Over half the countries in the world have some form of law that lets people exercise their freedom of speech, which I fully support BUT when does this go too far and something should be done to stop what is being said?
This is a difficult one to fathom as one could say that a law giving freedom of speech to the masses is not valid if it is still denying one portion of society the opportunity to air their views. Okay so what if for example an ultra nationalist is spouting off their views inciting racial hatred? This in turn causes mass riots, should this freedom of speech be stopped? In my view it should. Likewise if someone pro nuclear energy is talking about nuclear energy and a riot ensues between environmentalists and pro nuclear supporters, should it be stopped...well yes it should.
If this is the case then the issue arises again that you dont have real freedom of speech because if others dont like what you are saying and it causes civil unrest someone is censoring you meaning you dont have freedom of speech.
I am confusing myself as to whether freedom of speech should be allowed without rules and regulations or not......that is until I thought of the following point.
Once upon a time (1889) a young man was born in Austria to a working class family. As this young man grew up he was whipped by his father then was in the first world war as a runner for the 16th Bavarian Reserve Regiment.
Over time this young man became a German nationalist and joined the National Socialist German Workers Party otherwise known as the Nazi party. Due to freedom of speech and a strong mind this young man grew in stature and became the leader in German politics.....this man was Adolf Hitler.
Now due to the freedom of speech one has Adolf Hitler managed to control a nation, instigate a world war and cause the death of millions of people. If there had been some form of legislation giving rules on freedom of speech...would he have come to power, would their have been a world war...and would millions of innocent people have died in such awful conditions like the Jewish people in Bergen Belsen concentration camp? I think not....yet I still think their should not be rules on freedom of speech because then your still not free to talk.
Overall I have gone round in circles, while someone should step in when things turn fowl from one persons views, you still shouldn't stop them from airing their views no matter how much you don't agree.
Thursday 29 November 2007
When freedom of speech goes too far
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Once upon a time, "spouting off views" of racial EQUALITY sparked riots...should that have been stopped?
Freedom is an absolute. There should be nothing that can't be said. Note, I say SAID not DONE. If speech incites a riot, the rioters should be prosecuted if they break the law. Do that a few times and people will learn not to riot.
My biggest problem when people bring up the idea of limiting the freedom of speech is the idea of WHO gets to decide?
Hitler never trumps anything, especially if you look at the context of his rise to power. He came to power as a result of measures that were imposed by the powers that won World War I. He stepped into a situation where his rhetoric fell on fertile ground.
As Tiffany said, the standards in terms of what would count as speech that incites a riot change over time. That fact on its own precludes the idea of caging free speech.
Please excuse my raising a minor point which is tangential to the article. The disagreement over nuclear energy is not between nuclear advocates and environmentalists. People commonly make this mis-statement. Many environmentalists (I would say all the real environmentalists) favor nuclear energy.
On the main topic, you have raised an interesting dilemma. In the case we read of recently, where some boys hung nooses in a tree, that kind of symbolic speech normally is protected. But hate speech is treated differently. The sanctions against the boys were some short suspensions from school, but some people in the community thought they should do jail time. Should hate speech be treated differently?
I'll offer the opinion that it should depend on community standards, much like obscenity. But I'm glad to be persuaded otherwise.
Post a Comment