Free Speech… after Fitna
Well, while reading lots of blogs in the Web in regard to the Fitna film, I recognized that many, many people are concerned about the fact that we in Europe are going to lose more and more of our freedom… freedom of speech and the freedom to express ourselves… which made me think what “freedom of speech” really means in our societies.
Free speech means to have the right to express any opinion in public without censorship or restraint by the government…
I would say the part “… by the government” is important to notice, because in the West, freedom of speech means you can say practically anthing you want and the government will not haul you away and put you in jail.
There are some exceptions like the obscenity laws associated with radio and TV
But freedom of speech does not mean you can say whatever you want without impunity.
So the Dixie Chicks for example made a political statement in America and angered their demographic a few years ago. They have suffered the consequences of their behavior, but not have been censored by the government.
You can say whatever you want, but you will have to suffer the consequences. Just like you are free to rob a bank but if you’re caught you’ll have to suffer the consequences…
In America you can safely express yourself by waving an American flag, but not by burning one.
Most people would not publicly express desire for a member of the same sex, and many who support the legality of abortion no longer care to say so.
Society is a web of relationships which work together to keep each of us average in the most banal sense of the word.
Before expressing a strong opinion on anything, most of us carry out a practical inventory of possible results: how will the professor, the boss or some other authority figure react? What will the neighbors think? Will we still be accepted by our friends? Social obligations and needs, like financial debt, keep most of us from taking any risks.
Most of us feel that it would take a lot more than any given provocation to make it worth sticking our neck out.
Our fear to express any idea outside of an approved range does not raise a legal issue where there is no threat of government intervention. But it does raise a moral one. There appears to be a grievous difference between the rulebook and the game.
I could go on, but I think I made my point clear… we will not use our right of free speech at full volume, most often because of moral or “selfish” reasons.
The same applies to politicians… politicians are interest warriors, they will not use their right of free speech for the same reasons – just look to China right now and if so – in case of Wilders – they will have very good reasons to do so.
So Wilders film was not censored by the Dutch government… the TV stations in the Netherlands refused to broadcast this film and it was a moral decision and had nothing to do with censorship. The same applies to LiveLeak com. – they decided to remove this film… yes, they did it because of threats, but it was not the Dutch government that was behind the threats. They censored themselves…
You still can say whatever you want without beeing punished by the government, but you will have to suffer the consequences… We can live our freedom to a certain limit and in regard to free speech every single one of us, no matter if we are private persons, if we speak about TV stations or politicians, manager or whatever… we all have different limits… this right should also be accepted as a part of our freedom, our right of free speech and our right to express ourselves…
