Speaking Of....

By Mallory · Sep 8, 2011 · ·
  1. I, like Thomas Jefferson, “have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”

    Most forms of tyranny can only chain a person outwardly. As Mahatma Gandhi stated, “You can imprison me; you can torture me; you can even destroy this body – but you will never imprison my mind.” A person can be wrongfully searched, or arrested without cause and due burden of proof, or segregated into subpar conditions, but the tyrant cannot actually control what goes in their target’s (I know better than to impose the condescending label “victim” on anyone) mind.

    But a censor can. Censorship denies advocates the right to advocate, and denies would-be fighters for an idea of the knowledge that the idea even exists. A censor can stop a revolt against cruelty before it can even begin. Even if there's no large-scale injustice to combat (which, throughout the centuries, there always has been), censorship stops the mind from growing and therefore stunts human development. Censorship undermines the core principles of freedom and independence, implying that humans are all incompetent, flailing creatures who cannot determine for themselves what books to put down, and therefore need a board--or, God forbid, an individual--to determine this for them. Worms choose for themselves whether to crawl upward or remain underground, and censorship places humans at below the level of worms. Henceforth, the most depraved form of tyranny is the oppression of an individual’s right to freedom of expression.

    Think about it. If the government abused your Second Amendment, or Fourth Amendment, or Sixth Amendment rights, you would stand up for yourself in a court of law and assert that your Constitutional rights had been violated. You would assert that, as a sentient human being living in what was designed to be the freest nation on Earth, you have the right to be safe in your person, your home, and your liberties without any intrusion without the due process of law. With the publicity gained through freedom of expression, other supporters could take up your cause and help advocate on your behalf.

    But you could not maintain your rights as such if you were silenced.

    In addition to protecting our ability to defend all our other natural rights, free speech has always provided the solution to each historical problem. For example, when racial minorities and women suffered discriminating, subhuman recognition, no law swept the problem away overnight. In fact, the unethical treatment of over 50 percent of the population (women and minorities combined) WAS the letter of the law. Equal-rights advocates such as Rosa Parks; Martin Luther King, Jr.; Susan B. Anthony; and Booker T. Washington used the power of freedom of speech to draw nationwide awareness, acceptance…and action. Had the government been allowed to suppress them for creating controversy, or for offending the majority’s pre-established beliefs, no social change would have been achieved, and we would probably be suffering under the same inequality today.

    In the words of founding father Samuel Adams, “It does not require a majority to prevail…but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires in people’s minds.”

    No brushfire will survive when extinguished as a spark. If you are in a position of power, remember the importance of free speech. If you are in a position to censor, think about its effect before doing so.

Comments

  1. Trish
    Awesome, Mal. And exactly, even perfectly, right :D
  2. Mallory
    Thanks, Trish. :)
  3. Steerpike
    Right on, sister. This is very well done, Mallory. And I agree fully with everything you've said here. It is never a good idea to give up rights and freedoms. And all too often those who would take them attempt to do so under the guise of goodness or rightness.
  4. Mallory
    Yes, or the guise of not wanting to allow debate or disagreement.
  5. Cain
    Amazing - that's some powerful stuff! That's the kind of post that should be seen everywhere.
  6. Mallory
    Thanks :) Your writing is quite powerful as well.
  7. Heather
    A very interesting read, Mallory, and I agree with everything you have said here.

    This line is particularly important, I think, because that is the biggest thing censorship comes down to. I can decide when I want to read something, I can decide if something offends me or not without someone else's help, and I can decide when I want to see change occur.

    Thank you for sharing this insightful piece, Mallory, I enjoyed reading it.
  8. mugen shiyo
    I'd disagree with that. Many irate small groups are seized, ostracized, silenced, or whatever for sticking to their beliefs. It's usually when a message gains traction and starts getting more and more people involved that changes occur.

    I think these days are different though. They don't try half as hard to censor you as they would have before. They are more likely to either ignore you, let you speak till you sound like a lunatic or become tired news, or they drown you out by speaking from higher, broader platforms.
  9. colorthemap
    Perfect timing :D
  10. Steerpike
    Samuel Adams was exactly right. We see this all the time in our society.
  11. Cain
    Not bad for a brewery...
  12. mugen shiyo
    @ Steerspike, yeah, I could see what you mean. Now that you say that, I wonder if any signifcant defiance against unjust rules or treatment ever came about through any other way.
  13. Mallory
    Mugen, good point - yes, it is true that dictators will often silence and penalize a small group that dares to speak out. I think what he meant, though, is that all major progress has been achieved by people who *start out* in those small groups. The few that weren't extinguished. After all, at one point, wanting to break away from the British in the 1700s was seen as dangerous and radical. Same with women's rights, etc. :)
  14. art
    Nicely done Mal!
    But, won't anybody think of the poor censor! Every act displays not his strength but his weakness. Every act either solidifies his ignorance or robs him of the chance to better appreciate his truth.

    True story: Was it in Herodotus? I'm not sure but anyhow there was once a tyrant of some small polis in ancient Greece c. 650 whose tyrannising was so transparently pathetic that he awoke one morning and found that the entire population had simply buggered off and established a settlement elsewhere. The enlightened, somewhat sentimental, citizens could not bring themselves to topple the fellow since they felt so sorry for him.
  15. Mallory
    Art - Well yeah....to an extent. I guess it is reasonable to pity the censor, to a given point. Although, once an individual violates the rights of someone else, they lose my sympathy...it's like how I'll feel sorry for someone who was raped/abused/etc in childhood, but once they turn around and commit those same atrocities on someone else, they lose my sympathy once they become a perpetrator, because for them to do so is a consciously made choice.
    Not saying that all censors are akin to abusers/rapists, of course, but just an analogy of how I see it.

    But, generally speaking, I agree that a person who oppresses others must suffer from sense of weakness and insecurity, which can be pitied.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice