Breadcrumb Trail Links
Readers weigh in on Jordan Peterson's free-speech battle, South Africa's allegations against Israel, and 'three Cs' for the classroom
Published Jan 21, 2024 Last updated 5days ago 6 minute read
Re: Bureaucrats will rue the day they tried to shut me up Jordan Peterson, Jan. 17
Article content
As Jordan Peterson points out, unlike the U.S. Constitution, our Charter of Rights isnt worth the paper its printed on as far as protecting rights to property, mobility and speech, especially if professional associations are give the green light to ignore it.
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Article content
Even with his considerable resources, Peterson has a tougher row to hoe than Elon Musk confronting DEI ideology with threats of embarrassing bureaucrats whose demonstrable immunity to embarrassment has now been reinforced by the courts.
Likely they will not rue anything. Instead they will revel in their empowerment to flaunt the charter. Godspeed Jordan!
Kope Inokai, Toronto
In the case of Jordan Peterson, the Divisional Court did its job. Its decision left Dr. Peterson bludgeoned and bleeding, lying prostrate. And, when he reached up to a higher court for help (justice), he was slapped down again. The Chief Justice of the Court, and the panel of justices who penned both decisions, achieved their pre-determined purpose a complete public humiliation of Jordan Peterson.
Take heart, Jordan, you are good man and a great citizen with the fullness of valour and integrity which your judicial masters completely lack.
Michael A. Menear, London, Ont.
While I generally concur with Professor Petersons points of view on the state of free speech in Canada and the overreach of his professional organization, I believe that his repeated public rants will be increasingly seen as counterproductive and eventually self-defeating. I suggest that his best course of action would be to move on, and decamp to the U.S.A. or elsewhere.
Platformed
This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Article content
Advertisement 3
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Morton Doran, Fairmont, B.C.
First they came for the psychologists, but I wasnt a psychologist, so I did nothing. Next they came for the We know how this story ends.
Wasyl Wysoczanskyj, Etobicoke, Ont.
Re: The Davos men can still sometimes come up with a pleasant surprise John Ivison, Jan. 17
John Ivisons rosy view on the merits of the Davos conferences was neatly juxtaposed against Sabrina Maddeauxs lost generation column and Jesse Klines piece on the idiocy (and dangers) of blind faith in the net-zero objective.
Ivison may scoff at conspiracy theories but I would prefer it if all of those elites would get their heads out of the clouds, cut the (private jet-fuelled) virtue signalling, and focus on solutions that improve the lives of real people. Failing to do so should result in the conference being re-named Net Nero because those folks are fiddling while the rest of the world is burning.
Jeff Barker, Mississauga, Ont.
Re: What the UN court case against Israel means for Canada Christopher Nardi, Jan. 17; and Gaza death toll is not even close to those of actual genocides Rahim Mohamed, Jan. 15
Advertisement 4
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
It would be as bold for the International Court of Justice to declare it has no jurisdiction in the litigation opposing South Africa and Israel, thereby terminating the lawsuit, as it would be for it to use its provisional measures jurisdiction to order a ceasefire.
The international legal order, in my view, would best be served if the court issued interim orders for humanitarian relief, targeting Israel where feasible without compromising its rights of self-defence. Regrettably, no orders could lie against Hamas, because it has no standing before the court. But, if South Africa had the interests of Palestinians in Gaza at heart, it would intervene by appealing to the Hamas leadership to act in a way that has the best interests of the suffering civilians at heart.
Of course, its more interesting to South Africa to parlay its notorious antisemitism into a legal proceeding of dubious value, playing the genocide card. Trying to make Israel look bad is more politically attractive than doing good.
Howard Greenfield, Montreal
Both the low-tech genocide in Rwanda and the high-tech (for the day) genocide of the Holocaust share horrors beyond the pale, though the massacre of as many as 800,000 Rwandans occurred over some 100 days of absolute unimaginable frenzy, while the Holocaust slaughter of six million Jews was a years-long studied enterprise.
Advertisement 5
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
The Genocide Convention of 1948 was adopted on the heels of the Holocaust, which was a mind-boggling methodical attempt to find and eradicate each and every living Jew. That the Nazis continued their macabre efforts, even upon facing defeat, is almost incomprehensible.
As for Hamas attempting to eradicate Israel, their theology goes far beyond that. Much like the Nazis, their unbridled hatred of Jews not just Zionists knows no bounds. Given the opportunity, they would commit genocide as the term was first formulated.
Eli Honig, Toronto
Recommended from Editorial
Letters: B.C. pushing addiction rather than treatment
Letters: Politicians, police are failing the Jewish community
Re: Toronto school boards N-word ban targets white authors like Steinbeck, Twain Joseph Brean, Jan. 10
As an English teacher and English teacher-educator (now retired), I was appalled by the decision taken by the Toronto District Catholic School Board to remove all books containing the N word from its curricula.
In my experience, the problem is not with the books it is with how the books are taught. Educators need to consider the three Cs: curriculum, communication, and context, when making curriculum decisions.
Advertisement 6
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Under curriculum, they should consider among other things whether the book is truly age-appropriate. Too often I have seen books whose content is decidedly adult, placed on courses for Grades 9 and 10 for no other reason that the language is simple or in the case of To Kill A Mockingbird, it is told from the point of view of a young girl. The course should also include other books that can counter the victim-narrative which we find all too often.
Under communication, educators need to determine what could be deemed offensive in a text, then decide whether the text has merit and should be taught, and why. This information should be shared with students and parents. Open dialogue is crucial.
And finally, books must be taught within their historical context so that students understand why and how certain acts occurred. If necessary, partner with a history teacher to ensure students see the full picture. Teaching a book out of context can lead to hurt and offence.
Too often, as an English teacher-educator, I was presented with courses of study that were genre-based, rather than theme-based. Organizing a course or a unit around a theme such as Black People in North America, would make far more sense than teaching To Kill A Mockingbird on its own as the course novel with no context.
Advertisement 7
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
E. Joan OCallaghan, Toronto
Is it not interesting that while we are now banning classic literature from our schools, e.g. Of Mice and Men, Huckleberry Finn, To Kill a Mockingbird etc., it is now apparently perfectly legal to be antisemitic and violently so for example threatening to put someone six feet deep, stopping traffic on a public bridge, and damaging Jewish-owned premises?
What is the future of this once wonderful country to which so many of us immigrated for peaceful coexistence?
Bill Gruenthal, Burnaby, B.C.
National Post and Financial Post welcome letters to the editor (150 words or fewer). Please include your name, address and daytime phone number. Email letters@nationalpost.com. Letters may be edited for length or clarity.
Article content
Share this article in your social network
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Continued here:
Letters: 'Take heart, Jordan Peterson, you are a good man' - National Post