The First Amendment and Racism: Do Racists Have the Right to Free Speech?
Posted: Saturday, July 11, 2009
by Danny Davids
It was one of those judge shows that jump-started the thought process this time. The particular show I was watching has, as a regular part of each episode, a legal question to which you can respond with your opinion by calling an 800 number. The question for this episode asked if it was a good idea to allow racists the right to free speech, even if their comments incite violence.
My first response was "No, of course not." But the more I thought about it, the more I realized in the United States of America, that is the wrong answer.
It becomes necessary to first define what "racist", "free speech", and "violence" mean. In a day and age where people treat words like Humpty Dumpty did in "Alice in Wonderland", one person's racism may be another person's opinion. One may define "violence" as rioting in the streets and killing innocent bystanders; another may view it as participating in a protest rally; and a third may think it includes actions such as name-calling and yelling at a person who has a differing opinion. There must be concrete definitions for each term in the statement; only after these definitions have been determined can we move on to answer the question.
If we decide to restrict the right of free speech to any group, who makes the decisions? The government? The media? The people of the United States? And which people will oversee this ability to censor? The conservatives? The liberals? Straights, gays, blacks, whites, rich, poor, Christians, Muslims, atheists? Or would it be simply "the majority"--whatever that means these days? Our forefathers came from countries where this policy had been in place for centuries. If it was such a good idea, why did they leave their homelands to live a harsh and sometimes fatal existence in a New World? Evidently they felt there was something worthwhile in having the freedom to speak their minds without fear of repercussion from the powers that be.
Once a particular group loses its right to speak freely, what's to stop the overseeing body to steal the same right from another group? And another? Pretty soon the only groups allowed freedom of speech will be those whose voices echo the belief system of the overseers. Yet another reason why millions of people from around the world moved to what was to become the United States of America. You didn't have to be a puppet to survive; you could speak your mind.
But what if what somebody says hurts somebody else? Good grief, people, have you never heard children speak to each other? Young children have not yet learned how to fill their statements with innuendo, and their vocabularies are not sufficiently large enough for them to know how to reword a statement to soften the blow. Kids say exactly what they mean, and it can be hurtful. All of us grew up hearing (and sometimes speaking) hateful comments directed at other kids. And yet we survived. If the egos of our adult population are so fragile that one ugly comment ruins a person's life, then as adults we need to suck it up and get a spine. (Please realize I am not talking about the more serious issues related to physical, emotional, and verbal abuse. That is an entirely different animal.) The rhyme does not go, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will hurt forever." Grow up, let it go, and move on!
Using the excuse that racist comments could incite violence...well, any speech of any type could incite violence from anyone who is angry enough about any issue and lacks self-control. The person using this argument assumes that EVERY comment DOES result in violence. If this were true, then every time someone with an opinion on any topic voiced his or her views, there would automatically be a violent reaction from those opposed to that view. This is not the case. We do not live in the world defined in the movie "Minority Report"; you cannot determine ahead of time whether a particular comment is going to result in violence, and therefore cannot prevent people from speaking out because of a possibility that may or may not happen.
Finally, restricting speech of any type, no matter how uncomfortable the topic, also restricts any dialog or discussion about the topic being voiced. I hear people say that allowing certain opinions to be heard can "poison" others into believing those opinions to be true. As in the argument about violence, this is a possibility; that does not make it a guarantee. It is just as possible that a rational person presenting the facts against a given opinion can sway the one holding that opinion to change his or her beliefs. Only in the public forums of debate and discussion can all sides of an issue be seen so that public opinion can be found to be either fact or flawed, and changed if necessary. Shutting up one or more sides skews the end result and can lead to an entire populace believing a lie (witness the slavery issue in the United States, or the horrific results of Hitler's views concerning Jews during the Holocaust). We are all adults; we do not need to be guided like children, taught what we are to believe, and sheltered from any opposing viewpoint.
So what do we do in this situation? Our gut reaction is to tell people to shut up; after all, we're only human. But instead I think we need to let people voice their opinions and let the issues play out in public discussion. Removing a person's right to free speech is a gross violation of every US citizen's First Amendment rights. It also comes at a high price. What price? "What goes around comes around"; if you find it acceptable to restrict someone's rights, then someone else will find it acceptable to restrict yours. What's that phrase that's become so popular these days? Oh, yeah, that's right: "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
It becomes necessary to first define what "racist", "free speech", and "violence" mean. In a day and age where people treat words like Humpty Dumpty did in "Alice in Wonderland", one person's racism may be another person's opinion. One may define "violence" as rioting in the streets and killing innocent bystanders; another may view it as participating in a protest rally; and a third may think it includes actions such as name-calling and yelling at a person who has a differing opinion. There must be concrete definitions for each term in the statement; only after these definitions have been determined can we move on to answer the question.
