Canadian Convolutions > Elon Musk, Jordan Peterson alarmed at Trudeau's anti-free speech act

 

Two of the most intelligent men in the world are very concerned about the direction Trudeau's Online Harms Act will take Canada.

The act is designed to address issues that were never issues before the 21st century. Islamism, Drag Queens,  and transgenderism. It seems to be in defence of the godless, and there appears to be no place for the truth as a defence for the accused. 

Elon Musk Calls Online Harms Act an

‘Attack on the Rights of Canadians’

By Jennifer Cowan

5/8/2024

Updated:

5/8/2024

Elon Musk is once again speaking out against the proposed Online Harms Act, calling it an “attack” on free speech rights in Canada.

The billionaire owner of social media platform X called the proposed legislation “a terrible attack on the rights of Canadians to speak freely” in a May 7 post on X.

Mr. Musk waded into the issue in response to an article about the new changes being brought in with the proposed legislation, and in response to psychologist and author Jordan Peterson who also commented on the new bill.

Mr. Peterson, an outspoken free speech advocate, called the legislation “the most Orwellian piece of legislation ever promoted in the West.”

“Mr. Musk, it’s much much worse than you have been informed: plans to shackle Canadians electronically if accusers fear a ‘hate crime’ might (might) be committed,” Dr. Peterson said in a May 7 post.

Mr. Peterson has been outspoken on issues of free speech, including his opposition to the Liberal government’s Bill C-16, which added the protection of gender identity and expression to the Human Rights Code and Criminal Code.

Dr. Peterson’s Twitter account was temporarily suspended for his comments about transgender actor Elliot Page, but it was reinstated by Elon Musk after he purchased the social media platform in 2022.

Mr. Musk, who has said his purchase of Twitter was a $44 billion investment in free speech, has criticized the Online Harms Act on the platform in the past. He called certain measures of the legislation “insane” in a March 12 post in response to an article posted on X.

Entitled “Canadian law would allow judges to hand down life sentences for ’speech crimes’ (no, this isn’t a joke),” the article was posted by Not The Bee, a self-described news and entertainment website with actual news “that seems like it should definitely be satire.”

Justice Minister Arif Virani responded to Mr. Musks comment about the bill’s proposed  life imprisonment sentence for hate propaganda posts.

“The article you shared is misleading. I’d be happy to discuss our legislation and how X can work with us to help keep kids safe and stop hatred,” Mr. Virani said in a March 12 post.

In what way is it misleading, Minister? Share it with all of us.

“It looks like you agree that we all have a responsibility to protect free expression by stopping the worst kinds of hate speech,” he added.

The post included text from the platform’s Help Center, with a section highlighted that said, “We recognize that if people experience abuse on X, it can jeopardize their ability to express themselves.”

Online Harms Act

Bill C-63, known as the Online Harms Act, was introduced by the Liberal government in February in a bid to reduce Canadians’ exposure to “harmful content” on the internet. The legislation is currently at second reading in the House of Commons.

Attorney General Arif Virani has said the Online Harms Act would bring a new level of security to online communities and increase protection against the often inappropriate content appearing on children’s screens.

Does that mean protection against Drag Queens, transgender enthusiasts, etc.?

Bill C-63 seeks to establish special protections for children and make online services like Facebook and YouTube “accountable for and transparent about how they are reducing exposure to harmful content.” Compliance is to be monitored by a five-member Digital Safety Commission.

All of whom will be members of the LGBTQ lobby, I am sure.

But besides protection for children, the bill also proposes a number of other changes on online regulation and criminal prosecution.

The bill paves the way for what some critics have called “future crime” provisions, where a judge could place certain restrictions on a defendant for up to a year if the court is satisfied that the individual may commit a future hate crime. Some of the restrictions include wearing an electronic bracelet and curfews. Defendants who refuse could be sentenced for up to one year in jail.

If the bill is passed, a new definition of “hatred” would be added to section 319 of the Criminal Code, which refers to the public incitement of hatred and the wilful promotion of hatred and anti-Semitism. Bill C-63 would also add a new standalone hate crime offence to the Criminal Code that would apply to existing offences.

The new bill would also amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, specifying that posting “hate speech” online counts as discrimination. The government has said this would apply to speech based on detestation or vilification centred on race, religion, sexual orientation, and other grounds.

Maximum punishments for hate propaganda offences in Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code would also be raised to life imprisonment from the current five years. The government has said the maximum penalty would reflect the seriousness of the offence, and emphasized that in all cases courts would have the flexibility to give proportional sentences.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has been critical of the proposed legislation and has urged the government to make several “substantial” amendments. The agency said it has concerns about loss of free speech as well as the vague wording the bill uses to define offences, such as “incitement to genocide” and “offence motivated by hatred.”

Chandra Philip contributed to this report.

========================================================================================