Politics

When should freedom of expression be limited?

The question of freedom of expression is usually a limited one. It is asked under circumstances that arise because of competing values. In this case: the cartoons.

Mill’s basis for liberty is that “Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign”. Who decides what is insulting, what is dehumanizing, what is acceptable? Who defines what is harmful? If we use the “court of public opinion” are we to use the American, Middle Eastern, or European court. As global communications expand, we experience events occurring in different regions of the world within our own homes. Now there is a global public opinion court and it brings the question should it take precedent over local ones.

It seems the Islamic court of public opinion has spoken. It becomes obvious that the cartoons are considered insulting. The reaction to the cartoons has become physically violent. On a global level, the reaction has been voiced by republications of the cartoons in 125 newspapers in 45 other countries, as an act of sympathy and support of free speech. Racial hatred, misunderstanding, paranoia (the threat of terrorist attacks), 9/11, and the occupation of Muslim countries by Western troops, have created a exceedingly polarized world. So, here we have the competing values, those of the Islamic nations and their friends and pretty much everyone else.

If the questions are answered by the global public opinion: The answers appear to be NO. Free speech can be used by those who intend different consequences than the simple exercise of their freedom of speech. Response to question posed on The Smell Test

From Mahablog

sent in by femfacal

A Stalinist Line of Discipline.

Don’t miss this speech by Jim Marcinkowski posted at No Quarter. This is just a bit of it.

We fought the Soviets and I fought the Soviets because they had a fatally flawed, intolerable system of government where (and think about this):

The government was always right and never apologized;

Any dissent was suppressed, ridiculed, banned or worse;

Secret prisons were denied and never acknowledged or spoken about;

The torture of captives (in Lubyanka) was condoned;

State incarceration was not subject to the checks and balances of a legal system;

Economic plans, like for oil, were established/determined in closed sessions between politicos, commissars and production managers, far outside public view, and where government claimed privilege in so doing;

Wages were set at the lowest common denominator, no matter what Bloc country you were in;

Government agents had access to your medical records, your library records, your telephone, and your e-mail.

A place where judicial power and judicial review were proclaimed concepts, but simply ignored in application;

Where criminal records of young adults were closed to all but the military;

Where a Constitution was a mere facade and ignored by state actors.

Any dissent, debate and protest were deemed unpatriotic;

The public media was bought, paid for, and provided by the state;

The military clandestinely and shamelessly influenced the national media and public opinion;

A place where wrong was declared right;

Where tapping a phone was like tapping a pencil;

Where lying was considered a patriotic skill;

The extraction of natural resources was paramount to any concern for the environment and the impact on the health of its people;

Where the use of “state secrets,” (those things embarrassing to the government) were confused with legitimate issues of “national security”;

A place where “secrecy” and “national security” were used to control debate;

Where legitimate secrecy, was subject to political use and abuse;

Where “legislators” were mere mouthpieces for and rubberstamps of whoever was in power;

Where you lived and died with the permission of the government;

A place where foreign policy was more important than domestic concerns;

Where fear was used as a political weapon and an acceptable means of control;

Where the best medical care was reserved for the influential;

Where wealth was concentrated in the top 5%;

A place where there was no middle class – just a small economic and political elite, and the working poor. …

… Since 1995 the Republican Party and its friends in the American corporate structures that so vigorously contribute to and support them have—in the space of a decade—created in this country more than the beginnings of a system that this country spent 50 years trying to dismantle.