We have a rich history of case law dealing with the limiting of free speech. In truth, from the inception of the United States of America, those in power have sought to suppress dissident views. In particular, much case law exists concerning free speech during war times. In the claimed interest of national security and patriotism, free speech is frequently “put on hold” during war times.
As early as 1798, speech has been limited in times of war or post war. Claiming to be necessary for the new United States to survive its days of infancy, Congress passed the Sedition Act, which prohibited any printing, uttering, or publishing of information that would be contrary to the view held by the administration. This law stood, unopposed and unchallenged until its expiration. Following this, with each major war, cases have arisen as the dissenters express their opposition.
But, even beyond legal restriction on free speech, frequently during wartime, social pressure, antagonistic to dissenting opinions, is just as strong. In the post- September 11th world, where every car, home, and, business proudly waved the American flag, oppositional sentiments were not tolerated.
Like W.E.B Dubois, I believe that “…any system of spreading information, in any country which denies the intelligent citizen and voter certain facts or groups of facts, is fundamentally and dangerously wrong.” The restriction of free speech is undemocratic. Of course exceptions like state secrets that cannot get out exist, but the gross over-rationalization that is seen in case precedent is unacceptable. Much like W.E.B. Dubois, I think the power to prevent and stem this wrongdoing exists primarily among the American people. We should demand alternative viewpoints from our media and be reluctant to believe anything and everything we read.
Critical to maintaining an environment of free speech is not giving into the propaganda that encourages demonization of oppositional or dissenting opinions. If achieved, free speech will be a given and restriction- unthinkable. People would less eagerly fall pray to propaganda and require factual and ration proof to support going to war.
In this realistic world restriction on free speech would never stand.
As early as 1798, speech has been limited in times of war or post war. Claiming to be necessary for the new United States to survive its days of infancy, Congress passed the Sedition Act, which prohibited any printing, uttering, or publishing of information that would be contrary to the view held by the administration. This law stood, unopposed and unchallenged until its expiration. Following this, with each major war, cases have arisen as the dissenters express their opposition.
But, even beyond legal restriction on free speech, frequently during wartime, social pressure, antagonistic to dissenting opinions, is just as strong. In the post- September 11th world, where every car, home, and, business proudly waved the American flag, oppositional sentiments were not tolerated.
Like W.E.B Dubois, I believe that “…any system of spreading information, in any country which denies the intelligent citizen and voter certain facts or groups of facts, is fundamentally and dangerously wrong.” The restriction of free speech is undemocratic. Of course exceptions like state secrets that cannot get out exist, but the gross over-rationalization that is seen in case precedent is unacceptable. Much like W.E.B. Dubois, I think the power to prevent and stem this wrongdoing exists primarily among the American people. We should demand alternative viewpoints from our media and be reluctant to believe anything and everything we read.
Critical to maintaining an environment of free speech is not giving into the propaganda that encourages demonization of oppositional or dissenting opinions. If achieved, free speech will be a given and restriction- unthinkable. People would less eagerly fall pray to propaganda and require factual and ration proof to support going to war.
In this realistic world restriction on free speech would never stand.
posted by juliafm at 8:48 PM
2 Comments:
How far are you willing to go? Racist speeech? Anti-semitic speech? Speech that supports bin Ladin's goals?
definitely
Post a Comment
<< Home