flying_gazzelle said:
MelasZepheos said:
Several reasons, mainly that I don't believe in their one single policy. 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I defend to the death your right to say it.' I don't believe in freedom of speech.
I have to admit, this piqued my curiosity. Surely you believe in freedom of speech to some extent? Or do you mean to say that if you, as a person, were simply barred from saying anything, you would be totally fine with that. It just baffles me how someone, in this day and age, can actually claim to be against freedom of speech - and still have the audacity to voice their opinion. I would appreciate an answer as you seem to have your reasons.
The short, short version. Like I say I've been debating this issue with myself for about six or seven years now, maybe longer, and I still haven't come to a full conclusion of how exactly I feel about it.
I believe that the Primary Right of every human being is the right to freedom from oppression, be it physical, verbal, mental or any other form of oppresion. I'm not so naieve as to think that claiming we have a right to something makes it so, but that's the singular right I would defend to the death.
The Secondary Right of every human being is the right to freedom of speech (also thuoght and expression, but that's a very separate issue for me), except when it conflicts with the Primary Right of another human being. If your exercising of your second right knowingly and with forethought conflicts with the Primary Right of another person, you have sacrificed your right to freedom of speech.
In practice: The Westboro Baptist Church verbally insult and abuse homosexuals, the Marine Corps, the Jewish religion, and a whole range of others which I probably couldn't even list here. Thus they have used their Secondary Right to knowingly oppress other people, violating the Primary Rights of anyone they attack. Thus the Westboro Baptist Church from my perspective have lost their right to freedom of speech.
In some ways I don't believe freedom of speech even is a Right. I believe it's a privilege and a responsibility, and if you can't exercise restraint when addressing wrongs you feel, then you don't deserve it.
Before the inevitable counter-argument, yes, I know that the primary argument against my personal philosophy is that by saying that someone else no longer have the right to freedom of speech that is a violation of their primary right to freedom from oppression, but in some ways I feel the two are connected. This is why I also largely support the spirit of politically correct language, if not the letter of it.
It is possible to have debates, arguments, even heated fights, exhibiting every form of free speech, and not oppress someone. If you meet on even grounds for discussion, then all's fair. But if you knowingly use your power to subjugate somebody else either with or without the pretense of liberation then you are in the wrong. (This is getting into the sub-issue of freedom and rights, that is to say power and the distribution thereof, so it's only tangentally related, and I won't dwell on it.)
But it is another part of why I don't like Anonymous. They have all the power, and they don't use it responsibly. They don't meet people on even ground, they meet them as bullies with greater power. Gene Simmons. Did they defend his right to freedom of speech when he disagreed with them? Where were their morals and ethics then? If the one tenet of Anonymous is defending to the death a person's right to say something, why is it that when that thing is said against Anonymous they suddenly have carte blanche to oppress the person who spoke against them just because they have the power to do so, and no inclination to try and argue rationally, instead of striking out like a petulant child?
But like I say, that's becoming a discussion of power politics in human society.
In summation, I don't believe in freedom of speech for several reasons, partly because I don't believe it's a right but a privilege, partly because I think that exercising freedom of speech to oppress other people is a greater wrong than having your own freedom of speech oppressed because you carried out oppressive acts first, and partly because I think that power ratios must be equal for there to be true freedom, and since there is no balance of power, there can be no equality.
