Canada's Free Speech Problem

Almost any opinion can be voiced at U.S. colleges these days – but not in Canada. A speech by American conservative writer and broadcaster Ann Coulter was cancelled at the University of Ottawa, after organizers feared for her safety.

The day after a Toronto Sun editorial bemoaned what it called Canada’s “milquetoast caricatures of leadership” by being “mired in centrist (politics), ” a speech by American conservative writer and broadcaster Ann Coulter was cancelled at the University of Ottawa.

The reason: Intimidation.  Organizers feared for her safety.

Francois Houle, the university’s academic and provost sent her a letter warning that if she were not careful, her words could result in criminal charges for inciting hate.

Ms. Coulter noted that in the U.S. she has spoken at 100 to 200 colleges without incident. She sees herself as a “victim of a hate crime,” even before she spoke. And she’ll gleefully make mileage on this on U.S. talk-radio.

The scenario hardly substantiates the Sun’s bylined editorial view that Canada is too wishy-washy to stand on “principle,” led as we are by politicians seemingly unable “to overcome obstructionism and cynicism.” We are told one to emulate is U.S. President Barack Obama,  -- “a leader with courage” whose healthcare legislation invoked a “racial slur” against a leading black congressman.

“Canadian political discourse doesn’t get so vile,” declared the Sun.

Maybe our politicians are more restrained than a thousand demonstrators against Ann Coulter at the University of Ottawa. It’s mindful of the 1960s, when free speech supporting the Vietnam War was verboten at many North American colleges.

Almost any opinion can be voiced at U.S. colleges these days – but not in Canada. The government prevented British MP George Galloway from entering Canada last year – ostensibly because he was a financial supporter of the terrorist group Hamas, not because he’s pro-Palestinian and hostile to Israel. Hmm.

Ann Coulter feeds on publicity, and is outspokenly conservative in a way that makes some conservatives cringe. She’s also something of a humorist. But to suggest . . . nay, to insist . . . that she preaches “hate,” is absurd.

What she (and others) really find offensive are  human rights commissars who in Canada increasingly have power to decide what words, ideas and views are acceptable and “free,” and what is hateful and forbidden – witness recent celebrated cases against Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn.

As National Post writer Lorne Gunter notes, human rights bodies “protect only those individuals who are members of groups currently in favor . . . such as gays, feminists Muslims, francophones and immigrants.” Relegated to the back of the bus are “men, Christians, Jews, English-speakers, those of European descent.”

Being cancelled at the University of Ottawa because of fears for safety, plays into Ann  Coulter’s hands. As reflected by Mr. Houle, why are we so fearful of free speech? So politically correct, so uneasy that Canadians are incapable of thinking for themselves and must be guided, protected, controlled? And punished if we deviate?

Ann Coulter is no threat. Nor is George Galloway, Black Panther Bobby Seal, anti-Muslim Dutch radical Geert Wilders.

So why do we pander to those who disrupt and stamp on free expression?

Instead of scolding Canadians for being  “centrist” in politics, it’d be more useful if the Sun editorially advocated more tolerance for views that some find offensive, but which do not incite violence.

Meanwhile, by defying the wishes of the majority of Americans and resisting bi-partisan support in healthcare reform, President Obama may be “courageous” but also may wreak havoc in his country. We shall see . . .