Today, unlike yesterday — when they were prevented from speaking — members of the Counterjihad Collective were able to get on the roster of speakers at the OSCE “Human Dimension” meeting in Warsaw. Below is the intervention prepared and read by Maj. (ret.) Stephen Coughlin, representing Unconstrained Analytics.
2019 Human Dimension Implementation Meeting
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Working Session No 14 (10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.)
Specifically Selected Topic: Hate Crime — Participating State’s Compliance
OSCE / ODIHR
24 September 2019
Thank you, madam moderator, ladies and gentlemen.
“Hate Crimes” needs a definition. Let me explain. At a formal OSCE Side Event in Warsaw in 2013, we got the drafters of the “Islamophobia” narrative to acknowledge that the term has no central definition.
In 2017, on the 20th Anniversary of Runnymede’s “Islamophobia — A Challenge for Us All,” Runnymede put out “Islamophobia — Still a Challenge for Us All” where, yet again, it was acknowledged that Islamophobia “still does not have an agreed, published definition” before offering its own definition, “Islamophobia is anti-Muslim racism,” which happens to be the same definition the Organization of Islamic Cooperation promulgated in 2005 when declaring it a “new form of racism.”
In September 2019, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change issued Designating Hate — New Policy Responses to Stop Hate Crimes that likewise designated Islamophobia a form of racism while also affirming that the term lacks for a definition — all the while seeking its aggressive criminalization. To no-one’s surprise, the Tony Blair report also acknowledges that Hate Crime has no definition.
At a June 2015 OSCE event in Vienna, at an official forum, we got an OSCE panel to admit that saying something known to be true can constitute hate speech — thus seeking the criminalization of speech.
As of May 2019, UN General Secretary António Guterres, in a speech on the “United Nations Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech” called for stepped-up action to prosecute Hate Speech even as the UN officially acknowledged that the term lacks definition.
It is not a coincidence that both Islamophobia and Hate Crimes converge on repurposed Neo-Marxist notions of racism to be arbitrated by unelected diplomats in international forums where the people are cut off from any meaningful participation. Masked in facially neutral language, the energy behind prosecuting these “known-to-lack-definition” attack narratives is chilling.
Of course, as we are constantly reminded, “we all know what it is.” And we do! It is the granting to the state the arbitrary authority to prosecute its citizens for any reason or no reason at all. We will have those definitions after it’s too late to stop the process. When that happens, we will have completed the transition from citizens to subjects.
Just consider all the aphorisms built around slogans calling for the suppression of those who “seek to divide us!” Stripped of their saccharine narratives, these phrases, in the guise of prosecuting hate speech and Islamophobia, would give the state the arbitrary power to criminalize the dissent of its citizens. This is the rhetoric of totalitarianism. It is the abuse of language leading to the abuse of power. In forums like this, we are left to ponder whether our delegates are gullible, cynical or both.
Unconstrained Analytics recommends that the OSCE and all participating States reconsider hate speech and Islamophobia. As they now stand, they are attack narratives designed to suppress free expression. Certainly, implementation should be suspended until articulable definitions are provided. Thank you!
For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.