Why Free Speech is Cool and why Antifa is wrong

[David Boots]

What we got here is a failure to communicate.

And if rationality is to survive then to my mind communication is the key. And for communication we need to be able to speak freely.

The UN charter of human rights states in it’s preamble that enjoying freedom of speech is one of the aspirations of mankind. Article 19 states ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’
The US constitution was at first a procedural and functional document. It defined the roles of the president and so on but entirely forgot to mention any rights of the citizens of that country. Four years after it’s implementation free speech became one of the first bundle of rights to be tacked on to the document.
Arguably it creates a right to express opinions and views. It is uncontroversial to say that it was intended to ensure a free exchange of ideas, even unpopular ones.
By contrast, the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam which rejects the UN charter of human rights fails to mention free speech. According to that document all men are equal to each other but subservient to allah. Article 1 no less states ‘All human beings … are united by their subordination to Allah.’

Notably the document prescribes different roles for men and women. Perversely, and it is a truly perverse document, this document which purports to describe human rights, blatantly discrimnates and goes so far to allocate roles in society based on gender.

Now for the controversy. I don’t have a problem with people expressing homophobic, racist, supremist or other crazy and intolerant views. Until this year those people were generally ignored – not intentionally – but simply because their extreme positions were invalid or unrepresentative.

Why? Because if they enjoy the right to voice their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation or censorship, or societal sanction… then so do I. And I need not remind atheists that we are in the minority and that muslims have successfully closed many atheist blogs and facebook pages by claiming to be offended.

If you want to shut down the daily stormer then I can assure you that somewhere along the line some rabid religious freak will attempt to shut you down. I hope you can live with that.

I do have a problem with how and why people hold those views. But is it the case that you can marginalize someone into changing their regressive views? I would have thought education and exposure are the key.

Finally, using violence to stop the expression of an opinion is simply wrong. This is the hallmark of a totalitarian regime. And it has become the hallmark of Antifa.

[Dang Martin]

This seems to be a solid assessment.

When a group hides behind a label or dictionary definition while behaving to the contrary, it presents a problem. There’s the idea that Christians are good, by definition. Conversely, Atheists are bad, by definition.

ANTIFA hides behind the label of being anti-Fascism. On the surface, anti-Fascism sounds great! Nobody wants that. But then they engage in Fascist tactics in their efforts. Effectively, they have become that which they claim to be against.

The Third Wave Feminists are an example of hiding behind a “dictionary definition.” As they constantly bring up the dictionary definition of Feminism, they engage in sexist behavior that is clearly anti-male.

With regard to the free speech of the racist, be it the KKK or BLM, indeed they should be allowed to speak. Others should be allowed to ask them questions, for their philosophies must NOT be put in a place where they are above question.

Christopher Hitchens interviews John and Tom Metzger, two white supremacists, in 1991. He does not hit them. He does not stop them from speaking. Instead, he asks questions, and gives them enough rope to hang themselves with.

What I find most disturbing about ANTIFA, BLM, Third Wave Feminists, SJWs, and similar groups, is the overly-simplistic view of good and bad. A recent episode of “Rick & Morty” actually tackles this issue, and the YouTube channel WiseCrack has an interesting analysis of this:

The “heroes” in the story end up locating a “bad guy” on a planet. In order to destroy him, they destroy the entire planet. Effectively, they become that which they claim to be against, and do what the “bad guy” would have done. But because they are “good” and it was in the name of “good,” their actions should therefore be considered acceptable.

I think of ANTIFA in the same way. They’re a group that uses Fascism to fight Fascism. Would I feel any better being ruled under the jackboot of “good” Fascism?

To them, they are fighting Evil with a capital “E,” and in their minds, this gives them license to do absolutely anything with a capital “ANYTHING.”

When it comes to dealing with people who promote bad ideas, shutting them up only drives them underground. Beating them up only makes them legitimate victims, and lends them additional validation.

Instead, allow free speech to put their bad ideas and horrific attitudes on a platform for all to hear. Allow the light to hit these ideas, and they will be sanitized. Challenge their ideas. Laugh at their ideas. Criticize their ideas.

Talk to them. Treat them like human beings.

As someone who has spent his entire life on the Left, I can honestly say that there are many groups on the Left that are doing everything they can to push me out, from anti-racists who declare me a racist because of my skin color, to the anti-sexists who declare me a sexist because of my gender. The irony is thick.

I think Daryl Davis has the right idea. He has de-converted roughly 200 KKK members. He didn’t belittle them, de-humanize them, hit them, or shut them up. Instead, he opened his heart. He humanized himself. He helped them see where they were wrong, and guided them toward a better philosophy that did not involve the blind, angry, fearful hatred of others.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kkk-klu-klux-klan-members-leave-black-man-racism-friends-convince-persuade-chicago-daryl-davis-a7489596.html

ANTIFA is a Fascist group that ignorantly uses Fascism as a tool. They’re misguided.