If we decide to restrict the right of free speech to any group, who makes the decisions? The government? The media? The people of the United States? And which people will oversee this ability to censor? The conservatives? The liberals? Straights, gays, blacks, whites, rich, poor, Christians, Muslims, atheists? Or would it be simply "the majority"--whatever that means these days? Our forefathers came from countries where this policy had been in place for centuries. If it was such a good idea, why did they leave their homelands to live a harsh and sometimes fatal existence in a New World? Evidently they felt there was something worthwhile in having the freedom to speak their minds without fear of repercussion from the powers that be.
Once a particular group loses its right to speak freely, what's to stop the overseeing body to steal the same right from another group? And another? Pretty soon the only groups allowed freedom of speech will be those whose voices echo the belief system of the overseers. Yet another reason why millions of people from around the world moved to what was to become the United States of America. You didn't have to be a puppet to survive; you could speak your mind.
But what if what somebody says hurts somebody else? Good grief, people, have you never heard children speak to each other? Young children have not yet learned how to fill their statements with innuendo, and their vocabularies are not sufficiently large enough for them to know how to reword a statement to soften the blow. Kids say exactly what they mean, and it can be hurtful. All of us grew up hearing (and sometimes speaking) hateful comments directed at other kids. And yet we survived. If the egos of our adult population are so fragile that one ugly comment ruins a person's life, then as adults we need to suck it up and get a spine. (Please realize I am not talking about the more serious issues related to physical, emotional, and verbal abuse. That is an entirely different animal.) The rhyme does not go, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will hurt forever." Grow up, let it go, and move on!
Using the excuse that racist comments could incite violence...well, any speech of any type could incite violence from anyone who is angry enough about any issue and lacks self-control. The person using this argument assumes that EVERY comment DOES result in violence. If this were true, then every time someone with an opinion on any topic voiced his or her views, there would automatically be a violent reaction from those opposed to that view. This is not the case. We do not live in the world defined in the movie "Minority Report"; you cannot determine ahead of time whether a particular comment is going to result in violence, and therefore cannot prevent people from speaking out because of a possibility that may or may not happen.
Finally, restricting speech of any type, no matter how uncomfortable the topic, also restricts any dialog or discussion about the topic being voiced. I hear people say that allowing certain opinions to be heard can "poison" others into believing those opinions to be true. As in the argument about violence, this is a possibility; that does not make it a guarantee. It is just as possible that a rational person presenting the facts against a given opinion can sway the one holding that opinion to change his or her beliefs. Only in the public forums of debate and discussion can all sides of an issue be seen so that public opinion can be found to be either fact or flawed, and changed if necessary. Shutting up one or more sides skews the end result and can lead to an entire populace believing a lie (witness the slavery issue in the United States, or the horrific results of Hitler's views concerning Jews during the Holocaust). We are all adults; we do not need to be guided like children, taught what we are to believe, and sheltered from any opposing viewpoint.
So what do we do in this situation? Our gut reaction is to tell people to shut up; after all, we're only human. But instead I think we need to let people voice their opinions and let the issues play out in public discussion. Removing a person's right to free speech is a gross violation of every US citizen's First Amendment rights. It also comes at a high price. What price? "What goes around comes around"; if you find it acceptable to restrict someone's rights, then someone else will find it acceptable to restrict yours. What's that phrase that's become so popular these days? Oh, yeah, that's right: "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
This Article has been viewed 4,088 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsInteresting article! I despise racists, but they should have the right to free speech within the same limitations as the rest of us, i.e. no explicit & deliberate incitement to violence.Any speech may offend someone and indirectly incite them to violence - it is only when the speaker can be shown to be *deliberately* and directly inciting violence that I think their right to free speech should be taken from them.That aside, racists should be allowed to express their views, and the rest of us should be allowed to point out how small-minded, ignorant and unfounded such racist views are.Let them use their right to free speech to attract the derision and contempt they deserve, if that's what they want to do with it :)Ah, Ben, but then we get back to the question of who determines what speech causes "deliberate" violence. The legal system is effective in assigning guilt after the fact, but has a much more difficult time proving intent.
