The Death of Free Speech the 'Canadian Way'

I'm not really up on all of the personalities, but the realities of progressive attacks on political speech are all too real to me.

See Kathy Shaidle, "(Making Someone's Life a) Living Hell Is the Best Revenge."

I'll be checking Kathy's site frequently (or more frequently than I already do) with anticipation of her big announcement. Meanwhile, she links to this cowardly defense of the Canadian Human Rights Commission's "Section 13" --- which is the Canadian left's vile bureaucracy that's mounting a jihad against free speech up north by attacking and prosecuting conservatives who speak the truth, because as we all know, truth is the new "hate speech." See Bernie Farber and Marvin Kurz, "Hateful Words Can Hurt." And a key passage at the piece:

Another argument against Section 13 is that, unlike libel law, truth is no defence. But can it ever be “true” that victims of hate speech deserve hatred and contempt? Should someone be entitled to use a tribunal hearing to “prove” that, say African Canadians are inferior, that Jews are rapacious, or that all gays are pedophiles?

Truth is no defense? God, that's so pathetically f-king stupid it makes me wanna puke. Hello? It doesn't matter if the truth is painful or not --- it's still the truth. And notice how these idiots Farber and Kurz omit example of real conservative free speech. Did you point out that Islamists proselytize death to the Jews? Lock up that man for that, er, "hate speech"! These progressive asshats and their totalitarian minions will dictate what thoughts are acceptable. It's already happening, of course, all around us. The world is upside down, in a big way. The biggest lies in today's world are the inventions of the left. That the war in Iraq was a "debacle." That the science of climate change is "settled." That Israel, the Middle East's original democracy, is an "apartheid state." The list goes on. The common denominator is that progressives can't win debate on the merits, so they use totalitarian methods to attack their opponents and shut down debate --- despite their narcissistic chest-thumping to the contrary.

See also Closet Conservative, "OMGWords Caused the Holocaust AIYEEEE We're ALL GONNA DIE!!!," and Scaramouche, "The Ceej is Dead and Gone But Its Pro-Censorship Zombies Live On."

Muslim Countries Target Free Speech

Well, Muslims worldwide are squelching debate at home, but Professor Jonathan Turley focuses on efforts at the United Nations to "criminalize intolerance," with the blessing of none other than U.S. President Barack Obama.

At Los Angeles Times, "Criminalizing intolerance":

This week in Washington, the United States is hosting an international conference obliquely titled "Expert Meeting on Implementing the U.N. Human Rights Resolution 16/18." The impenetrable title conceals the disturbing agenda: to establish international standards for, among other things, criminalizing "intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of … religion and belief." The unstated enemy of religion in this conference is free speech, and the Obama administration is facilitating efforts by Muslim countries to "deter" some speech in the name of human rights.

"While the resolution also speaks to combating incitement to violence, the core purpose behind this and previous measures has been to justify the prosecution of those who speak against religion." Although the resolution also speaks to combating incitement to violence, the core purpose behind this and previous measures has been to justify those who speak against religion. The members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, or OIC, have been pushing for years to gain international legitimacy of their domestic criminal prosecutions of anti-religious speech.

This year, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton invited nations to come to implement the resolution and "to build those muscles" needed "to avoid a return to the old patterns of division." Those "old patterns" include instances in which writers and cartoonists became the targets of protests by religious groups. The most famous such incident occurred in 2005 when a Danish newspaper published cartoons mocking the prophet Muhammad. The result were worldwide protests in which Muslims reportedly killed more than 100 people — a curious way to demonstrate religious tolerance. While Western governments reaffirmed the right of people to free speech after the riots, they quietly moved toward greater prosecution of anti-religious speech under laws prohibiting hate speech and discrimination.

The OIC members have long sought to elevate religious dogma over individual rights. In 1990, members adopted the Cairo Declaration, which rejected core provisions of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights and affirmed that free speech and other rights must be consistent with "the principles of the sharia," or Islamic law. The biggest victory of the OIC came in 2009 when the Obama administration joined in condemning speech containing "negative racial and religious stereotyping" and asked states to "take effective measures" to combat incidents, including those of "religious intolerance." Then, in March, the U.S. supported Resolution 16/18's call for states to "criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief." It also "condemns" statements that advocate "hostility" toward religion. Although the latest resolution refers to "incitement" rather than "defamation" of religion (which appeared in the 2005 resolution), it continues the disingenuous effort to justify crackdowns on religious critics in the name of human rights law.

The OIC has hit on a winning strategy to get Western countries to break away from their commitment to free speech by repackaging blasphemy as hate speech and free speech as the manifestation of "intolerance." Now, orthodoxy is to be protected in the name of pluralism — requiring their own notion of "respect and empathy and tolerance." One has to look only at the OIC member countries, however, to see their vision of empathy and tolerance, as well as their low threshold for anti-religious speech that incites people. In September, a Kuwaiti court jailed a person for tweeting a message deemed derogatory to Shiites. In Pakistan last year, a doctor was arrested for throwing out a business card of a man named Muhammad because he shared the prophet's name.

Ah ha!

Truth. The new "hate speech.

But continue reading at the link.

Sarah Palin: A Personal Thanksgiving Reflection

At IBD (via Glenn Reynolds).

Obama Neglects to Thank God in Thanksgiving Address

At Los Angeles Times, "Obama criticized on Twitter for Thanksgiving remarks omitting God." And see Todd Starnes, at Fox News, "Obama Leaves God Out of Thanksgiving Address."

To Increase Jobs, Increase Economic Freedom

From John Mackey, at Wall Street Journal:

Is the United States exceptional? Of course we are! Two hundred years ago we were one of the poorest countries in the world. We accounted for less than 1% of the world's total GDP. Today our GDP is 23% of the world's total and more than twice as large as the No. 2 country's, China.

America became the wealthiest country because for most of our history we have followed the basic principles of economic freedom: property rights, freedom to trade internationally, minimal governmental regulation of business, sound money, relatively low taxes, the rule of law, entrepreneurship, freedom to fail, and voluntary exchange.

The success of economic freedom in increasing human prosperity, extending our life spans and improving the quality of our lives in countless ways is the most extraordinary global story of the past 200 years. Gross domestic product per capita has increased by a factor of 1,000% across the world and almost 2,000% in the U.S. during these last two centuries. In 1800, 85% of everyone alive lived on less than $1 per day (in 2000 dollars). Today only 17% do. If current long-term trend lines of economic growth continue, we will see abject poverty almost completely eradicated in the 21st century. Business is not a zero-sum game struggling over a fixed pie. Instead it grows and makes the total pie larger, creating value for all of its major stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, investors and communities.

So why is our economy barely growing and unemployment stuck at over 9%? I believe the answer is very simple: Economic freedom is declining in the U.S. In 2000, the U.S. was ranked third in the world behind only Hong Kong and Singapore in the Index of Economic Freedom, published annually by this newspaper and the Heritage Foundation. In 2011, we fell to ninth behind such countries as Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Ireland.

The reforms we need to make are extensive. I want to make a few suggestions that, as an independent, I hope will stimulate thinking and constructive discussion among concerned Americans no matter what their politics are.

A great piece.

Continue reading.