Is the Freedom Charter worthy of printed paper?


Commentary

Some of us are old enough to remember an era when freedom of speech was considered essential to maintaining functional democracy.

In democracies like Canada and the United States, all citizens, especially politicians and candidates for other leadership positions, have a say in cultural or political will conflicts, and others.

Throughout the history of our country, government censorship generally prevents the disclosure of sensitive military secrets or violates customary moral standards and is seriously literary, artistic, political, or scientific. It was limited to banning the publication of worthless pornographic material.

At schools, universities, and public forums, we once sought to investigate every aspect of civil issues. We thought it was unfair and counterproductive to collude with some to rule out the opinions of others.

As free citizens, we were free to make decisions. We really valued debate and taught the art of debate at school.

Temptation to censorship

Today, the trend towards freedom of expression seems to be reversed. Porn is ubiquitous and easily available to anyone of any age who has access to a computer or mobile phone.

Defenders of freedom of speech, press and academic freedom, on the other hand, are generally driven by civil discourse in the margins. This is especially true if the speaker is considered to be on the conservative side of the political spectrum.

In Canada, state media agencies set the tone for almost all network news and opinion programming, international newspapers dominate print media, and social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook act as censors for progressive policy makers. It works.

Canadian fame media often portray the very idea of ​​free speech and telling the complete truth as a far-right resident. Media outlets, who tend to take the position of conservative editorials, are portrayed as unnoticeable and often denied access to public figures and important political events.

More than ever, Canada’s Prestige media is flying on a single wing. The pinion on the right is dumped. You don’t need balance anymore. Craft is kept in the air by a powerful recentralized cultural engine backed by plenty of public funding, government regulatory benefits, and censorship trends.

Free debate and election campaign

In our current cultural straitjacket, there was little hope that freedom of speech and the spirit of free speech would regain momentum in the 2021 federal elections.

Last week, TVA, a media group with the ability to reach all households in the country, aired the first French leader’s debate on the campaign. The TVA’s designated “main party” leaders were Erin Outur (Conservative), Justin Trudeau (Liberal), Jagmatesin (NDP), Anamy Paul (Greens), and Bloc Québécois’ Eve Francois Blanche. In a state.

Almost all of the debate revolved around the ever-increasing role of government in the lives of ordinary Canadians.

The first half of the event focused on government policy related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Other issues raised throughout the evening, such as government childcare, dying medical assistance, gun control, and climate change, have been argued around almost completely progressive issues.

Trudeau presented himself as a national vaccine champion by imposing forced shots on civil servants and the traveling civilian.

As Canadians poured into the streets of the city against compulsory vaccination passports and blockages, Outur accepted an alternative “federal plan” for a quick inspection of Canadian travelers.

In a long-standing debate on the reintroduction of commercial health services in Canada, Trudeau noted that he blamed Otur’s past support for folk reintroduction options. Conservative leaders refused to take up the argument or give a direct answer when Trudeau pressured Outur to support the introduction of a so-called “two-layer” system in the country. bottom. Mr. Outur could only say that he wanted to see a more private “innovation” in healthcare, but he supports the system we have.

When it comes to climate change, the signature issue on the left, it was a business as usual. The imaginary environmental horrors associated with oil and gas development during the Harper era were triggered by the current conservative proposal to roll back carbon emission regulations in moderation. At the same time, Singh, the leader of the New Democratic Party of Socialism, said Canada has had the worst results in emissions of all G7 countries in recent years, and national climate change warrior Justin Trudeau has promised his environment. ..

No one was dare to challenge the orthodox progressive claim that “climate change” was the most important issue of our time.

Silence by omission

At the start of the 2021 campaign, the Leaders Debate Committee selected five political parties to participate in the official election debate. Not surprisingly, they were the Liberal Party of Trudeau, the Conservative Party of Outour, the New Democratic Party of Singh, Paul Greens, and Blanche Bloc Québécois.

The most notable candidate excluded was Maxime Bernier, a former Harper government minister. The People’s Party of Canada, recently formed by Bernier, is a devoted coalition of former Harper conservatives, liberals and populists, describing the principles of its founding as “freedom, responsibility, justice and respect.”

When you consider the PPC platform, you’ll be amazed at the elements deeply rooted in the classical liberal tradition and the populist elements that resemble the American MAGA movement. The PPC takes a clear and clear position on controversial issues such as freedom of speech, immigration, trade, supply control and national health care.

Bernier himself is an economist trained in the traditions of Adam Smith, Frederick Bastier and Friedrich Hayek. Like them, he believes that social prosperity is driven by creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation. It is only possible in societies with free markets and small government.

Open-minded citizens seeking informed voting may be well served by discussions that include Bernier’s views. However, according to the rules of the Leaders Debate Committee, at the start of the campaign, PPC fell below the 4 percent threshold of polls required to qualify for a place on stage.

In the middle of the campaign, PPC actually exceeded 4%, voting ahead of the Greens. But with the establishment of Woke Laurentian in Canada, “rules are rules.” This is especially true if you support the silence of a clear political opponent.

Nowadays, we tend to conclude that the Charter of Rights and Freedom, which seems to guarantee “freedom of expression,” is as valuable as printed paper.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

William Brooks

William Brooks is a Canadian writer who contributes to The Epoch Times in Halifax, Nova Scotia. He is currently the editor of “The Civil Conversation” at the Civitas Society in Canada.

Posted on