anyone it its history. Jordan Peterson called him a “teenage actor” and that pretty much sums it up. Talk about delusions of grandeur!
Trudeau and his liberal supporting media outlets are bent on polarizing Canadians. This is by definition is the way it’s supposed to work when you have fictitious organization structures design to carry out mandates that have positions of power filled by ordinary citizens. They sign on the employment contracts and are legally forced to follow the mandates at all costs or be punished by the rules set up to govern the fictitious organizational structure. That’s why you have to bail out like Liberal MP Joel Lightbound.
Thank you Tara. The topic is incredibly apropos to the state wherein we Canadians now find ourselves. Between the top down authoritarian censorship being practiced by Trudeau and his cronies and the bottom up censorship that "Woke, BLM, LGBTQ, and other activists are bring to bear on the speech of ordinary folks, one wonders if there is any freedom of speech left in the world today. Being an 80 year old man, I was raised in times much different than what we have now. I was beginning to despair as I listened while my favorite radio started going to hell in a hand basket. I cannot even listen to it any more. I'm so glad my son referred me to these enlightening presentations.
There is no free speech if the right is not supported as absolute.
And we need to remember that the right covers both the speaker for being free to express his views, as well as the rights of the listener to hear those views.
Ban books on the left in Canada... are you for real Renee! When does that happen. Why is it okay to say that far right are not supposed to have any say in our society while the left get away with tearing down statues of John A. And there is nary a peep from the wonks on TV...
And don't even go there.. I'm a Liberal, well used to be.
Everything here is viewed first off thru a leftist lens. Everything!
Take for example the speech by the MP from Saint Herbert... Mr. Lightbout opened it with a two minute qualifier about right wing extremism not having any place in our society.. Two minutes making generalizations about the protest and then he proceeds breathlessly to say that he didn't want to carry on with making generalizations..
Yes, I agree. Although I admire his strength in coming forward, the fact that he somehow had to qualify his statement with an opening false characterization of the protest annoyed me.
And I voted NDP all my life (except last election in which I did not vote). I am deeply disappointed and disgusted with the total lack of leadership from Singh in standing up for my rights and the party is basically dead to me now. Now I’ve been labelled as “far right,” which is preposterous. I have gone beyond political parties now as they are so transparently disingenuous.
Singh and Trudeau are playing with matches in a room filled with gas by feeding this narrative. Insults are fine if you are a government figure in Communist China but not so much in what passes for a liberal democracy.
what i found interesting was the concept that "minoities" had won so many victories and were in such a prominent place in Canada that they no longer need free speech. I have felt over the last few years that we are being ruled by minorities, not only in voting federally but in power over government. The Liberals are completely obsessed with each passing social fad and demonizes anyone who speaks out about them along with their alllies in the mainstream media. Urban liberals ARE terrified of the broader public's free speech because it undermines their power over what is acceptable and what isn't in this country. Personally I have traditionally been on the left and always respected those that rallied for free speech and I haven't changed much at all in that regard although the makeup of the left HAS changed significantly and their priorities as well. I feel politically homeless in a time of weak opposition to Trudeau, and where the elites in Canada have revealed themselves to be quite focused on shutting us all up by calling people racists. It's disgusting.
I find it sadly ironic that you published your comment under what appears to be a pseudonym.
I agree with everything you say. I would consider myself mildly right of centre in some ways and mildly left of centre in others (whatever that means these days) which I think speaks to the importance of free speech in itself, in that my often-shifting positions on this or that issue are the product of free and full debate of each. It’s little wonder that these attempts to stifle debate about what the facts mean, and yes, even what the facts are, are polarizing people and fomenting further extremism on both ends of the spectrum.
What troubles me most is that the legacy media, of which I was once a member, is complicit in all of this, and I still can’t figure out if they realize that or not. I hate that they have adopted the terms ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ as if they weren’t some form of Orwellian newspeak. Let governments and left-wing activists use and attempt to define what pieces of information fall into either category, but the media should steer clear - or at least modify the words with ‘so-called’ the way they did with the freedom convoy.
Urban liberals are terrified of work (labour). Hence: truckers, the old left, germs, food delivery, leaving the debt-pod...
