I think concluding “illegal to even study or question history” is a big stretch, but the Canadian government has been criticized widely for plans introduced las

I think concluding “illegal to even study or question history” is a big stretch, but the Canadian government has been criticized widely for plans introduced last year that seem problematic [0]. A key quote: > The amendment would "prohibit the communication of statements, other than in private conversation, that willfully promote antisemitism by condoning, denying or downplaying the Holocaust." This is widely believed to be unconstitutional in Canada, and it’s not hard to imagine the chilling effect, e.g. is asking an honest question in class considered “private”? I suspect not. Is a question about 4-5 vs 6 million considered “downplaying”? I don’t think most reasonable people would think so, but I don’t think it’s reasonable people we should worry about. I think many will argue that asking questions and promoting holocaust denial are very different things, and I think they are, but the lines are very blurry. It’s increasingly popular on social media to immediately label people as the most extreme version of “other/out” for any form of behavior that doesn’t demonstrate complete commitment to the in group. An ambiguous law about holocaust denial implemented under the current social climate seems like a recipe for disaster. I think holocaust denial and antisemitism are abhorrent, obviously. But it is this fact that seems to empower legislation that threatens freedoms. Various online safety bills seem to belong in a similar category. - [0] https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6446671 https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6446671