Ms. Gazan seeks to criminalize "denialism" and "downplaying" while at the same time apparently being disinterested in (actual) truth.
Is it downplaying to point out the error(?) above stating that, "...in 2021, it was announced that the site contained 200 possible unmarked graves..." When announced in 2021, it was a "mass grave" with the confirmed remains of 215 missing Indigenous children following their undocumented deaths according to the local Indigenous Chief. This claim was broadcast around the world and is still widely believed to be true at least in part because follow-up stories did not draw the same level of attention. Was there already fear of being accused of denialism?
Yes, the truth does hurt sometimes but actual truth doesn't do so with intent; it just is. We should not allow "her truth"/"his truth"/"my truth"/"their truth"(so often heavily steeped in personal bias rather than based on fact) to prevent us seeking THE truth nor should we be jailed for questioning.
"If people are to speak freely in society, we have to be willing to be offended." Exactly. Let's hope the government won't allow itself to be manipulated by this blatant use of victimhood. Doesn't she see this would only cause quiet resentment to grow and divide us further?
This is a difficult subject. I have a lot of thoughts around it, but I think only a couple that really I want to express.
The first is around the issue of free speech, and the purpose (not of free speech as a concept, but the purpose of a statement.
Free speech is subject to limitations. Rights in our charter are not absolute, they can be limited to protect other rights or uphold national values (that's from the Guide to the Canadian Charter, via the government's website). And, I think that Peter puts that in that context, that in this case, it is being proposed that the right to free speech be limited by hate speech. As Peter does point out, we do know that children died in residential schools. If you read the Bryce Report, he records that percentage wise, the number of deaths was signficant in percentage. As well, our government apologized for the imposition of residential schools - and in that, our Prime Minister Harper (not known as a woke progressive) stated:
"Tragically, some of these children died while attending residential schools, and others never returned home.
The government now recognizes that the consequences of the Indian residential schools policy were profoundly negative and that this policy has had a lasting and damaging impact on aboriginal culture, heritage and language.
While some former students have spoken positively about their experiences at residential schools, these stories are far overshadowed by tragic accounts of the emotional, physical and sexual abuse and neglect of helpless children, and their separation from powerless families and communities."
So we do know for a fact that children died, and they died as a result of the actions of our government. And PM Harper also addresses one of the things that Peter talked about in his column - about those who might have had a positive experience, and how it is outweighed by the tragic accounts of what went on.
This really leads me back to purpose. If we have something to say today about residential schools, what is the purpose of what we are going to say? Is it to learn about what happened? Is it to comfort those that lost family members? Or is it to argue that x number of children died, as opposed to y number of children?
If you say your purpose is to learn, and to give comfort and support, then you can do that by going on a learning journey, reading accounts of residential schools, listening to the elders talk, visiting residential schools, learning about treaties (and what your obligations are in upholding those treaties).
If your purpose is to say X amount of children died, as opposed to Y, I would ask you what that accomplishes. Even if you want to question the number, go to the schools, ask the elders, and ask them how they have come up with these numbers. You have obligations as a fellow citizen to learn and grow.
People might wonder about why it is deemed necessary by Ms. Gazan to have this added to hate speech. I can't speak for her, but I can tell you what I have heard. Indigneous people trusted the crown to protect them. That was the spirit and intent of the treaties that were signed. And in the case of residential schools ( and many other policies) not only were they not protected, they were harmed. And using the word harmed is an incredible understatement. They were meant to be extinguished as a people. That type of harm takes generations to recover from, at least 7 generations. And now, 2-3 generations later, they see and hear people trying to downplay what happened. Think about it for just a moment. If someone came and removed your children from your home, forced them into a school miles away, took away their language, subjected them to abuse, and left them in conditions so that a lot of them died - what would you do?
It is a tragic truth that thru residential schools as thru many other policies, we stripped people of their rights - rights to live their way of life, rights to their own religion, rights to speak their own language, the right to assembly. Having people worry about the right to be able to have free speech, about an issue where so many rights were stripped away, that's an incredible thing to comprehend.
I have reflected a lot on what Timothy Snyder said about freedom. We in North America (and other places I am sure) have defined freedom as starting at a certain point. So that point, for some, begins when settlers took the land, when land owners enslaved Afro Americans and their descendants. Or freedom begins after we used and abused immigrants to build a railway. So we talk about "freedom", but we are not willing to talk about the price that we exacted on others to have that freedom, or acknowledge it, and admit that the freedom we wanted and expected was not a freedom that we made available to everyone. In the end, that is not freedom, it's tyranny.
Compelling, logical arguments. One difficulty that I have with Leah Gazan’s Bill, the statements of many supporting it, and your thoughtful statements, in addition to the ridiculous restriction of freedom of expression, is that all of those mentioned presume to be true every claim made by an Indigenous person, and an activist on their behalf, and some NDP or Liberal politicians trying to score points/votes and keep the Trudeau Liberals in power (game playing that has been ongoing since 2021 or before). The law of averages and common sense dictate that they are not all true, particularly some of the absolutely outrageous claims being made, without evidence, by some of the said individuals. Will those lies be punishable by incarceration as well? Also, the Trudeau Liberals are still withholding some documentation that has been requested by Indigenous people all the while denying they are doing so and busily pointing fingers at the religious institutions to turn over all their records. Leah Gazan is an extremely radical leftist who desires to stop everyone who disagrees with her from having a voice.
Ms. Gazan seeks to criminalize "denialism" and "downplaying" while at the same time apparently being disinterested in (actual) truth.
