| Home | About | Contact | Forum | Links | Search |
 |
|
|
Freedom of Press and Speech Sacrificed to Islam
by Reginald Firehammer
The world's governments, especially those that pride themselves on being secular, are being used to force religious compliance on everyone. When an Ideology is given special status, so that any speech, article, book, or commentary is repressed if it is unfavorable toward that ideology, it has become the state religion, in this case, the "state" is comprised of most of this world's governments. These two articles: "Holy Smoke, Don't criticise Islam, says UN," by Damian Thompson, and, "Here's what offends this writer," by Mark Steyn are just two of the latest articles demonstrating the ever tightening grip governments are exercising to squelch all but "government approved" speech. Mark Steyn makes the point that it is not, "false, or libellous, or seditious," speech that is not approved; if it were any of those it could be establishned objectively. The grounds for the complaint against Steyn are totally subjective, as he says, "Their complaint is essentially emotional: it 'offended' them. And as offensiveness is in the eye of the offended, there's not a lot I can do about that." And that is the point, and it has been going on for a long time. Freedom of speech is being taken away from us on every front. In my January, 2004, article, "Freedom of Speech means Freedom to Offend," I pointed out, if we are only free to say or print what offends no one, there is no freedom of speech or press at all. In my article, I quoted an official government (Massachusetts) list of those whose tender feelings one is not allowed to offend: "Black, White, Asian, Hispanic, Arab, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Islamic (Moslem), gay (male), lesbian, handicapped, persons with AIDS, physically disabled, mentally disabled, female, or male. In the actual list, 'other,' is included several times, but that seems a bit redundant with the inclusion of the last two, female and male. Who does that leave out, exactly, and what does it leave out? There is virtually nothing one can say or write, to or about, anyone that by some interpretation cannot be considered harassment or hate speech." Terror and Inquisitions The latest assault on free speech, however, is far more serious and dangerous than the insidious growing repression has been thus far. It is obvious the PC oppression of free press and speech has, until now, been driven primarily by politicians attempting to curry the favor of every special interest group they could. But this new attempt to squelch all criticism of Islam is driven by an entirely different motivation—fear. The trial of Mark Steyn, which is really against the publisher, MacLeans, is reminiscent of the inquisition, particularly the Spanish Inquisition, which, though the motivation was different, was carried out by the government of Ferdinand and Isabella and directed against religious heretics. There have been no tortures or public executions yet, only because the Muslims have not yet demanded the heretics who offend Islam be turned over to them for trial under Sharia law—but it is coming. Be Offensive or Be Enslaved We have for too long gone out of our way to avoid offending people. While there are always fools who get pleasure out intentionally offending others, most of us do not enjoy other's discomfort, and where possible, avoid offending anyone. But the world has changed. There is almost no truth one can express that will not offend someone. It has come to the place in our society and the world, if before you speak or write, you consider for a second the question of whether it will or will not offend someone, you have already surrendered. What you will have surrendered to is what the politicians have already surrendered to, terror. The reason terrorism is growing throughout the world is because terrorism works—but it only works if you surrender to it. Mark Steyn points out that publishers throughout the world are already surrendering. "Canada is not unique in the urge of its bien pensants to pre-emptive surrender: Australian publishers decline books on certain, ah, sensitive subjects; a French novelist was dragged into court to answer for the "Islamophobia" of one of his fictional characters; British editors insist books are vacuumed of anything likely to attract the eye of wealthy Saudis adept at using the English legal system to silence their critics." If we are to continue to have any freedom, those of us who know the principles those freedoms depend on have to boldly speak and write the truth wherever and whenever we can. People will be offended and you may have to pay the consequence if it happens to be your manager or boss or best friend you offend. Free speech is one thing about which the cliché, "use it or lose it," is true. If you are going to live as a free individual, you will have to be offensive, which is what exercising free speech is. Little Freedom Left in the World If you want to know the way the world is going, the following is how the voting went on the UN Resolution that essentially condemns criticism of Islam: These vile countries all voted for the resolution and against free speech: AFGHANISTAN No vote was recorded for these. I suppose they hoped they wouldn't be noticed. They needn't have worried: ALBANIA These pusillanimous countries all abstained, afraid to take a stand for free speech: ARGENTINA Only these countries voted against the resolution and for free speech: ANDORRA The free world shrinks. Your contribution to that shrinking is to always be careful what you say and write does not offend anyone; after all, you would not want your future masters to be offended. To reprise Steyn's reprisal of Sir Edward Grey, the lamps are going out all over the world—one distributor, one publisher, one novelist, one cartoonist, one TV host, one commentator, one professor, one student, one boss, one worker, one individual at a time.
—01/07/08 |
|
All trademarks are the sole property of their respective owners.
Copyright 2004-2007 The Autonomist & HPAmericaTM All rights reserved.
|