Just imagine waiting at an office for an appointment and having nothing to do. You decide to pick up and read a magazine while you patiently wait. To your amazement, the magazine begins declaring very shocking allegations such as, ‘God hates fags!’, ‘Muslims are terrorists’, ‘Women belong in the kitchen’, and so much more. Would this language offend you? In addition, how would you feel? A similar scenario was presented when a group of Muslim petitioners commenced protesting the Canadian magazine giant, Maclean’s, as well as a particular column written by famous author, Mark Steyn, due to the Islamophobic rhetoric within (The Agenda with Steve Paikin). Furthermore, both parties by coincidence were being interviewed by Steve Paiken on TVO’s,
…show more content…
In the case of Maclean’s situation, John Mill would argue that the state does not have the right to intervene amongst the actions of either Mr. Steyn or Maclean’s due to the fact that neither of them had harmed anyone. In view of liberty, Mill had created a concept called, ‘The Harm Principle”, in order to outline the circumstances and limits of possessing liberty as well as use of power and is illustrated as …show more content…
A simple example of the tyranny of the majority is an article studied in tutorial for Political Science 1AA3. The article outlined how several universities across Canada were protesting abortion and how sensitive the subject was to students. The University of Waterloo also went as far to banning the protests . One thing this assignment showed was how the majority of people are able to manipulate the minority, but this does not make it justified. To connect this point of tyranny of the majority to Canada, observe the outcome of the Maclean’s case. Mark Steyn had been proven innocent and that he stayed within his freedoms of speech to do so (CTV News). As a society we have to understand that all sides of an argument must be taken into consideration as well as understanding that humans naturally get
In the case of Maclean’s situation, John Mill would argue that the state does not have the right to intervene amongst the actions of either Mr. Steyn or Maclean’s due to the fact that neither of them had harmed anyone. In view of liberty, Mill had created a concept called, ‘The Harm Principle”, in order to outline the circumstances and limits of possessing liberty as well as use of power and is illustrated as …show more content…
A simple example of the tyranny of the majority is an article studied in tutorial for Political Science 1AA3. The article outlined how several universities across Canada were protesting abortion and how sensitive the subject was to students. The University of Waterloo also went as far to banning the protests . One thing this assignment showed was how the majority of people are able to manipulate the minority, but this does not make it justified. To connect this point of tyranny of the majority to Canada, observe the outcome of the Maclean’s case. Mark Steyn had been proven innocent and that he stayed within his freedoms of speech to do so (CTV News). As a society we have to understand that all sides of an argument must be taken into consideration as well as understanding that humans naturally get