Steyn Wars - A Peace Treaty Drafted (And Rejected)

Earlier this year, the CHRC asked Professor Richard Moon to take a look at Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. It's the section that says you can't write or say anything over the internet that might expose identifiable groups (whoever they are) to hatred or contempt (whatever that is).

If you need some backstory on Steyn Wars, you can read a re-cap here. Long story short, Steyn quoted a Muslim that said something bad about Muslims, so a couple of other Muslims wanted him to shut up or, barring that, they wanted Maclean's magazine to let them write a cover story refuting Steyn (and the Muslim guy, I guess), which Maclean's would have to print artwork and all. For a while, it looked like the governments of Ontario, British Columbia, and Canada might back them up on this, but the CHRC decided to hedge and asked some dude named Professor Moon to tell them whether they could prosecute hate crimes or not. So Steyn was accused of being a bigot, but it was never clear if he was even allowed to be accused of being a bigot.

Get it? Me either. Welcome to Canada. It's been 7 years since the internet hate crime rule went into the books, and only now does the Canadian Human Rights Commission even ask if they're allowed to prosecute internet hate crimes.

Anyway, Professor Moon has decided that hate speech is bad, but censorship is bad too. Quite a pickle. Says Moon:

We must develop ways other than censorship to respond to expression that stereotypes the members of an identifiable group and to hold institutions such as the media accountable when they engage in these forms of discriminatory expression.

Well, allow me to throw a can of Chock Full O' Hate Crime right through that window. Again, we come back to the old argument: define discriminatory expression.

He can't do it. No one can do it. The best Moon can do (and it's a pretty good argument) is say that hate speech advocating physical violence should be punished, as this is a much more narrow test than punishing hate speech that hurts someone's "dignity."

I can get into that, and frankly I have to because the Canadian Criminal Code already covers it. But still, he's keen to see the good side of Section 13, and gives a nice atta-boy to the CHRC: The few section 13 cases sent to Tribunal and in which the Tribunal has found a breach of the section have almost all involved expression that is so extreme and hateful that it may be seen as advocating or justifying violence against the members of an identifiable group.

Doc, you should have quit while you were ahead. Notice the key words: "almost" and "most" and "may."

That doesn't wash with me. Either something urges violence or it doesn't. "I wish art didn't exist," is one thing, "Kill all artists," is quite another. Would "I wish art didn't exist" imply killing artists? Depends who you ask.

In the end, Moon does grow a pair, if only for a moment. After despairing about how and why to shut people up, he comes out with a doozy: 1. The first recommendation is that section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) be repealed so that the CHRC and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) would no longer deal with hate speech, in particular hate speech on the Internet.

That must have really curled their hair up in Ottawa. Surely they must have thought that a guy with a PhD would fall on the left side of the aisle. Doc, don't you know how many bureaucrats you'll put out of work with talk like this?

Still, he goes on. He can't help it. There's just something about regulations that appeals to people who are used to thinking that regular folks need to be kept in line. Here's the bit that should scare any so-called journalist in the nation:

Newspapers and news magazines should seek to revitalize the provincial/regional press councils and ensure that identifiable groups are able to pursue complaints if they feel they have been unfairly represented in mainstream media.

If this does not happen, consideration should be given to the statutory creation of a national press council with compulsory membership. This national press council would have the authority to determine whether a newspaper or magazine has breached professional standards and order the publication of the press council’s decision.

A newspaper is not simply a private participant in public discourse; it is an important part of the public sphere where discussions about the affairs of the community takes place. As such it carries a responsibility to portray the different groups that make up the Canadian community fairly and without discrimination.

Whoa. That's quite a broadside against a free press. Let's take it one by one:

1) [E]nsure that identifiable groups are able to pursue complaints. Define "identifiable groups," and tell me where they would file their complaints. Also tell me what remedies we're talking about. I have a funny feeling it would involve cash.

2) [W]hether a newspaper or magazine has breached professional standards and order the publication of the press council’s decision. Who decides the "professional standard," and since when should a council order a private paper to print anything? This sounds like a wonderful way for the big boys to knock a small magazine out of business.

3) A newspaper is not simply a private participant in public discourse. Depends where they get their money, pal.

4) As such it carries a responsibility to portray the different groups that make up the Canadian community fairly and without discrimination. Get bent. They have a responsibility to make money and sell papers. Period. And one more time, tell me who the "different groups" are and how me and my beer buddies can get a membership card. We'll need one for when we're treated unfairly.

Moon's peace treaty isn't bad. If he had stopped typing after saying that Section 13 should be scrapped, I would have been on board. But the second he remembered who he is (and who he's working for) I got off the train. Telling papers what to print, and who to write stories about, is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Get back to me after the re-write.