The Liberals have introduced Bill C-9, their latest attempt to police so-called "hate speech." The mischief runs so deep, and through so many channels, that one hardly knows where to begin the excavation. Best, then, to return to first principles. For it is there, deep in the bedrock of our Canadian legal inheritance, that Bill C-9 reveals itself as a rupture with centuries of jurisprudential wisdom.

Bill C-9 creates a new definition of hatred as involving "detestation or vilification". Since when are emotions crimes? As for vilification — harsh or damaging speech — that has long been addressed by defamation law. One suspects the answer lies not in legal necessity but in a desire to regulate opinion under the guise of regulating harm.

For a millennium, the Common Law has held that malevolence must hitch itself to a prohibited act before the state may intervene. Words alone, however offensive, have not sufficed. The wisdom in this distinction becomes clear when we consider the fate of controversial speakers.

In 1968, Enoch Powell delivered his notorious "Rivers of Blood" speech. Reviled in Parliament and the press, dismissed from the Shadow Cabinet, condemned across the political spectrum — Powell nonetheless committed no crime under English law. His remarks were inflammatory, perhaps reckless, but they did not incite violence or direct harm. The social value of protecting free expression outweighed the offence he caused.

Could Powell speak today? Under Bill C-9, his speech would almost certainly constitute the "wilful promotion of hatred." No act would be needed. Words, transmitted through any medium, would suffice. The actus reus evaporates; the crime consists in the expression of a disfavoured thought.

Bill C-9 represents an attack on the very structure of the Common Law, that hard-won system designed to restrain arbitrary power. The Common Law has always recognized that criminal law is the state's harshest tool and must be used sparingly. It has understood that thoughts, however loathsome, are not crimes. It has insisted that the boundary between regulating conduct and policing belief must be zealously guarded.

When the state criminalizes thoughts rather than deeds — when prosecutors may infer criminality from mere expression — we abandon the principles that have protected liberty since Magna Carta. We trade the sturdy protections of actus reus and mens rea for the soft authoritarianism of enforced social harmony.

With the bills Carney has passed or will pass, Canada will be a de facto police state by this time next year.

Conman Carney is plundering Canada while he becomes a dictator.

Conman Carney was honest for a change.

Conman Carney wants to turn Canada into a police state just like Starmer does in Britain.

SHOCKING (NOT): CANADA DROPPED OUT OF THE TOP 10 FREEST COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD — AND IT KEEPS GETTING WORSE UNDER THE LIBERALS 🚨
Wake up Canadians. The latest Human Freedom Index just came out from the Fraser Institute and the Cato Institute, this isn't some opinion piece, it's hard data from 87 indicators covering everything from rule of law, security, freedom of speech, assembly, religion, movement, low taxes, fewer regulations, and the right to trade freely.

Canada under the Liberals? We can't even crack the top 10 anymore.
Back when Stephen Harper and the Conservatives were in charge, Canada was consistently in the top 10, sometimes as high as 6th. We were one of the freest nations on Earth, where people could make their own personal and economic choices without Big Government breathing down their necks.
But since the Liberals took over? We've been slipping year after year.

Matthew D. Mitchell, senior fellow at the Fraser Institute and co-author of the report, said it straight: "Governments around the world have recently been restricting freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly, freedom of movement, and the freedom to use sound money, and the impact is alarming."

Sound familiar? Think about frozen bank accounts during the Freedom Convoy, endless regulations choking small businesses, skyrocketing taxes, online censorship bills, and politicians telling us what we can say or how we can protest.

Let that sink in.

Meanwhile, freer countries mean wealthier, healthier, happier people with less corruption and more opportunity.

Ask yourself:
- Why has Canada fallen out of the top 10 under the Liberals?
- Why are they restricting speech, assembly, and economic choices when the data shows freedom makes life better?
- When did putting more government control over Canadians become the priority instead of letting us thrive?

This isn't about left or right, it's about freedom. The same freedom our grandparents fought for.

This should piss you off like it does me.

Jo Jo and I are appalled by what Mark Carney's Liberals have been trying to control what you can see and say.

C-11 gives the Liberals sweeping censorship powers over what Canadians can see and say online.
C-18 blocks news from social media, silencing independent voices and limiting what Canadians are allowed to read.
C-9 would punish Canadians for quoting scriptures the government considers politically incorrect.
This does not belong in a free country. In fact, just look how Canadians reacted when Global Affairs Canada tweeted about censorship by foreign regimes: