... some is more free than others.

[partly]

"This was not an issue about free speech," Tim Moore, director of the SMU student center, said in a story for Thursday's edition of The Dallas Morning News. "It was really an issue where we had a hostile environment being created."*

I love that quote. It so neatly side steps the "censorship" label and makes it all about being "kinder and gentler". Look, it cries, I'm good, I'm for free speech, only this, well, this can't be free speech because it was creating a hostile environment. I feel like I've stepped right into a parallel ending of "Animal Farm" -- "All speech is free but some is more free than others."


Free speech is a sorely abused rallying cry for so many people these days, especially here on the 'Net where the "free speech" banner is often used bludgeon others into submission or justify intrusive and trollish behavior. But I notice a very disturbing trend -- free speech is only "free speech" if it happens to be saying what could be considered "progressive" or "open minded" or "good". Otherwise it's not "free speech" it's "hate speech" -- as in "I hate your speech so you can't say it."

There was a terrific example of that just during the latest Gulf War. Rallies were going on and the old standby of burning the American flag was again trotted out in symbolic protest against the government action. This didn't make the news, much. Burning flags is quite passe and everyone knows that it is just symbolism -- anyone who is so narrow-minded as to feel hurt and offended about such a wonderful expression of free speech just needs to get over themselves. Free speech ruled the day. Symbolic gesture = free speech.

Then the Dixie Chicks expressed their personal feelings about the President and the war. Not everyone agreed with what they had to say and several groups of these people decided that they would express their own personal feelings about the Dixie Chicks. So they gathered all the DIxie Chicks albums that they had and ran them over with tractors. The outcry against this was swift and universal. How dare anyone be so hateful as to do that? Look at how terribly threatened the Chicks must feel, such displays of destruction must be stopped -- or at least belittled and ridiculed. Symbolic gesture = hate speech.

Colored me confused. I see no difference in the burning of the flag or the crushing of a CD. Now if I send a letter to the President or to Natalie Maines threatening to blow them up or cut off their heads, I could see how that is obviously threatening. But if burning a flag is free speech, why isn't crushing a CD. Or burning a book for that matter?

If I burn a flag and it only means that I don't like what the government is doing, doesn't it follow logically that if I crush a CD it only means I don't like what the artist is saying or if I burn a book it only means I don't like what the writer is saying? And conversely if burning a book means that I want to totally undermine the access to the written word and crushing a CD means that I want the artist to die a horrible and painful death, then doesn't burning the flag mean that I want the government and all those who work for/support the government to be wiped from the face of the earth?



Freedom of Speech should be an ideal -- a right that comes with responsibilities and obligations. It should not be a weapon used to force your opinion others nor should it be a cry to "prove" your own superiority. For "Freedom of Speech" to survive, no one should ever be allowed co-opt that ideal and claim it as part of their -- and only their -- ideology. Because the very idea of that -- the very thought that only one side, group or person is the sole protector and champion of Freedom of Speech -- undermines the very right that they claim to cherish.

Comments

Beware of ramble...

[finabair.livejournal.com]

Personally, I think that so long as people PAY for the books they burn and the CDs they run over, they can just keep on doing what they're doing. They're only damaging their own property.

Now, if they start perpetrating ACTUAL crimes in order to make their points? NO. That's wrong. But then, they probably know that, which is why they're destroying their own property. Or so I'd think.

Most of the time, I either like something or don't care about it one way or the other. It's really rare for me to dislike things entirely, overall. But whenever I don't like something (a movie, a musical group, whatever) I feel less and less 'allowed' to SAY so these days.

I sometimes get frustrated by people claiming that things which aren't to their taste are "bad", rather than simply saying, "I don't like it." But sometimes I think they feel a need to justify that dislike, thus they have to label it "bad". It's the same pressure I feel, but they react to it differently.

So what I wonder then is, where did we all get the idea that we're supposed to LIKE everything unless it's "bad"?

Re: Beware of ramble...

[partly.livejournal.com]

Now, if they start perpetrating ACTUAL crimes in order to make their points? NO.

I have to point out that committing ACTUAL crimes is wrong no matter what point the criminal has to make. The scary, bad part of book burning comes before the actually burning takes place. It's the twisting of mind into unquestioning obedience and the total and complete disregard for independent thought. The actual book burning is just a bright shiny demonstration of that mindlessness.


So what I wonder then is, where did we all get the idea that we're supposed to LIKE everything unless it's "bad"?

Because people demand that you justify your every like and dislike. Because people get offended if you don't like what they like and start making all sorts of judgments about the kind of person you are. Because too many people get all bent out of shape when you don't like what they do and they start to feel that they have to push you away before you push them away.

I also think that, as a society, we've become more and more isolated from people who like different things than we like. And we start to feel threatened by those people because they seem as alien to us. And because we have so little contact dealing with people who have different likes and dislikes we tend to demonize them. Understanding takes more work than dismissing.

Or so goes my theory...

[powerpynt.livejournal.com]

I'm sure you already know I agree with you wholeheartedly. I was in a group identified as "pro" war for a week or two and the chicks thing came up at that time. Some immature member started the chant to have them metaphorically assasinated and I slammed the lid on it with a post that somehow pushed her and her hypocritical posse back under their rock.

But that said, it's not pleasant taking your/our position because to stay true to our convictions we need to allow such hatemongering as flag burning and fascist marches, all "speech" protest that doesn't hurt anything but the opposition's feelings. And that's far easier said than done.

I see no difference in the burning of the flag or the crushing of a CD.

Me either though I have to admit someone burning the flag really pisses me off and crushing a cd is pretty funny considering the likelihood the crusher thought better of it later and paid the chicks a second time. But I'm willing to watch each action without a word, so long as the actor is an individual or loose assembly and not a government.

Your last paragraph was particularly well said. You're right on, but don't let it make you crazy like I do. People will always co-opt free speech for their cause alone; it's human nature to gather every weapon available while denying the enemy a reasonable defense. All's fair...

[partly.livejournal.com]

But that said, it's not pleasant taking your/our position because to stay true to our convictions we need to allow such hatemongering as flag burning and fascist marches, all "speech" protest that doesn't hurt anything but the opposition's feelings. And that's far easier said than done.

It is.

Of course, while I totally believe in the right to free speech, I don't believe in the "right" to have that speech heard. The constitution does not -- should not -- guarantee an audience, just the opportunity to speak to see if you get an audience.

Nor does free speech mean the I have to support your speech. I don't have to use my money to let you exercise your right of free speech. If I pay for a website to put up political and idealogical essays, I don't have to let you put up opposing ideas if I don't want to.

My dime, my time.

Go ahead and have your little Nazi march... I just think that all the sane people should just go party somewhere else and you and play with yourself.

[powerpynt.livejournal.com]

It's not based on race. It's based on bringing a diverse community to a certain organization

Actually it's this junk humanism found in the same article that drives me even more insane than the speech issues. The nonsense that all caucasians are of the same ilk and therefore diversity is non applicable in the white world is exactly what creates racism in the first place.

That I have anything in common with a recent Hungarian emigre because of the color of our skin alone is absurd, and yet we both would be judged alike by any university admissions system in the country and ignored out of hand.

This is the thing I was whining about the other day; the "I eat grapes", "Then you're a grape eater", "I never said that" argument. Of course it's based on race and to say otherwise is beyond simple rhetoric; It's a plain, old, ordinary lie.

[partly.livejournal.com]

I'm so glad you read that and commented on it. It was something that really bothered me, but the whole "free speech" idea had been on my mind recently, so I went with it. :-)

I, as you know, agree with you. To me, diversity doesn't come with race as much as it come with different social backgrounds. I think middle-class city folks are pretty much the same the world around. I have a internet friendship with an attorney in LA and I think that I'm much more alien to her than an black attorney from LA would be. The difference between me and the black attorney has nothing to do with race and everything to do with background.

*blinks*

Not my best articulation on the subject but the best I can come up with right now.

[powerpynt.livejournal.com]

You're a funny girl:) And your articulation did just fine:p