Warman wins another one: Man wins rights case against B.C. neo-Nazi (HT Catfur)
This must be getting really demoralizing for the Nazis: Warman's tenth victory! Makes me feel safe to walk the streets of Coquitlam. Come to think of it, I never really worried about Coquitlam (and no, not even PoCo). Frankly, there are only two kinds of places in Canada where I would fear being outed as an Israel- and America-loving half-Jew interested in the free marketplace.
But will the left be held to account for their common antisemitism, something inherent in the Marxist and/or politically-correct, equalitarian, victimary world view, if not always consciously so? Maybe not as long as they have Warmans to believe in.
Warman has received a lot of criticism for making money from going after marginal hate mongers in this country; many of us see it as a legalized form of shake down. I don't know if anyone knows what Warman has done with most of the money he has received via CHRC complaints. But now comes news that Warman may be aware how this all looks, as he is giving away his latest award, only a thousand dollars this time:
Perhaps this murder really touched Warman's conscience. Still, it's one thing to give your own material support to the children of a murder victim. It's somewhat different to make a public act of donating money rung out of "neo-Nazis" to the child victims of an unsolved murder of an aboriginal woman. It's basically saying that she was killed by a racist or a racism that is pretty much the same as that you are fighting when you go after Stormfront losers. A cynic might say it's even a way of using a murder victim to counter the storm of bad publicity you, and the whole "human rights" system, have recently been receiving.
The larger point is that Warman and the CHRC seem to insist we see our world in terms of a certain victimary religion, one that erodes all kinds of (for me, but potentially for others) meaningful distinctions and puts those of us with a taste for certain Jewish intellectual predilections more in fear of the "human rights" hate police than of marginal figures in Coquitlam.
What could I possibly mean? Well, let's just say, hypothetically, that if one wanted to put forward the argument that speech policing through the Canadian Human Rights Commission is actual Nazi-like, i.e. state-sanctioned surveillance and coercive, behaviour, while Stormfront is home to a hatred that is not going anywhere in today's Canada, would one open oneself to defamation law suits (from those one labeled Nazis) and social and professional ostracism at the workforce (say one worked in a university or as part of a trade union like CUPE Ontario, or the Canadian Postal Workers)? And which side would one have to worry about? Warman's supporters, or Stormfront's?
Furthermore, if I were to point out that the racism which led the Nazis to kill my Jewish ancestors is not the same kind of racism that may have led someone to kill an aboriginal prostitute - notwithstanding that a racist may well hate both Jews and aboriginals - could I open myself to accusations of making invidious distinctions - even though for me the difference between Judeophobia and hatred of that deemed primitive points to something of significant anthropological and historical importance in understanding what resentment is, how it works, and how it might be mediated - distinctions that may well be deemed hateful by those enamored of a victimary religion where everyone today has an unquestioned right to see most any form of discrimination in terms of the Holocaust (the Holocaust being widely deemed the potential logical outcome of any racism, and every victim of racism deemed the equivalent of the Jews, totally innocent when massed together, stripped of any individual identity and story, and butchered) so that, e.g., even the Israeli Defense Force must become the new Nazis, in the logic of someone like Mohammed Elmasry or many a university professor/union leader?
If the answer to the latter question is yes, that's just more proof for the argument that it is the hate police who are the real neo-Nazis. It is really rage at the supposedly invidious distinction that is at the root of the Nazi, in my humble opinion.
This must be getting really demoralizing for the Nazis: Warman's tenth victory! Makes me feel safe to walk the streets of Coquitlam. Come to think of it, I never really worried about Coquitlam (and no, not even PoCo). Frankly, there are only two kinds of places in Canada where I would fear being outed as an Israel- and America-loving half-Jew interested in the free marketplace.
But will the left be held to account for their common antisemitism, something inherent in the Marxist and/or politically-correct, equalitarian, victimary world view, if not always consciously so? Maybe not as long as they have Warmans to believe in.
Warman has received a lot of criticism for making money from going after marginal hate mongers in this country; many of us see it as a legalized form of shake down. I don't know if anyone knows what Warman has done with most of the money he has received via CHRC complaints. But now comes news that Warman may be aware how this all looks, as he is giving away his latest award, only a thousand dollars this time:
Warman will donate most of the settlement money to a memorial education fund for the children of Kelly Morrisseau, an aboriginal woman whose 2006 murder in Gatineau Park, north of Ottawa, remains unsolved. The rest will go to the Canadian Anti-racism and Education Society.I've never heard of Kelly Morrisseau before. A quick Google suggests she was a beautiful young aboriginal woman, working as a prostitute in Ottawa, who was found naked and pregnant, murdered. As the linked article above notes, the murder remains unsolved.
Perhaps this murder really touched Warman's conscience. Still, it's one thing to give your own material support to the children of a murder victim. It's somewhat different to make a public act of donating money rung out of "neo-Nazis" to the child victims of an unsolved murder of an aboriginal woman. It's basically saying that she was killed by a racist or a racism that is pretty much the same as that you are fighting when you go after Stormfront losers. A cynic might say it's even a way of using a murder victim to counter the storm of bad publicity you, and the whole "human rights" system, have recently been receiving.
The larger point is that Warman and the CHRC seem to insist we see our world in terms of a certain victimary religion, one that erodes all kinds of (for me, but potentially for others) meaningful distinctions and puts those of us with a taste for certain Jewish intellectual predilections more in fear of the "human rights" hate police than of marginal figures in Coquitlam.
What could I possibly mean? Well, let's just say, hypothetically, that if one wanted to put forward the argument that speech policing through the Canadian Human Rights Commission is actual Nazi-like, i.e. state-sanctioned surveillance and coercive, behaviour, while Stormfront is home to a hatred that is not going anywhere in today's Canada, would one open oneself to defamation law suits (from those one labeled Nazis) and social and professional ostracism at the workforce (say one worked in a university or as part of a trade union like CUPE Ontario, or the Canadian Postal Workers)? And which side would one have to worry about? Warman's supporters, or Stormfront's?
Furthermore, if I were to point out that the racism which led the Nazis to kill my Jewish ancestors is not the same kind of racism that may have led someone to kill an aboriginal prostitute - notwithstanding that a racist may well hate both Jews and aboriginals - could I open myself to accusations of making invidious distinctions - even though for me the difference between Judeophobia and hatred of that deemed primitive points to something of significant anthropological and historical importance in understanding what resentment is, how it works, and how it might be mediated - distinctions that may well be deemed hateful by those enamored of a victimary religion where everyone today has an unquestioned right to see most any form of discrimination in terms of the Holocaust (the Holocaust being widely deemed the potential logical outcome of any racism, and every victim of racism deemed the equivalent of the Jews, totally innocent when massed together, stripped of any individual identity and story, and butchered) so that, e.g., even the Israeli Defense Force must become the new Nazis, in the logic of someone like Mohammed Elmasry or many a university professor/union leader?
If the answer to the latter question is yes, that's just more proof for the argument that it is the hate police who are the real neo-Nazis. It is really rage at the supposedly invidious distinction that is at the root of the Nazi, in my humble opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment