“Remarkably, pre-Hitler Germany had laws very much like the Canadian anti-hate law. Moreover, those laws were enforced with some vigour. During the 15 years before Hitler came to power, there were more than 200 prosecutions based on anti-Semitic speech.”
Meanwhile, Mark Steyn speaks very slowly to the last remaining idiots:
The problem the Jews found themselves up against in Germany and elsewhere was not the lack of hate-speech laws but the lack of protection of the common or garden laws — against vandalism and property appropriation and suchlike.
One notes, by the way, that property rights are absent from Canada’s modish Charter of Rights.
Oh, and by the way, almost all those powers the Nazis “seized” the morning after the Reichstag fire, the “human rights” commissions already have. In the name of cracking down on “hate,” Canada’s “human rights” apparatchiks can enter your premises without a warrant and remove any relevant “document or thing” (as the relevant Ontario legislation puts it) for as long as they want it. And without anybody burning the House of Commons or even the Senate.
Happily, beginning on July 1, under Ontario’s “human rights” reforms, Commissar Hall will have far greater powers to initiate prosecutions against all and sundry. Under the new proposals, “‘hate incident’ means any act or omission, whether criminal or not, that expresses bias, prejudice, bigotry or contempt toward a vulnerable or disadvantaged community or its members.” “Act or omission”? Of course. The act of not acting in an insufficiently non-hateful way can itself be hateful. Whether or not the incident is a non-incident is incidental.
I quote from “Concepts Of Race And Racism And Implications For OHRC Policy” as published on the OHRC website:
“The denial of racism used by so many whites in positions of authority ranging from the supervisor in a work place to the chief of Police and ministers of government must be understood for what it is: an example of White hegemonic power over those considered ‘other.’ “
Got that? Your denial of racism merely confirms your racism.
It bears repeating that some HRC abuses represent a property rights issue as much as they do free speech.
You can trace what happened to Scott Brockie directly to demands that Maclean’s publish an unwanted article.
And, as I’ve also been saying for some time, you can trace all that, my dear friends, to another gang of pushy university students determined to ignore that whole inconvenient “private property” concept — that is, Greensboro in 1960.
I’m currently reviewing A Conservative History of the American Left and lo and behold:
The Left’s 1960s began in Greensoro on February 1, 1960, when students imposed their morality on racist businessmen by disrupting their enterprises until the proprietors operated in a manner to the activists’ liking. It ended in Greenwich Village on March 6, 1960, when activists killed themselves with bombs they had constructed to kill American soldiers immersed in a war they disliked. Once coercion of fellow citizens became acceptable, once ends justified the means, once lawbreaking became a condoned tactic, the slope got slippery.