Freedom of speech

The best way to insure freedom is to allow freedom of speech. More than all the do-gooder teachers trying to empower their ESL students into some form of "critical thinking" social activism, we need to make sure that all opinions can be expressed without fear.

I am reading Radzinsky's biography of Stalin as part of my Russian learning. When I reflect on how freedom of thought and expression was extinguished in Russia, and how everybody lined up behind the safety of orthodoxy, of only expressing popular or approved thoughts, I wonder if the same could happen in our society, in Canada. In some ways, it is the very do-gooders, who are applying the stifling pressure of political correctness on our freedom, who have been eroding our freedoms. We see it in universities. We see in government institutions, which spend tax-payer's money to persecute people for their thoughts.

Under Stalin the cause was Revolution or the proletariat or whatever. Life, friends, family and even one's own life needed to be sacrificed for this great cause. Yet this cause, Communism, is is no longer. It has been repudiated and abandoned. Countless millions, from former bourgeois, to intellectuals, to committed communists to peasants, were all sacrificed for a "great" cause, that has gone "poof".

Now we have a new utopian mafia, and it includes the human rights industry, and it operates with the same intolerance of contrary opinion. Here is Ezra Levant, a Canadian advocate of freedom of speech, in his presentation to the US Congress.

Comments

[Jim]

Well said, Steve. And Ezra Levant's speech was enlightening. Thanks for being among those who speak out against the erosion of liberty.

[Esther]

I think this subject of freedom is very important, because sooner or later it will affect everyone. I once heard a woman called Briggite Gabriel say that we were becoming victims of some sort of "political correctness".

[GeoffB]

Steve,
I like the phrase "utopian mafia." Reagan used to joke that when government said how it was going to help, you'd better hang on to your wallet. When obscure government agencies start talking about how they're going to fix society, you've got to watch out for a whole lot more than just your wallet.

It's a good thing there was still enough freedom of speech around for Ezra Levant to post parts of his trial on the internet. Without that, we'd never even have heard of him, or what's been going on.

Freedom of speech is indeed the first freedom: if you're prevented from saying what the government doesn't want you to say, be it for your own good, someone else's, or the government's, pretty soon the only opinion left is what the people in power prescribe. Scary times indeed. It's a good thing the HRC overreached when they did, so that the word could get out before they'd had time to get everyone to assume that their way of doing business was the norm and perfectly reasonable.

[Vitaly]

>Under Stalin the cause was Revolution or the proletariat or whatever... Yet this cause, Communism, is is no longer.

Under Stalin the cause was eliminating illiteracy, building industry, winning the war, rebuilding the country devastated by the war etc.

You are right that this cause is no longer since illiteracy has been eliminated, industry has been built, war has been won, and country has been rebuilt.

For comparison, 23% of USA population are "functionally illiterate" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States)

There is a project 'Name of Russia' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Russia), similar to 'The greatest Canadian'. Stalin got the first place. You can use your critical thinking to figure out why.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Vitaly,

I would not like in a country where the leadership eliminates political opponents, declares war on peasants and other classes of society, and sends millions to concentration camp, and this is in the twenties and thirties, well before the war. Stalin almost invited the Germans in by eliminating his best generals and making such a mess of his invasion of Finland. The Russian people fought off the Germans, Stalin just happened to be the leader.

As for functional illiteracy it exists in all countries in th OECD to a similar extent and I doubt the Russia is an exception.

[Vitaly]

>leadership eliminates political opponents, declares war on peasants and other classes of society

After revolution a lot of Jews came to power. Educated Yiddish speakers considered illiterate Russian peasants as an alien nation. And they really committed a lot of atrocities. They also closed and destroyed a lot of Orthodox churches. In Russian empire Jews were discriminated so they were all too happy to jump on Russian educated class. Trotsky exiled a lot of Russian intellectuals.

Later on those “revolutionaries” were prosecuted by Stalin. Immigrants had an opportunity to return, churches resumed service.

>sends millions to concentration camp

That’s what Western European would do. Concentration camps were invented by Britons in South Africa and later on used by Germans. Both Britons and Germans sent millions of civilians into concentration camps where most of them died from starvation and diseases.

Soviet Union never had “concentration camps”. Convicted people were serving their terms in labor camps. The main goal of such camps was to do construction and convicts were provided with food and medicare (obviously). People can have different attitudes towards such labor camps but with the help of those camps there were built a lot of hydroelectric stations, canals, railroads, plants, cities etc that are essential part of infrastructure of present-day Russia.

