[Vision2020] apologists for violence

[Paul Rumelhart]

I didn't read Michael O'Neal's editorial, but I do want to comment on 
this topic.

I am a strong advocate of freedom of speech and freedom of expression.  
When I end up defending particular examples of speech that are being 
argued against, I'm almost always defending speech that I disagree 
with.  The reason for that is that speech I agree with is hardly ever in 
danger of being suppressed in today's society.  The main reason that I 
defend speech I disagree with has to do with not wanting to give our 
government the club that they can use to beat us into submission. 

I would love it if there was less violent talk surrounding politics, and 
that there were fewer racial slurs and put-downs and just generally rude 
behavior on-line, on talk radio, and on the street.  However, it's a 
better situation than giving our leaders the ability to determine what 
is acceptable and what is not in this area.  I don't trust those 
currently in power not to abuse this, and even if I did I wouldn't trust 
their unknown replacements not to abuse this after those in power were 
voted out or ran up against their term limits.

If you are repulsed by political candidates flinging violent rhetoric, 
imagine how much you would hate it once they have the power to tell you 
what you can and cannot say.

I would like others to tone down their rhetoric and I would love for 
them to use reasonable logic and debate rather than trying to incite 
people emotionally, but I'm not willing to unleash a demon in order to 
get them to stop.

In my opinion, if we want to stay a free country (assuming we still are 
one) then we need to push back against governmental control on speech in 
every way possible and make sure that the exceptions are extremely clear 
and well thought out.

Paul

roger hayes wrote:
> Regarding Michael O'Neals recent editorial.
> I am repulsed by so many people defending the right to scream "Fire!"  
> in crowded theaters. We need to understand what we do when we incite  
> people to riot or violence. I don't give a hoot from which quarter  
> the rhetoric is flung, telling people "Don't retreat, Reload" and the  
> thousands of other vindictives being hurled at the public is nothing  
> but sedition at worst, and trash talk at best. It is designed to  
> prick at the raw nerves of fear and hate in which modern life seems  
> to be so rich these days. How does the rest of the world view us? Do  
> they hear the angry and often violent talk of media baboons  
> advocating death sentences on people with whom they disagree.  Do  
> they get wind of ridiculous racial slurs against world leaders and  
> languages other than English? Do they fear to visit the United States  
> out of worry for their personal safety because of our growing  
> reputation for violence and anger?
> A civil and healthy debate about our responsibility as citizens, and  
> particularly as media or governmental figures to rein in our language  
> is a good thing. Shish, we need to take back our dignity!
> Sincerely,
> Roger Hayes
> Moscow
>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>