Empowering the State to proscribe and punish speech is not only the most dangerous step a society can take -- though it is that -- it's also the most senseless. It never achieves its intended effect of suppressing or eliminating a particular view. If anything, it has the opposite effect, by driving it underground, thus preventing debate and exposure. Worse, it converts its advocates into martyrs -- as one sees from the hero-worship now surrounding people like Levant and Steyn, who now become self-glorifying symbols of individual liberty rather than what they are: hateful purveyors of a bitter, destructive, authoritarian ideology.There is an inherent need in society to place some restriction on speech, but the current line in the sand being applied by the Alberta Human Rights Commission seems to me to be about four beaches over from where it should be. It is my opinion that by silencing these views, a martyr is made. Also, by denying free expression we take away the biggest buffer against ignorant and insensitive statements -- letting the proponent of such a statement open his or her mouth and prove the idiocracy underlying the viewpoint.
Monday, January 14, 2008
If X happens, I'm moving to Canada...
The popular liberal line of "If X (something related to Bushism) happens, I'm moving to Canada" should be taking a hit among truly liberal minded folks with the current over zealous application of hate speech laws. Greenwald at Salon has a nice post on this issue, of which I found the following paragraph most pertinent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment