In 1977 the  Canadian government created the Human Rights Commission to “to settle complaints of discrimination in employment and in the provision of services within federal jurisdiction” On its face, there’s not much to take issue with regarding HRC’s mandate:

The Commission works with employers, service providers, individuals, unions, governmental and non-governmental organizations, and provincial and territorial human rights bodies to foster understanding and commitment to achieving a society where human rights are respected in everyday practices.

Yet, according to Ori Rubin, who has published two parts of a three-part series titled The HRC on Trial over at the Western Standard:

If you do not like what someone has said or written, you file a complaint to intimidate them into silence. If your complaint is successful, the HRC will forcibly silence your victim and may potentially levy fines for the alleged offence. Even if you are unsuccessful, and the complaint is ultimately dismissed, you have generated bad press for the accused, and caused a loss in both time and money which he cannot recover, while losing little yourself.

The HRC is being invoked by more and more people and groups who, rather than engage in open and honest discussion, choose instead to use the force of government to curtail those proffering other stances.  Though created with good aims, like many government programs, the HRC has had exactly the opposite effect, allowing virtually anyone to be muzzled by the State.

On a more personal note, I became aware of the speech-chilling effects of the HRC when at the Liberty Summer Seminar last July, where comedian Guy Earle shared his story with those present.

For more on this, check out our F**k Censorship overview housed at Bureaucrash Social and our F**k Censorship t-shirt from our Contraband shop.