Anyone who is willing to listen and think has the capacity to better themselves. Would anyone from ANTIFA be open to listening, to hear how and why they are misguided and what they are doing wrong?

So far, any attempts that I’ve made to offer up a critique have been met with the declaration that I’m “a white supremacist,” a “Fascist,” a “Nazi,” or even “literally Hitler.” One cannot work any harder to push me away from their side of the argument. It is truly frustrating.

[David Boots]

I agree and I particularly like the idea that you need to focus on what is pragmatic. I share antifa’s frustration and anger but we all need to step back and look at what it is that works.

[jakelafort]

ok cool hand luke…free speech is critical to an open society…is it unlimited and absolute?

no it is not…political speech gets the greatest protection and commercial speech the least

do the limitations on speech have a chilling effect on speech? I doubt it. If we remove first amendment

protection for hate groups whose primary purpose is to spread racist ideology and who use

badges of historical virulence will there be a corresponding loss of speech in other groups? No.

If a person or group threatens a person it is a crime but to threaten a race is free speech…incongruous and

insupportable…what value emerges in granting speech to those groups? (to say if we take it away from them

then it will be taken from all of us is simply  untrue) (if we say racist speech simply moves underground and the victimizers look like victims then the reality of history smacks us in the face in that when racism manifests openly and  goes unopposed it can lead to genocide)

We have had bs wars in usa against drugs…howz bout a war in which we can actually come together as a nation

and attempt to extirpate hate?  How about setting a tone to discourage racists by prosecuting members of hate groups? How about showing victims of racism that the government and the people are here to protect them?

[David Boots]

So this is a good point. Free speech has been limited in some circumstances. But I prefer to not recognise any general right or interest not to be offended. This is because offense is such a subjective notion. Often abused by the theist.

There are a surprising number of limits on free speech but the most well known tend to fall into two categories. Speech that defames and speech that incites hatred or violence.

Putting to one side threshold issues, the question of a remedy arises. Who gave antifa a license to enforce it’s beliefs on others? If people have transgressed race vilification laws then antifa can call on the state to enforce it’s laws.

If antifa is right, then surely I can elect myself to attack any particular group that offends me.

It seems to me that a right to uninhibited expression is priceless where public debate in a democracy is valued.

[jakelafort]

It is clear to me that non-attorneys tend to misunderstand the first amendment.  It is not even applicable unless the government is the meanie clamping down on the speaker. And yes there are limits on speech and different standards are applied depending on the nature of the speech.

If i understand you then speech that is offensive is undifferentiated. If that is your stance then i say manifestations of racism ought not get lumped in with other “offensive” speech.  Massive gathering of nazis and their ilk are not to be conflated with those who offend the delicate sensibilities of others in matters such as political speech (burning flags) sexual speech, critique of religion.  Prudes may be shocked by sexual speech.  Patriots may be shocked by burning flags. Theists may be offended when they see the prophet with a cock in his mouth.   I agree that the offense created by such speech does not outweigh the value of the right to said speech.

 

Yes we need protection of such speech. It is critical to a free society, along with the press…

Not so the right to  virulent racist speech in all of its splendor and manifestations.  No good will come of it. No good ever has.  There is an idea that goes back centuries, at least as far back as Hume..that there is a free market place of ideas and that good ideas win out over bad. It is not the way it works. If the world were populated by intelligent people then it would be otherwise. But the coterie of persons who are discriminating enough to reject bs are not sufficient to overcome the will of the majority.

I have not stayed current with antifa and perhaps it is that there is overstepping. I simply do not know. But the idea that there are those among us people with the balls to stand up to the racists makes me smile. Pacifism does not work when the enemy is fascist/racist and aggressive.  Bertrand Russell finally realized that. If we allow the racists to be unopposed we embolden them. Trump’s mouth has already done so.  We encourage others to join the ranks of the hate groups. It suggests a certain acceptance when it goes unopposed.

The KKK at its height had some 4 million members. Entire towns of whites came to see blacks tortured and hanging from trees.  The people and the government were largely silent.  In the 30s and 40s we had german americans who were part of nazi groups in silver shirts and the german american bund.  Let me stop. (stops self from rant) Suffice it to say that we ought not ignore history. It is highly instructive.

I would love to see the government go after all of those groups.  Prosecute the leaders. Confiscate their property.

I would love to see a fight against racism using education.  School children ought to learn about eugenics, social darwinism,  forced sterilizations, fascism in the usa…hate groups in the usa.  It is however a reason for optimism that there is some mainstream opposition to the hate.

 

[Strega]

Dang, thanks for the Hitch fix!

[Dang Martin]

Strega wrote:

Dang, thanks for the Hitch fix!

You’re welcome. Although I can tell he gets a bit frustrated, he stays relatively cool, asks them questions, and sometimes re-asks. Their unwillingness to answer, or avoidance of questions, is in and of itself, a very telling answer.

[Author]

Posts