I love Canada. I am a proud Canadain. However, nothing is perfect – not even Canada. And it has made me ache to see my beloved country destroyed from the inside by the ‘tyrrany of the nice’. Of course, there is nothing ‘nice’ about this tyranny. It corresponds to ‘nice’ about as much as shadenfreude does to ‘pleasure’.
I speak of nothing else than the encroaching ‘fascism with a smile’. The thought police. And before most of us noticed, they have rotted the core of several of our legal institutions here in Canada – and are having a go in the USA, too. But, like a wart – the infection gets deeply sunk into the flesh before the outward signs are visible.
More and more Canadians have begun to wake up and smell the poison in our cups. Mostly regular people, who don’t understand why a person is not allowed to smoke a perfectly legal cigarette where a ‘privileged’ one can openly smoke marijuana. Or why a priest must never express his views – for the rest of his life – on issues like gay marriage. (Don’t get me wrong, I think it idiotic and immoral to oppose same-sex marriage. But somehow, I expect that many priests might have a different take on this – and that is their right.)
And since the calm, laid-back Canadians that we are actually began to discuss this at the watercoolers, coffe-shops and medical clinic waiting rooms (lots of people to talk to there), you know the winds of change are not far behind. So, how do our social engineers respond?
By sicking their ‘calming sqad’ at us.
I have trouble reading most ‘mainstream media’ print, because I love the English language and it pains me to see the abuse of grammar so routinely commited there. But, on occassion, people bring articles to my attention… as Blazing Catfur and FiveFeetOfFury have done here.
It is stories like these that make me question whether there is such a thing as ‘media bias’. That seems a singularly inappropriate concept – which implies that ‘bias’ is something that ‘could’ be a property of today’s journalism. Considering the ‘social engineering’ tone of ‘calming the populace’ this article takes, I think its aim is to educate us on what we ought to be thinking. How could that be referred to as bias?
It is not a ‘fluff piece’, as some seem to suggest. To the contrary. It is a well crafted educational piece, loaded with all the ‘proper’ buzzwords to ‘show us’ what we ‘ought to think’. To coddle us back into our woolly-headed sleepiness. Herd the sheep into the corale… That is the aim of the article – at least, in my never-humble-opinion.
Yet, it seems to have backfired. Perhaps it went too far in its tone of condescention, or perhaps it came too late. People were too awake to simply sink back into their slumber. The comments section reflects this, and is the most interesting part of this article. I, too, would have left a comment – but there is no way I’m giving my address to any organization that prints drivel like this!
Ah, yes. The comments section. Many of the comments point out that Mr. Warman, the much-admired subject of this article who often sues on behalf of others who – in his mind – ‘ought to’ have been offended but were not (and who is one of the worst offenders the thought police has to offer) is suing ‘some bloggers’ (including FiveFeetOfFury and BlazingCatfur) because, somebody commenting on their site called Warman a ‘Nazi’ (I think).
What I am not entirely clear about is this: is he suing because he thinks that calling him a ‘Nazi’ is an insult to himself, or to ‘Nazis’???
It could go either way, you know….
Correction: Blazing Catfur is not, in fact, being sued by Warman (though she had been threatened with other suits). This was my misunderstanding. However, many pro-free speech bloggers are. I apologize for my mistake.
UPDATE: The Globe and Mail has not closed the ‘Comment’ section on the article I wrote about in this post. However, Blazing Catfur has taken some screenshots and these can be accessed HERE! I wonder if this is simply frustration on thier part, because their ‘education’ had backfired, or if someone had threatened them….
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
September 20, 2008 at 18:27
I like your “calming” argument. I felt that there was something particularly annoying about the article and I think you hit the nail on the head. It is an attempt at group think, and it is not restricted to the Globe and Mail. All the major Toronto newspapers indulge in it.
Newspapers in the nineteenth century were colourful, partisan, outrageous and wonderful. In Upper Canada in 1850, there were 150 newspapers of record and their readers were quite able to sort fact from fiction, and partisanship from straight-up commentary. The newspapers stimulated discussion and controversy and all were the richer for it.
Today I read that the revenues of the New York Times are down almost 10% and there is general concern that major newspapers are unlikely to survive. Perhaps the publishers should take a glance back at their pages from the mid 1800s and learn what the newspaper business is all about.
September 20, 2008 at 19:03
I’ve read books and articles by kirk makin and this type of article seemed remarkably out of character. If nothing else, it’s odd he would pass up an obviously interesting story just to produce a puff piece on one player, regardless of how he might feel on the issue. He has always seemed sufficiently professional to see the risk in these commissions and their chilling effect. I strongly suspect he’s doing a favour for somebody.
Ain’t it great we don’t have to pay for this crap?
September 20, 2008 at 19:09
LOL well articulated, regarding the assertion that “Someone” called him a Nazi: Did he not admit to being a member of a White Supremacist Discussion forum signing on under an alias? Does that make him a Nazi, well using his criteria of what constitues a Nazi I suppose he could be one working under cover? Why is he allowed to post on White Supremacist forums, but other Canadians are labeled by his ilk as Nazi Supporters. It’s circ logic as it’s finest, do as I say not as I do.
September 20, 2008 at 20:14
Thank you for you kind comments.
@Rose:
Mr. Warman often sues people on behalf of groups that ‘ought to’ be offended at something…
So, is he suing ‘everyone’ because HE was called a ‘Nazi’ and HE is offended?
Or is he suing ‘everyone’ on behalf of ‘Nazis’, because ‘the Nazis’ ought to be offended by being compared to him?
Hey, I’m just an Aspie – I don’t know!!!
September 21, 2008 at 18:39
*reads the post*
*blinks*
It’s… it’s like a left-wing Jack Thompson….
This is one of the reasons I think the first right any country needs to enshrine is the right to be offensive. I mean… whether he’s doing it out of the goodness of his heart of not, the man is making a career out of being offended for other people.
I wonder if pointing out that his decision to do so – and its implication that the people he’s suing on the behalf of aren’t capable of deciding when they should/shouldn’t be offended could itself be considered offensive – would make his head explode?
(First time I ever thought I’d have to say that I’m glad I live in the US and not in Canada, when discussing a human rights issue….)
September 22, 2008 at 13:35
Very worrying what is happening in Canada with the freedom of speech issue. Although in Europe we are not better at all. Just see Gregorius Nekschott… in whose house police stormed in the wee hours of the morning to arrest him and see what his PC and notebooks have. They were searching for some cartoons he had drawn which were alledgely insulting to Muslims. Just for the record: he had been doing offensive cartoons for other faiths (his favourite were about Christ’s crucifixion) for his whole life. Just in case someone has not heard of him.
I believe Governments are using this “offensive theories”, the terrorism… to ensure people are not really presenting them a true opposition.
(Oh, and thanks for your link. I will link yours immediately 😆 ).
September 29, 2008 at 11:12
It’s sad that Canada is suffering from the same anti-freedom as the US. The very people who call themselves “liberal” are the ones who want to make everyone think the same as they do.