We should all be concerned with the ever-increasing examples of extremism and polarization of people against others who don’t agree with their views.
In the latest example published in the Gazette on Nov. 3, the ‘organizing team’ of an anti-racism public meeting, organized by an NDP MLA, removed some people who wanted to attend not because of their actions, but because of the belief that these people had links to a ‘far-right’ group.
After reading the story, I had to wonder, were the organizers afraid that these people’s perceived beliefs would somehow ‘rub off’ on other attendees just by their being in attendance?
It seems to me this was yet another example of a missed opportunity to enlighten and possibly persuade others into their way of thinking by words – not violence. The organizers could have had the morally superior position of, “... although we do not agree with some of your philosophies, we appreciate your coming to listen and possibly support us.”
Instead, the only thing this story showed me was that the terms “bigot” and “extremism” are not solely within the purview of the "far-right."
Sadly, we have come a long way from the words of a wise man in the past, who stated, “Sir, I disagree with what you are saying but will defend your right to say it.”
It seems society’s new version would be something closer to, “Sir, if I disagree with what you believe, I will not defend your right to say it, but instead will publicly label you as racist, bigoted, Islamaphobic, sexist, politically incorrect, and so on, depending on the topic.”
Wow, what a journey!
Randy Kish, St. Albert
