Canada and Quebec constantly boast of being great defenders of freedom of speech and thought. It is indeed true that we enjoy a great deal of freedom in this regard. If it were not the case, I could potentially be arrested and interrogated just for writing this text that criticizes our ability to say and show our opinions, our struggles, or simply the truth.

Our neighbors to the south are seeing their freedom of expression diminish year after year. The far-right is often blamed for this. I won’t say whether I agree or disagree with this, as it’s not the subject of this text. Instead, I want to talk about “our place.” I’ll lay my cards on the table immediately, even if it’s already clear to those who read me regularly: I am left-leaning. Some say I’m very left-leaning on the political spectrum.

This introduction aims to lead you to a subject that is starting to particularly bother me. In Canada (and Quebec), in the cinematic world (I’ll let experts in other fields speak for their respective universes), we’re seeing more and more films whose release is postponed to avoid hurting the feelings of certain people, or screenings cancelled because, again, certain people don’t like what is said or where the funding comes from. Not to mention film distributors and promotion agents who try to change the content of texts and reviews.

Toronto and Montreal Allow Censorship of Works 

Yes, we can say what we want in Canada. But when it comes time to screen a film at a festival, it seems that cancellation (not to say censorship) is gaining value in cinematic circles.

Earlier this fall, we learned of the cancellation of screenings of the documentary “Russians at War” at the TIFF. The documentary by Canadian-Russian director Anastasia Trofimova aims to show the daily life of Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine. The reason for the cancellation? Some people said the film had funding from Russia. I’m one of those who side with Ukraine and believe Russia should face its crimes. But cancelling the screening of a movie because it “hurts some people” who disagree with what is shown or because of the source of the money, that shouldn’t happen. A film, even a documentary, represents a point of view, that of the person who made it. Is it by banning different points of view that we will advance social justice or equality? If we want to convince people to change their minds, we still need to show them that their opinion also has value, right?

Recently, there was also the presence of a male misogynist on TLMEP, which made defenders of gender equality howl. But if we pretend these men don’t exist, we contribute to the indoctrination of those who don’t think in a progressive way. Ah yes, there we have it. Has the good left become even more prone to excluding the “others”? I’m just asking the question. But I’d really like to hear your opinions on this.

This brings us to what prompted me to write this opinion piece.

Danae Elon’s Rule of Stone Removed from RIDM 

I would have liked to speak to the director, but I wasn’t allowed to. In fact, I was suggested to wait and that it wasn’t the right time. So I’m taking this opportunity to extend an invitation to Danae Elon. I will therefore have to rely solely on what comes from official messages. First, I have a lot of difficulty believing the people involved when they write that the director decided to withdraw her film. To me, it sounds a bit like when I’m told that 90% of Russians voted for Putin. It’s not really a choice. But obviously, this is just an impression, since I haven’t been able to speak to the person concerned and my questions haven’t been answered.

RIDM requested the withdrawal of the film because it allegedly received funding from Israel. I quote RIDM: “the absence of certain information relating to some sources of Israeli funding received during the development stage of the film project limited our ability to collaborate transparently with important partners, including members of the community actively supporting the Palestinian people.”

So, this film and its director, who has been vigorously criticizing Israel for over a decade, are being cancelled because there was allegedly money from Israel, which is heavily criticized in the film. Thus, people who defend the Palestinian cause are having a film that defends them cancelled because a few dollars come from Israel. Honestly, even if the film presented Israel in its best light, how do ideological groups have the right to censor an artist who offers their point of view through a film?

Personally, I’ve seen almost all of Danae Elon’s films, and she always offers a realistic and disturbing vision of what’s happening in that part of the world. By removing her movie (which I wasn’t even allowed to see), we are contributing to the promotion of censorship. And if we want people with opposing opinions to eventually get along, maybe we should start by accepting to let them speak. But what’s craziest here is that those who are making the film disappear seem to be the ones the film is defending. Bravo!

And Me in All This 

Since we’re in the age of me-myself-and-I, I’ll end by talking about myself. This cancellation story, coupled with the strong demands I had to change words in one of my article titles on a film shown at RIDM, really took away my desire to attend RIDM screenings.

Is a documentary festival that accepts censorship respectable? In my humble opinion, no, it is not.

Our recent tendency to want to sanitize everything to avoid hurting anyone seems particularly harmful. What happens when a person doesn’t learn to accept a “no” or is overprotected to avoid pain? They become tyrannical at different levels. It’s no wonder that more and more children in our first-year classes are throwing their desks or violently hitting their teachers when they don’t immediately get what they want.

Perhaps it’s time to start accepting that we don’t all have the same point of view on the world and that it’s by talking to each other that we can live in harmony.

But it’s so much easier to close our eyes and pretend…

P.S. If I’ve hurt you by writing this opinion piece, we can talk about it. I’d be happy to. But don’t ask me to change a single word.