Is it downplaying to point out the error(?) above stating that, "...in 2021, it was announced that the site contained 200 possible unmarked graves..." When announced in 2021, it was a "mass grave" with the confirmed remains of 215 missing Indigenous children following their undocumented deaths according to the local Indigenous Chief. This claim was broadcast around the world and is still widely believed to be true at least in part because follow-up stories did not draw the same level of attention. Was there already fear of being accused of denialism?
Yes, the truth does hurt sometimes but actual truth doesn't do so with intent; it just is. We should not allow "her truth"/"his truth"/"my truth"/"their truth"(so often heavily steeped in personal bias rather than based on fact) to prevent us seeking THE truth nor should we be jailed for questioning.
If truths cannot be discussed or questioned, that then becomes indoctrination. Questioning everything is important. Like it or not.
"If people are to speak freely in society, we have to be willing to be offended." Exactly. Let's hope the government won't allow itself to be manipulated by this blatant use of victimhood. Doesn't she see this would only cause quiet resentment to grow and divide us further?
The modern progressive left is a cancer in the body of western civilization eating away at the enlightenment.
This is a difficult subject. I have a lot of thoughts around it, but I think only a couple that really I want to express.
The first is around the issue of free speech, and the purpose (not of free speech as a concept, but the purpose of a statement.
Free speech is subject to limitations. Rights in our charter are not absolute, they can be limited to protect other rights or uphold national values (that's from the Guide to the Canadian Charter, via the government's website). And, I think that Peter puts that in that context, that in this case, it is being proposed that the right to free speech be limited by hate speech. As Peter does point out, we do know that children died in residential schools. If you read the Bryce Report, he records that percentage wise, the number of deaths was signficant in percentage. As well, our government apologized for the imposition of residential schools - and in that, our Prime Minister Harper (not known as a woke progressive) stated:
"Tragically, some of these children died while attending residential schools, and others never returned home.
The government now recognizes that the consequences of the Indian residential schools policy were profoundly negative and that this policy has had a lasting and damaging impact on aboriginal culture, heritage and language.
While some former students have spoken positively about their experiences at residential schools, these stories are far overshadowed by tragic accounts of the emotional, physical and sexual abuse and neglect of helpless children, and their separation from powerless families and communities."
So we do know for a fact that children died, and they died as a result of the actions of our government. And PM Harper also addresses one of the things that Peter talked about in his column - about those who might have had a positive experience, and how it is outweighed by the tragic accounts of what went on.
This really leads me back to purpose. If we have something to say today about residential schools, what is the purpose of what we are going to say? Is it to learn about what happened? Is it to comfort those that lost family members? Or is it to argue that x number of children died, as opposed to y number of children?
If you say your purpose is to learn, and to give comfort and support, then you can do that by going on a learning journey, reading accounts of residential schools, listening to the elders talk, visiting residential schools, learning about treaties (and what your obligations are in upholding those treaties).
If your purpose is to say X amount of children died, as opposed to Y, I would ask you what that accomplishes. Even if you want to question the number, go to the schools, ask the elders, and ask them how they have come up with these numbers. You have obligations as a fellow citizen to learn and grow.
People might wonder about why it is deemed necessary by Ms. Gazan to have this added to hate speech. I can't speak for her, but I can tell you what I have heard. Indigneous people trusted the crown to protect them. That was the spirit and intent of the treaties that were signed. And in the case of residential schools ( and many other policies) not only were they not protected, they were harmed. And using the word harmed is an incredible understatement. They were meant to be extinguished as a people. That type of harm takes generations to recover from, at least 7 generations. And now, 2-3 generations later, they see and hear people trying to downplay what happened. Think about it for just a moment. If someone came and removed your children from your home, forced them into a school miles away, took away their language, subjected them to abuse, and left them in conditions so that a lot of them died - what would you do?
It is a tragic truth that thru residential schools as thru many other policies, we stripped people of their rights - rights to live their way of life, rights to their own religion, rights to speak their own language, the right to assembly. Having people worry about the right to be able to have free speech, about an issue where so many rights were stripped away, that's an incredible thing to comprehend.
I have reflected a lot on what Timothy Snyder said about freedom. We in North America (and other places I am sure) have defined freedom as starting at a certain point. So that point, for some, begins when settlers took the land, when land owners enslaved Afro Americans and their descendants. Or freedom begins after we used and abused immigrants to build a railway. So we talk about "freedom", but we are not willing to talk about the price that we exacted on others to have that freedom, or acknowledge it, and admit that the freedom we wanted and expected was not a freedom that we made available to everyone. In the end, that is not freedom, it's tyranny.
Compelling, logical arguments. One difficulty that I have with Leah Gazan’s Bill, the statements of many supporting it, and your thoughtful statements, in addition to the ridiculous restriction of freedom of expression, is that all of those mentioned presume to be true every claim made by an Indigenous person, and an activist on their behalf, and some NDP or Liberal politicians trying to score points/votes and keep the Trudeau Liberals in power (game playing that has been ongoing since 2021 or before). The law of averages and common sense dictate that they are not all true, particularly some of the absolutely outrageous claims being made, without evidence, by some of the said individuals. Will those lies be punishable by incarceration as well? Also, the Trudeau Liberals are still withholding some documentation that has been requested by Indigenous people all the while denying they are doing so and busily pointing fingers at the religious institutions to turn over all their records. Leah Gazan is an extremely radical leftist who desires to stop everyone who disagrees with her from having a voice.