Number comparison: USA has 2 million people behind bars. If to add people on parole or probation then it will come to 7 millions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate). I am wondering how many people went through American jails within 30 years period.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Vitaly,

It is pointless to discuss with some as brainwashed as you. Are you telling me that the knock on the door at midnight that people in Russia and the east block countries like Czechoslovakia and Hungary suffered was the work of Jews?

Just a few numbers. In 1937 under Yezhov, but under Stalin's order 700,000 people were shot (including many Poles who seemed a favourite target of Stalin). Millions died in the Gulag, where they were used as slave labour, very often on futile stupid projects like the White Sea-Baltic Canal, which never served any purpose other than to kill people.That is without even talking about the mass starvation and elimination of Ukrainian peasants and kulaks.

There may be a large number of people in prison in the US. They are not dying there as undernourished slave labour living in appalling conditions. The fact that the Britons were the first to set up concentration camps in the Boer war, or that the Nazis even more systematically cruel on an enormous scale, does not lessen the tragedy of the senseless murderous cruelty of the Stalinist regime.

Maybe that is what you want to live under, but I think you are in a minority.I have seen surveys of public opinion in Russia, and the Stalinist oppression is seen as one of the most shameful periods of Russian history. You may enjoy living under the uncontrolled tyranny of a small number of mafiosi who kill their population at will, under the pretense of building up socialism or the country. I have trouble understanding that mentality.

I want Freedom of expression, and freedom from maniacs who would kill people in the name of meaningless utopias. You , of course, have the freedom to believe what you want and say what you want. The day you lose that freedom you will be in trouble. Under Stalin people only had the freedom to kiss ass.

[Katie]

I'm friends with quite a few Russian immigrants who tell quite a different story. Vitaly, surely you can do better than Wikipedia as your source.

[Bernard]

So I assume you would also defend David Ahenakew against being criminally persecuted for something he said. Otherwise you would be a hypocrite. Fact is Canada has had hate speech laws for years, so the people who are only outraged now are probably ones who agreed with people being charged when they disagreed with them. Let`s have true freedom of speech then, I`m all for it.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Of course I do not think Ahenakew should not be criminally prosecuted for saying Jews should fry in hell or whatever garbage he had to say. Why do you so quickly assume that I would, not and assume that I am a hypocrite? On the other hand if other people in our society feel we should have "hate speech laws" then these should be handled in normal courts of law.
The reason people are at upset now is the sudden realization that a large pseudo-legal infrastructure of useless bureaucrats has been set up so that with the limitless resources of the state they can attack individuals and condemn individuals for saying things that "might cause offense", and those individuals have to pay for all of their own defense funds, and yet these pseudo-legal "tribunals" do not have to follow legal procedure, nor prove any actual crime based on our laws was committed.
Also I do not equate what Ahenakew said with Levant's publishing of the cartoons. I do not consider religion to be anything other than a belief, an ideology, and as such is not free from ridicule by others,nor exposure to analysis and interpretation by others as in Steyn's article for which MacLean's magazine was brought before these useless monkeys at the HRC. I do not believe in blasphemy, nor in the immunity of any religion or religious group from ridicule or criticism.
On the other hand Ahenakew's case, which you use here, does not involve criticism, nor ridicule, just hatred. Still I do not believe he should be prosecuted for his hatred, he is ridiculous and people can quickly see that.

[Steve Kaufmann]

The first sentence above should read "Of course I do not think Ahenakew should be criminally prosecuted for saying Jews should fry in hell or whatever garbage he had to say."

I will admit that Levant has done a tremendous job in making people aware of the extent to which aggressive do-gooders, at public expense, are intimidating ordinary citizens, not all of whom have the money of MacLean's or the energy of Levant. Since you make assumptions about my hypocrisy, I can assume from your tone, that you would be a happy participants in a HRC witch hunt.

[Katie]

It seems to me people are missing the point. Freedom of speech means being able to say whatever you want, as inane as it might be. So I might think certain people leaving comments are doofii (plural of doofus, look it up) based on their ill formed logic, but I don't think they should be punished for it. I might not respect what one says, but I respect his or her right to say it.

