Die Bundesregierung will nicht sagen, ob sie die Verweigerung von Internatsschulen unter Strafe stellen wird
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-federal-government-wont-say-criminalize-residential-school-denials/
Die Bundesregierung will nicht sagen, ob sie die Verweigerung von Internatsschulen unter Strafe stellen wird
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-federal-government-wont-say-criminalize-residential-school-denials/
11 Kommentare
[removed]
This is a trap. Demand someone to take a position in the abstract, and take umbrage at the position based on fabricated scenarios or at the failure to take a position.
There’s plenty of actually reasonable criticism of the media frenzy around the graves a few years ago that is immediately discounted as ‘residential school denialism’.
For people claiming to be against misinformation/disinformation, many seem to be oddly disinterested in an honest discussion about the huge amount of inaccurate, misleading, and sometimes outright false claims made at the height of this, that were of course hi-jacked by politicians.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/the-year-of-the-graves-how-the-worlds-media-got-it-wrong-on-residential-school-graves
This is just one analysis of this that I remeber from the time but I’m sure there’s more.
Of course that won’t matter, many will immediately discount this because it’s from the national post instead of actually engaging with the material.
Would this be considered residential school denialism?
Why would they even consider it? Such a stupid idea, lets make a contentious thing illegal to talk about unless you take the wrong side
It’s always been very alarming how important it is to so many posters here to downplay residential schools. In fact a lot of people’s primary reason for posting is to moan about indigenous issues.
I’ve come and gone from Reddit for a long time and this sub has always had a problem when it comes to this topic. It’s only gotten worse.
The Supreme Court ruled decades ago that intentionally spreading lies is protected under the Charter guarantee of free speech. In that specific case, the Court struck down a law that was being used to prosecute Holocaust deniers: https://canlii.ca/t/1fs9n
Feels like that should be a part of the conversation. Yet none of the apparent „experts“ quoted in this article thought to mention it.
A comment I posted elsewhere for this article – Some thoughts:
1. It’s no small thing to use the full power of the state to take or curtail someone’s liberty because of something they say. This is ground that should be tread upon very, very carefully and thoughtfully and not called for haphazardly.
2. The word ‚denialism‘ is sometimes used by people to shut down legitimate discussions – such as the fact that what was once reported as ‚mass graves‘ are actually unconfirmed disturbances that should better be called ‚potential‘ or ’suspected‘ or ‚unconfirmed‘ graves. Remember: those reports set off a firestorm that led to real-world consequences – church burnings, etc. It is especially important not to use the law to deny facts or the legitimate investigation of facts.
3. Part of what I personally disdained about the Trudeau version of the Liberals was their easy embrace of illiberal solutions when it suited them. Let’s not repeat that mistake with this version of the Liberals. I think a good medium would be to commit to more education on residential schools – not just in school but in broader culture. They were bad. They involved the notion of ‚killing the Indian to save the man‘ – an idea that reasonable people should absolutely reject and understand as tragic and criminal by modern standards and values. Make the actual facts well known and common knowledge instead of reaching for the very heavy hand of the law.
They won’t say because they know the topic is a trap, and they know no matter what answer they give it’ll set off a firestorm.
We have adequate Hate Speech laws, we don’t need to expand the criminalization of speech. I don’t even need to point to a hypothetical situation anymore to warn of the slippery slope effect, I can just point to the UK.
As ridiculous as denying the trauma caused by the residential school system is, this should not be criminalized. We have free speech.
Total phantom. It’s like „Government of Canada refuses to deny presence of Aliens in RCMP“ or „Government of Canada refuses to say whether it will put curses on witchcraft practitioners“
All that’s missing is a conservative call to suspend the charter to protect these deniers.