|
In The National Post, Joseph Brean interviews Barbara Hall, Chief Commissar of the Ontario "Human Rights" Commission. Commissar Hall is the lady who, after noting that she lacked jurisdiction over me, Maclean's and the excerpt it ran from America Alone, decided to pronounce us guilty anyway. She has no truck with any criticism of her actions: Sure, she may have denied me my constitutional right to the presumption of innocence and a fair trial, but so what? That's a small price to pay in the noble campaign to eradicate "hate" from the Canadian psyche.
The Post piece is a fascinating glimpse of the fetid waters in which these sharks swim: everything from the HRCs' pseudo-jurisprudence to the very language is designed to bolster the received wisdom against any dissent or doubt. I was struck by this passage:
It is the complaints that are not made that give her more concern.
"I would say that for a province as large and as diverse as Ontario, to have 2,500 formal complaints a year, that that's a very low level," the activist lawyer and former mayor of Toronto said. In the long term she would like to see human rights complaints decrease, but in the interim they "may have to spike."
Only 2,500 complaints a year? C'mon, you Ontario deadbeats, that's way too low. Can't you hate a little more? Or complain a little more? We got a nice cosy sinecure to justify here.
That's a very revealing turn of phrase, by the way - the assumption that a province as "diverse" as Ontario should automatically expect a higher level of "hate crimes", and thus (if I follow Commissar Hall's language) "hate" follows "diversity" as surely as night follows a sunny day. What if Ontarians just aren't as hateful as the Commissars require them to be? To modify Brecht, we need to elect a new people, if only to file more "human rights" complaints.
God Almighty, if we have to have ex-mayors of Toronto as anti-thought-crime enforcers, couldn't we at least have Mel Lastman?
|
