Free Speech - Tea Time With Barry Ep 6

Beat the censors, sign-up for our newsletter: https://firstfreedoms.ca/call_to_action_pages/stay_informed/

In this episode Barry shares his view that freedom of speech is the freedom to think. If we cannot speak because of some state dictate or societal prohibition we are not free. Free speech is the cornerstone of our freedoms and lies at the root of a free and democratic society.

The lessons learned take us back millennia to the time of ancient Rome and flows up to our age. Examples abound of those in power wanting to control our thoughts and therefore our speech. The attempt to control speech online is the latest frontier in the battle over ideas as was exhibited in the Canadian Liberal Government’s Online Harms Act, thankfully it has died with the proroguing of Parliament.

Yet the threat remains as was recently exhibited in the case of Nigel Biggar being denied the opportunity to give his address at Regent College, Vancouver, BC, about colonialism. The cancellation of his speaking engagement is related to public backlash and protests concerning his views on colonialism and how they intersect with broader discussions about race, history, and truth.

Nigel Biggar, a theologian and ethicist, argues for a nuanced understanding of the impact of colonialism, suggesting that while it had harmful effects, there were also positive outcomes. This perspective has sparked significant debate and criticism from those who argue that it downplays the lasting negative impacts of colonialism, particularly on Indigenous peoples.

Protests from various groups, including students, academics, and Indigenous activists, who opposed Biggar’s views on colonialism and expressed concern over giving a platform to what they perceive as harmful rhetoric. Protests often focus on concerns about promoting ideas that could perpetuate colonial narratives and marginalize the voices of Indigenous communities.

In light of the backlash and potential disruptions, Regent College decided to cancel Biggar’s appearance. The college's decision reflects its consideration of the community's concerns and the desire to maintain a respectful and inclusive environment for all its constituents.

This situation highlights the ongoing tensions between free speech and the responsibility of institutions to address the impact of controversial views. It raises questions about who gets to speak, the implications of their messages, and how academic and religious institutions navigate these challenges.