Alexander Tsesis the obscure legal scholar debunked yet again

Why is Canada’s Justice Dept. attempting to defend a dangerous & anti-democratic law such as Section 13 (1)? And why are they citing an obscure legal scholar named Alexander Tsesis as an “Expert” in their brief countering the Lemire Section 13 (1) Constitutional challenge? Is this how law is made in Canada? Our Justice Dept. finds one left wing crank who supports their untenable & publicly reviled position and falsley elevates him to the level of reknowned legal scholar based on a soundly debunked theory the guy tossed off after a Lawyers Guild bun fight?

Is Rob Nicholson home? Who is running Justice?

Stillman at sleepy old bear weighs in.

Hue & Cry Pt. ll

Today I’m going to have a look at some of the Attorney General’s argument resting on assertions from Dr. Tsesis, an American assistant professor of Law, advisor to Ted Kennedy and the Canadian government, and, in the words of Ezra Levant a “ left wing kook.” The following is taken from the Attorney General’s submission defending section 13 of the CHRA.

58. Dr. Tsesis has developed an extensive critique of Oliver Wendell Holmes’ notion of the “marketplace of ideas,” and reaches similar conclusions: Beyond the theoretical difficulties of Holmes’ marketplace of ideas it is simply untrue that the dissemination of vitriol defuses racism, sexism, or anti-Semitism. Experience disproves the notion that falsehood is always vanquished by truth. To the contrary, history teems with examples of times when lies, distortions, and propaganda empowered groups like the Nazis to repress speech and perpetrate mass persecutions … Even when both true and false beliefs are available, persons often cling to the false to retain power. In spite of the availability in the United States of literature against slavery, that institution did not end through rational discourse but through a bloody civil war.

The market place of ideas is not perfect. However, by allowing dangerous belief to be expressed openly it allows others to engage it early on and enforces its position as being radical. In the case that someone oversteps the bounds and incites the commission of a crime or acts on racist belief then it becomes a criminal matter and off to pokey goes the bad guy.

The rest.

Share