Human beings are not attack dogs
A much better article on Comment is Free than Hannah Pool's mindless prejudice by Brendan O'Neill on free speach
"People are not attack dogs. They are possessed of free will. And most of them, I would wager, would turn down the footballer's offer to massacre other fans or the Jamaican singer's invitation to beat up some 'batty boys'.The best defence against bad ideas is better ideas. Free them all and truth will vanquish stupidity.
Those who accepted these invitations to violence, however, would be entirely responsible for their actions. They should be punished, not the speaker or writer who allegedly inspired them.
To punish speech for its potential consequences is not only an insult to liberty - it also calls into question the existence of free will itself, and treats all of us as beasts who must be protected from our own worst instincts by the gracious censor."
1 Comments:
Not sure if I completely agree here. People have free will, yes, but that doesn't mean it's not possible to influence others by speech. Isn't that why free speech is important?
I think there's a balance to be struck here. The priority for me still has to be that government is not allowed to silence people who disagree with it. But if there's scope within that to prevent people launching hate campaigns or encouraging violence, then we should.
It's a big if, though. It depends on the goodwill and sense of government on the one hand and the skill of legislators to write laws which can separate the good from the bad. With the current administration being so dreadful on both counts, perhaps the balance right now needs to be pretty close to absolutely free speech.
But let's not pretend that doesn't come at a cost. The bombers of 7th July, for example, each made up their own minds to take part, but I'm sure most of them were influenced by other people in the process. And I'm equally sure that Blair's "dodgy dossier" influenced a few key people in the run up to the Iraq war.
Post a Comment
<< Home