Tag Archives: protest

Intolerance for bad faith actors

Leave a reply

I have always been a pretty strong advocate for free speech. To me it’s the underpinning of a robust democratic society. We don’t have to like what someone says, but they have a right to say it as long as it isn’t hate speech or harmful to someone. We shouldn’t allow racism, threats, and doxing, but we should allow differences of opinions and even angry rants when they are not threatening to a person or group of people.

But I’m struggling with the lack of good faith that I’m seeing. In our country, I see a lot of protests and anger towards our Prime Minister. I believe people should be allowed to protest and share their concerns, but when I see articles like, ‘Attack on Trudeau unsurprising, experts say, warning of future violence against politicians‘ stating that he was “pelted with gravel while at a campaign stop in London, Ont.” Or I read that he was heckled so loudly that he couldn’t continue a speech… Then that is going way too far. This isn’t protest, it’s fascist, it is intolerant and oppressive.

There is a difference between voicing concerns and harassment. There is a difference between protesting and threatening, there is a difference between peaceful, civil behavior and what seems to be happening today.

If I was to describe my politics, I’m definitely left of center. And while I fundamentally disagree with many things Ben Shapiro thinks and says, I get upset when I read articles that he can’t even speak at a university because of safety concerns… And that was 6 years ago! Things are even worse now. Much worse.

When I recently read, “The presidents of three of the nation’s top universities are facing intense backlash, including from the White House, after being accused of evading questions during a congressional hearing about whether calls by students for the genocide of Jews would constitute harassment under the schools’ codes of conduct.” I am deeply concerned. Should students be allowed to protest? Absolutely! Should they be allowed to promote genocide of any person or people as part of their protest? Absolutely not.

It’s an easy line to draw. Absolutely not. That’s acting in bad faith. That’s undermining our democracy and our freedoms.

We need to differentiate how we handle protests and free speech by people who are acting in good faith from those acting in bad faith. The very rights and freedoms we are given in a free and democratic society depend on us doing so. When we give those freedoms to people that abuse them, we subvert our own liberty. We diminish our freedoms and allow others, with harmful words and actions, to impose less civil values on us.

When free speech is misused, it harms us all. When violence is advocated or permitted; when protests prevent civil conversation and debate; when harassment is permitted; we all suffer. We can’t let people acting in bad faith weaken our civil liberties. We can’t just expect people to act in good faith, the minority who don’t will be too disruptive. We need to squash the bad faith actors. The trick is that we need to do so with legal actions. We need to have zero tolerance for intolerance, and we need to create laws that clearly restrict and penalize threats, hate crimes, and malice.

This is known as the paradox of tolerance, “The paradox of tolerance states that if a society’s practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that, in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.”

Instead, what I am seeing is things like this happening:

People who have caused over a decade of harm to others do not deserve a social media platform. That’s not censorship, that’s prevention of further malice, pain, and suffering to innocent people. As I contemplate leaving Twitter, news like this makes me lean towards shutting down my account. But I don’t pretend that will have any meaningful impact beyond my own peace of mind.

The acceptance of bad faith actors has been building over the past decade, and we are deep into the consequences now. Free speech should only be a right for people who act in good faith. There can be disagreement, there can be discourse, there can even be civil arguments and protests. What there can’t be are bad faith actors and activists using free speech as a mechanism to promote harmful ideas, hate, violence, and disruptions to public discourse. For this we need zero tolerance.

Related: Ideas on a Spectrum

Free speech in a free society

Leave a reply

There are a few people I really hate to listen to. They annoy me with their persuasive rhetoric and popular-sounding rifts and quotes that speak to a target audience and to no one else. That said, I don’t think I have a right to silence them. I can be outspoken about what they are saying that I think is wrong. I could choose to block them on social media platforms, and I can even call them nasty names, if that’s a game I want to play, (I don’t), but I don’t get to shut them up.

On the other hand, I think hate speech has no place in a good and decent society. In other words, we should only be intolerant of intolerance:

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually ceased or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

And so when I see news like this, it upsets me. It doesn’t matter what your politics are, whether you are on the left or right, or whether or not you think our Prime Minister is doing a good job or not… He should not have to shorten an event because of angry protesters.

I will defend anyone’s right to protest. Not screaming protesters preventing a speech they don’t want to hear, not things being thrown at speakers, and not disrupting a planned event and making the event impossible to run. Unless the person speaking is spouting hate, we need tolerance. The only thing that should be disrupted is hate speech and intolerance. That’s it. That’s all.