Well done. Free speech is free speech, end of story.If we (well, they) start limiting racists and others we don't agree with, it will never end. We have to take the good with the bad and the ugly. Unfortunately, the bad (and especially the ugly) get all the press.LOL, Mike, so true that last statement!Michael, this hit home for me awhile back when the idea of banning pornography from the Internet was going around. Somebody wanted a law to ban "offensive" material from the 'net. Yes, I was gung-ho for the idea, until I realized that the definition of "offensive" could expand to other fields, including those I didn't find problematic but others might. So as much as I hated to admit it, I have to say leave the porn on the Internet because I don't want to lose access to the things I enjoy (can you imagine no SearchWarp just because somebody found an article or two "offensive"?). Thanks for your input.
Great read, Danny. I agree that even racists have the right to free speech in America, but there’s an important caveat that your article fails to address: What about first amendment rights on private property?The fact is, there is no constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech on private property. Basically, you have the freedom to say whatever you want on public property, but not in my house. Indeed, as property owners, we have a legal responsibility to govern what is said on our private property.Even with freedom of speech, not everyone gets to say what they want on network TV or in national newspapers. These are both privately owned properties, so they have a responsibility for what is being said using their platforms. Web sites, magazines, radio programs, churches, etc. are also privately owned properties as well, where absolute freedom of speech for everyone does not exist.In light of this, must I (or should I) allow a racist (or anyone else I find to be morally offensive) to say whatever he or she wants in my home, from my business, or at my church? I don’t think so.Hmmm...John, you're going to make me write a follow-up article now, aren't you? :)
hi danny,as i see it, if we all were to live according to the golden rule, things would be great, but that's not going to happen, and if we are not exposed to anger and hatred and racism, how will we ponder what to do about such things? they exist, we know they exist, we want them to go away, but we also have to be aware of how to have a discussion about unpleasant things.we have kids, we adore them, they grow, they say and do things that they shouldn't, what are we to do? kick them out of the house, or try to teach them better ways of dealing with life?if we don't allow them to be free, we may never know what they think and act like when we aren't around. i would think it better to hear them, and explain to them what is right and what is wrong, and why.thanks for sharing this with us,my best,sue
As a gay person and a Psychic I walk with judgment all the time but I don't have a problem with free speech. What I have a problem with is someone making assumptions about me without knowing who I am or getting to know me. I could go all Christians are bible bashers or all black people rob houses or all teenagers are hooligans but that isnt true a persons faith sexuality or race or age doesn't determine who they are as a person.I am happy for someone to say they do not believe in gay marriage thats their right but don't make assumptions about who I am based on an opinion you have. No one knows a human soul until they take the time to listen to the voice which comes from it. Have an opinion but share it with respect and humility because in the end an opinion is ones persons perception and any situation can have more than one angle depending from where you are looking from.
Great article. Well done.You are looking at the problem of: governments must tell people what to do and have the power to in force it. However, to be a true democracy the government has to give up certain powers to allow free speech.So under free speech they can but under the amendment they can't. Thus the government has given rights with one hand while enforcing it's will with the other.
Great Article, but the issue is much bigger. we must stick to our amendments, like free speech! When somebody has the guts to stand up and give attention what is really going on ( You Liar... - you remember that???), they pay the consequence for their act, but they stop the trance for people been total brainwashed!! Wake up before you lose everything, even the freedom of your privatize (like the new health care issue) and been put back into slavery and under dictator control. To many people before us left their lives for our freedom, don't allow now this government to take it away from us. Bring Peace and Freedom back to the world and stop starting fights and slader people for Power and corruption.
How would we know who is who, and what is what if we muzzled the voices of the people? It's the voice that lends us an insight to the character of each human for good or bad. The words of ignorance need to hear itself in order for it to change and become the wiser.Maybe we should concentrate on better education for all first, instead of considering stifling unintelligent voices. It's not what we say, but what we do that really matters in the end.
Racism will never go away as long as humans occupy this planet.Political correctness does nothing but mask what people are thinking.It's not against the law to be racist it is ones right in this country,.until the liberals control us all.Oh you have to think like us .You have to love everybody.Guess what I don't love everyone and I don't want to. I want to be around my own kind.You can't shove 10 cultures into one spot and expect everyone to get along.It is impossible.I'm 100 percent out of tolerance,but not 100 percent racist.just pro freedom .
Great text!
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.