Philip Slayton - Nothing Left to Lose: An Impolite Report on the State of Freedom in Canada

ALSO BY PHILIP SLAYTON

Lawyers Gone Bad: Money, Sex and Madness in Canadas Legal Profession (2007)

Mighty Judgment: How the Supreme Court of Canada Runs Your Life (2011)

Bay Street: A Novel (2013)

Mayors Gone Bad (2015)

How To Be Good: The Struggle Between Law and Ethics (2017)

The Future of Tennis (2018)

For Rodger Beehler (19382006)

Sutherland House

416 Moore Ave., Suite 205

Toronto, ON M4G 1C9

Copyright 2020 by Philip Slayton

All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this book or

portions thereof in any form whatsoever. For information on rights and

permissions or to request a special discount for bulk purchases, please

contact Sutherland House at

Sutherland House and logo are registered

trademarks of The Sutherland House Inc.

First edition, March 2020

If you are interested in inviting one of our authors to a live event or

media appearance, please contact

and visit our website at sutherlandhousebooks.com for more

information about our authors and their schedules.

Manufactured in Canada

Cover designed by Lena Yang

Book composed by Karl Hunt

Cover photo courtesy of Getty Images

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication

Title: Nothing left to lose : an impolite report on

the state of freedom in Canada / by Philip Slayton.

Names: Slayton, Philip, author.

Description: Includes index.

Identifiers: Canadiana 20200156136 | ISBN 9781989555224 (hardcover)

Subjects: LCSH: Civil rightsCanada. | LCSH: CanadaPolitics and

government1945- | LCSH: CanadaCivilization1945- | LCSH: Liberty.

Classification: LCC JC599.C3 S53 2020 | DDC 323.0971dc23

ISBN 978-1-989555-22-4

A GOLDEN AGE

Ive lived in a golden age, in a golden place.

In 1954, when I was ten years old, my family immigrated to Canada. I have spent most of my life in this beautiful country, living in a democratic society, during a peaceful and prosperous time, a time marked, above all, by freedom. How lucky can you get?

But now, as my life enters its last phase, I am afraid. Things are changing, and changing fast. The golden age is coming to an end. Almost certainly, my children and grandchildren will not have the kind of life I have enjoyed. Freedom, which requires so many particular circumstances to flourish, and is essential to almost everything that is worthwhile, is in serious jeopardy, even in Canada, the most blessed of countries. We have lost much already. And time is running out. In this book I try to explain what has happened and why, before suggesting what we might do to salvage something before there is nothing left to lose.

A POINT OF VIEW

Everyone is a creature of their time, circumstances, and history. Everyone has a point of view that incorporates and expresses these constraints. Many strive to transcend their point of view, conscious of its limitations. They try to be objective. They try to understand other perspectives. They try to be balanced, fair, and respectful. They recognize that a majority point of view can become a minority point of view as history shifts. They know that what is regarded as legitimate and acceptable in one age can become illegitimate and unacceptable as societys thinking changes. They understand that paying attention to others, particularly to the pain that others experience, is part of leading a moral life. They try to understand other points of view because we have a moral obligation to try and be as intelligent and informed as possible.

The duty to understand other points of view, the requirement to be intelligent and informed, is supremely important in a highly diverse country such as Canada where there are many perspectives and where social peace and progress depend upon as much understanding and tolerance across groups as possible. But there are limits to what is attainable. No one can transcend their personal identity completely. No one can abandon their point of view without a trace. There should not be criticism of this failure. No one should be asked to apologize for being what they are.

It is sometimes said that a member of one group cannot understand and legitimately comment on the circumstances of another group. So, for example, it is said (by some) that men cannot understand and should not presume to comment on the predicaments of women, or that whites are not qualified to offer opinions on the affairs of those who have black skins. An anonymous academic reader of an earlier but similar version of this manuscript took exception to certain parts and particularly to Chapter Twelve on Indigenous People. The main criticism was that I failed to acknowledge points of view and ways of thinking that differ from my own and did not recognize and assess counter-arguments. The anonymous reader noted that the voices I cited lack diversity and are predominantly white, male, and mainstream authority figures. The chapter is bookended by white men., wrote the anonymous reader: There is no evidence in this manuscript that Mr. Slayton is speaking with indigenous peoplejust about them. And: The impression given of the authorial voice is one of a dominant culture man speaking to other dominant culture men.

I take the criticisms of this anonymous reader as urging a moral and intelligent approach to understanding the situation and point of view of others. I have tried to adopt that approach (and I have made some limited revisions based on these comments). The criticisms have some weight, although I think they are exaggerated and vague. But, to the extent the comments of the anonymous reader reject as inappropriate or illegitimate the authenticity and integrity of my own voice and my own point of viewthe view of an elderly, white, professionally educated, heterosexual maleI reject them.

RODGER BEEHLER

One day in 1963, when I was a student at the University of Manitoba, I attended a campus conference on a political subject. Someone in the audience tried to shout down a speaker who was expressing unpopular views. Another member of the audience, a student, leapt to his feet and gave an extemporaneous, eloquent, and impassioned defence of freedom of speech. I remember it as if it were yesterday. When the intervener sat down, the audience clapped enthusiastically, the heckler went silent, and the speaker with unpopular views carried on. The student intervener was Rodger Beehler, who became my lifelong friend. In later years, Rodger was a distinguished philosopher, finishing his career as chairman of the philosophy department at the University of Victoria. He died in 2006. I miss Rodger, and his passion for freedom. This book is dedicated to him.

Port Medway, Nova Scotia
October 2019

Is Canada free? Not entirely. Does it deserve recent international praise as a bastion of liberal democracy? To a limited extent only. Should Canadians lie smug and superior in their beds at night, confident in their virtue and freedom? No.

Our complacency is unfounded. There are many threats to our freedom. Some are structural. Some are procedural. Some are obvious. Others are insidious, cumulative, hard to spot, easy to ignore. And our natural deference to authority, a particularly Canadian attribute, multiplies the danger many fold.