We undermine our own freedoms when we prevent people with different views from speaking. We don’t have to give them a platform ourselves. We do have to recognize their rights and freedoms to think differently than us. Don’t like the the Prime Minister? Then be active in the next election. Do research and speak from a knowledgeable place about his policies you dislike and promote another candidate. Share your opinion, dedicate your time, and change things in the next (free) election. But don’t heckle, scream, and disrupt that person’s planned event. Want to hold up signs and protest, go ahead. Want to share your opposing opinion on social media? Go ahead. But don’t be a jerk and prevent a planned event from happening… save that for groups with names like Hitler Loving Nazis. If that’s a hate group giving a talk, the paradox of tolerance comes into play, and by all means disrupt and prevent that hate speech from happening. Anything less than that, then preserving free speech is far more important than anything you have to say in a disruptive protest.

6 weeks later

I said this in a post, ‘If or When?‘ six weeks and 2 days ago, with respect to Omicron and coronavirus:

I’m afraid my crystal ball gazing conjures no clear images of what’s to come in the short term. What’s my best guess? Businesses and maybe even schools closing from staffing shortages; Tougher restrictions in public (indoor) spaces; and a lot of people self-or-family isolating.

What’s my hope? Less and less hospitalization with more and more mild cases that look like a ‘regular’ flu.

We didn’t have any full school closures in our district but 2 weeks after this post we had a 3-day period where many schools were short staffed and support teachers, and vice principals, were reallocated to help fill the needs. Tighter restrictions didn’t happen. And many people did get mild versions of Omicron although so few of them were tested, because of shortages of tests and long lineups, that I think the number of cases reported was probably underreported by a factor greater than 10.

Now, there are no issues with staffing, and there is an abundance of rapid tests available, and I think things are much better. The only big news here in Canada is a protest against mandates and vaccines that is being held in Ottawa, with smaller versions showing up in other major cities. I’m not going to link to any of the reports because I don’t believe they deserve the attention.

I find it sad how many people are misguided by these protests, and think they are somehow fighting for freedom by blockading people and making others less free? It’s sad how messages of hate and ignorance are part of this convoy. It’s ironic that when we are on the brink of restrictions being lifted, thanks to a vast majority of Canadians doing their part in slowing the pandemic by following the mandates and getting vaccinated, these unvaccinated, anti-mask protesters feel like they are somehow doing something to better the world they live in.

6 weeks after my original post I still haven’t had covid, but I’d say this has been as much about luck as any other reason. Many people around me have been equally as cautious as me and have contracted it. All these people have had versions that are mild, or at least not bad enough to go to the hospital. And I still wonder if for me it’s a question of if or when? But in this 6 weeks I’ve seen things getting much better. I wonder if mask restrictions will continue in schools after March Break? I wonder if there will be crowd restrictions at theatres and sports events, or if restaurants will still require vaccine passports?

Unless another contagious and more deadly strain start spreading, I think we might see a lot less restrictions in the coming months… But it won’t be because of this ‘freedom rally’ that’s happening. On the contrary, it will literally be despite them and their anti-community stance, not doing their part to help reduce the concerns and spread of coronavirus.

Sad irony

There is a truck convoy in Ottawa and thousands of people are protesting vaccine and mask mandates. I’ll be generous and say there are 10,000 people there protesting. That’s 0.026% of the population not 2.6%, not .26%, 0.026%. Double that if you consider people who wanted to join them, you are still just over 0.05% of the population.

This small but loud group has a right to peacefully protest, they don’t deserve so much attention. I have been bypassing the news about them in my feed, but I did see one thing that was really pathetic. One of the things some protesters did was to put signs on a Terry Fox statue. Terry Fox, a Canadian hero who:

A) Was immunocompromised and might have been an example of the kind of person who we are trying to protect with these restrictions, because he might have had a vaccine exemption.

B) Raised millions of dollars for medical research.

Wow. Talk about missing the point.

I hope the small unvaccinated population in Ottawa end their peaceful protest without harming anyone or damaging any property, and they don’t end up taking too much more of our attention.

And while I’m at it, thank you to everyone who understands that these (temporary) mandates and restrictions are to help protect our community, and for doing your part. You have my appreciation, and my attention.

Anti-Yellow Line

That’s it, I’m fed up! I’m sick and tired of rules limiting my freedom. The roads are public, the government shouldn’t be able to tell me which side to drive on.

It’s my car, my choice.

Prohibitive yellow lines are a symbol of tyranny.

I will not succumb to someone else’s fear.

It’s not about road safety, it’s about control.

When injustice becomes the law, resistance becomes a duty.

I’m not a sheep that you can keep in line.

Motor vehicle death statistics are exaggerated to scare you.

I should be able to drive as close to other cars as I want to.

Mandatory lanes are illegal. They limit my rights and freedoms.

Yellow lines are a symbol of false security.

—–

How ridiculous would it be if we didn’t obey the laws of the road that kept us from colliding with oncoming traffic?

How ridiculous would it be for us to ignore laws and norms designed to keep us, and those more vulnerable than us in our community, safe during a pandemic?