MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282008239 · doi:10.25071/1916-0925.40263

Civil Law Alternatives in the Fight Against Hate Speech: The Case Study of the Marcus Hyman Act

2022· article· en· W4282008239 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kenneth Grad

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Jewish Studies / Études juives canadiennes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLawPolitical scienceVictoryRacismHumanitiesHistoryCriminologySociologyPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The difficult question of how to hold hatemongers legally accountable has lately taken on greater urgency as hate speech has risen to disturbing levels. In the fight against harmful speech, Canada is heavily reliant on the criminal law. An alternative legal remedy might be provided through civil actions for group defamation. Such lawsuits are currently permitted only in Manitoba. The Manitoba legislation was enacted in the 1930s through the efforts of Jewish MLA Marcus Hyman as a means for combating the fascist Canadian Nationalist Party headed by William Whittaker. This article provides a history of the Marcus Hyman Act. The Hyman Act has been discussed in several works but none of these sources offers a comprehensive analysis of the legislation’s origins and history. This article fills this gap. While historians have suggested that the Hyman Act—and its subsequent invocation in a lawsuit against Whittaker brought by William Tobias—was inconsequential, in fact it represented an important victory against antisemitism in the 1930s. Although it has fallen into disuse, the legislation’s history indicates that it could provide a useful mechanism for countering racism in the present day.L’enjeu difficile concernant les moyens pour tenir les semeurs de haine légalement responsables a récemment pris une importance accrue, car les discours haineux ont atteint des niveaux inquiétants. Dans la lutte contre ces types de discours, le Canada s’appuie fortement sur le droit pénal. Un autre recours juridique pourrait être fourni par des actions civiles pour diffamation collective, de telles poursuites n’étant actuellement autorisées qu’au Manitoba. La législation manitobaine a été promulguée dans les années 1930 grâce aux efforts du député juif Marcus Hyman comme moyen de lutter contre le parti nationaliste canadien fasciste dirigé par William Whittaker. Cet article présente l’historique de la Loi Marcus Hyman. La loi Hyman a été abordée dans plusieurs ouvrages, mais aucune de ces sources ne propose une analyse complète des origines et de l’histoire de la législation. Cet article comble cette lacune. Alors que les historiens ont suggéré que la loi Hyman — et son invocation ultérieure dans un procès contre Whittaker intenté par William Tobias — était sans conséquence, elle a en fait représenté une victoire importante contre l’antisémitisme dans les années 1930. Bien qu’elle soit tombée en désuétude, l’histoire de cette législation indique qu’elle pourrait constituer un mécanisme utile pour contrer le racisme de nos jours.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Jewish Studies / Études juives canadiennesSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207