Thank you, Tara, for the interesting and insightful interview. I was particularly struck by this idea of “dangerous speech.” I have not read Susan Benesch’s description of this concept, but will certainly do that. However, I did scan through some Canadian mainstream media articles focusing on this idea that “calling the trucker protest peaceful plays down its non-violent dangers.” These articles appeared to me to be coming from the one-sided place of negatively framing and slandering the protest on the basis of a few isolated incidents which are not at its core at all. I haven’t been in Ottawa during the protest, but the objective and non-biased footage and news reports of it show a very different picture than what is portrayed in the mainstream media. All one has to do is look at the crowds of people lining the overpasses on the truckers’ route across Canada, waving their Canadian flags in frigid weather, to see and understand the heartfelt and unifying intent and force behind this protest. Is this expression “dangerous speech”? On the other hand, there has been very little in the MSM criticizing Trudeau’s characterization of the Canadian citizens as “championing hate, abuse, and racism,” calling them (us) a “small fringe minority of people holding unacceptable views,” and calling people who choose not to be vaccinated “racist and misogynist extremists” and “science deniers.”
Here’s another gem: “ It’s a very small group, but that doesn’t shy away from the fact that they take up some space.” You bet we do! And yet another: “ This leads us, as a leader and a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?” Might these statements of Trudeau be considered “dangerous speech,” or does he somehow get a free pass on “free speech” because he’s in a position of power?
IMO, the comments in your last paragraph are clearly “dangerous speech”. Just think of the possible undertones of these comments and especially the source. He’s demonstrated bigotry and racism and even vaccinism over and over. He’s clearly unable to meet the integrity requirements of this position. He should be removed from this position of power considering his “dangerous speech”. I never voted for Trudeau but now I feel stuck with him.
Wow, I’ll have to remember that one for a Scrabble game! What astounding ignorance, arrogance, and lack of good judgement he displays in making such statements. He has done more to divide this country than anyone it its history. Jordan Peterson called him a “teenage actor” and that pretty much sums it up. Talk about delusions of grandeur!
Trudeau and his liberal supporting media outlets are bent on polarizing Canadians. This is by definition is the way it’s supposed to work when you have fictitious organization structures design to carry out mandates that have positions of power filled by ordinary citizens. They sign on the employment contracts and are legally forced to follow the mandates at all costs or be punished by the rules set up to govern the fictitious organizational structure. That’s why you have to bail out like Liberal MP Joel Lightbound.
Thank you Tara. The topic is incredibly apropos to the state wherein we Canadians now find ourselves. Between the top down authoritarian censorship being practiced by Trudeau and his cronies and the bottom up censorship that "Woke, BLM, LGBTQ, and other activists are bring to bear on the speech of ordinary folks, one wonders if there is any freedom of speech left in the world today. Being an 80 year old man, I was raised in times much different than what we have now. I was beginning to despair as I listened while my favorite radio started going to hell in a hand basket. I cannot even listen to it any more. I'm so glad my son referred me to these enlightening presentations.
There is no free speech if the right is not supported as absolute.
And we need to remember that the right covers both the speaker for being free to express his views, as well as the rights of the listener to hear those views.
Who is this "we" you speak of?
That was great. Thank you.
Great interview. I'm looking forward to reading his book.
Ban books on the left in Canada... are you for real Renee! When does that happen. Why is it okay to say that far right are not supposed to have any say in our society while the left get away with tearing down statues of John A. And there is nary a peep from the wonks on TV...
And don't even go there.. I'm a Liberal, well used to be.
Everything here is viewed first off thru a leftist lens. Everything!
Take for example the speech by the MP from Saint Herbert... Mr. Lightbout opened it with a two minute qualifier about right wing extremism not having any place in our society.. Two minutes making generalizations about the protest and then he proceeds breathlessly to say that he didn't want to carry on with making generalizations..
Why did he have to do that?
Yes, I agree. Although I admire his strength in coming forward, the fact that he somehow had to qualify his statement with an opening false characterization of the protest annoyed me.
And I voted NDP all my life (except last election in which I did not vote). I am deeply disappointed and disgusted with the total lack of leadership from Singh in standing up for my rights and the party is basically dead to me now. Now I’ve been labelled as “far right,” which is preposterous. I have gone beyond political parties now as they are so transparently disingenuous.
Patrryce like you I have become very jaded..
Singh and Trudeau are playing with matches in a room filled with gas by feeding this narrative. Insults are fine if you are a government figure in Communist China but not so much in what passes for a liberal democracy.
I voted PPC in past two elections as well.
Hilarious! Rather than replying to me Rene turtles and DELETES his/her comment.