I'm not sure what this has to do with ESL. The last thing I'd want to do is preach my own ideology. Is that what's going on in some ESL courses?

[Vitaly]

>Vitaly, surely you can do better than Wikipedia as your source.

You are right; my source is my grandparents who lived during those times. They are saying that when Stalin died everybody was crying. Probably Stalin’s death had the same effect on Russia like Gandhi’s death on India.

I am just against hypocrisy and double standards. When Soviet army is in Afghanistan it’s “spreading totalitarianism”, when American army is in Afghanistan it’s “spreading freedom”. Soviet military bases in Eastern Europe is “oppression”, American bases in Eastern Europe (and in Central Asia) is “democracy”. Soviet rockets in Cuba is a “threat”, American rockets in Czechia is “protection” (if Soviet tanks hadn’t been there in 1968 then US base would’ve been there long time ago).

Censorship in USSR is “bad”, Hollywood blacklist and McCarthyism is “good”. Starvation in Ukraine (and in Russia and in Kazakhstan because of drought) is frequently talked over; starvation in Ireland is rarely mentioned. Gerrymandering in Northern Ireland existed till 1970s but it doesn’t prevent England from posing itself as an “epitome of democracy”.

Lincoln organized a massacre of 1 million Americans (to kill that amount of people with mid 19th century weaponry it really had to be a terrible war) and now is honored as “the greatest president”. But Stalin is “tyrant”.

When Stalin was in power, in USA blacks had to go to the end of the bus, Indians were kicked out of restaurants etc. “All men are created equal” wrote slave-owner Jefferson and became a “founding father”, whereas Stalin regime is “shameful”.

“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”

[Steve Kaufmann]

I get it, other people are bad, therefore all the people killed by Stalin in the name of a great "ideology" deserved to die. The deportation of whole nations, Crimean Tatars, Chechens etc. did not happen. The kulaks were eliminated by natural disaster, ...it is all as nothing compared to gerrymandering Ireland, and slavery in the US (abolished about the same time as Serfdom was abolished in Russia).

I don't buy it Vitaly. The problems of the US are the problems of the US. Totalitarianism is a threat that may raise its head again. I prefer to be vigilant and not gloss over the past in the name of national pride. I read lots, including Russia sources. But you are obviously free to cherish whatever historical memories you want.

[Bernard]

I don't believe anybody should be legally punished for their speech or writing unless it directly leads to harm to a person. If Ezra or MacLean's wrote the same articles about some other ethnic/religious groups they probably would have been dragged into courts and shut down, and most people would cheer. I don't think HRC can or will do anything. As I said, anti-free speech laws and HRCs have been around for years, why didn't people protest against them when they were first introduced?

[Steve Kaufmann]

Bernard,

What exactly are you trying to say? If Ezra published cartoons that satirized Christianity, or if Steyn had said that American influence in Canada represented a threat, they would have been dragged into courts and shut down? Are you joking?

People did not know the HRC's were around. Nobody paid attention. Just like nobody realizes the extent to which the utopian mafia dominates government bureaucracy, the judiciary, our universities etc. Ezra took up the fight because of the ridiculous nature of the most recent HRC trials. More people are now aware and many think it is ridiculous.

What is your problem exactly? Do you feel that publishing the Moslem cartoons, which had already been published all around the world, and pointing out that Islam has a large expansionist, irrational, side to it, that we should be aware of, that this somehow worthy of being hauled into court and being shut down for. It seems to me that you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here.

[Bernard]

If they said Jews, Blacks, or homosexuals are a grave threat to the Western civilization they probably would be prosecuted and shut down.

I am outraged by the hypocritical outrage of the journalist clique who were OK with anti-free speech laws
and HRCs, but when they themselves are chased after them then it becomes some huge travesty.

As far as religions go, most if not all have the irrational followers, although I didn't see any Islamic expansion since the heyday of the Ottoman Empire.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Bernard,

Have you read Mark Steyn's book? Have you read the magazine article in question?

Can you tell me which paragraphs in the book or magazine article you feel are "hate speech"?

If it is just his conclusion that militant Islam is a threat to our western society, are you saying he should not be allowed to say that? I guess you would have forbidden Churchill from expressing concerns about what was happening in Germany under Hitler, when militant nationalism was deliberately fomented with the consequences that we now know.

Now what does all this have to do with Blacks, Jews and homosexuals? The hypocrite is you.