Monday, February 11, 2013
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Monday, October 29, 2012
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Friday, August 03, 2012
Beyond the Pale - freedom in America and UK - From "The American" 2012
Beyond the Pale
I'm not a racist, but...used to be the fairly popular precursor to racist comments in the past. These days, it is freedom of speech that is on the receiving end of such treatment.
So I will take two stories, one from either side of the pond, to illustrate how it is becoming acceptable to take the approach that “I'm all for freedom, bu
t...”. The but in the sentenc ll invariably refer to something that is just too unsavory, despicable or gauche and utterly offensive. Of course, that is precisely the type of thing that has to be protected by freedom of speech – as nobody ever wanted to censor anything that didn't offend anyone.
So we have that stupid student, Liam Stacey who apparently gets drunk and rather than gushing bile or nonsense in a local student bar where no one pays him any attention (or in a real bar where he gets a right-hander) he decides to Tweet his views about Bolton footballer Fabrice Muamba's collapse at FA Cup quarter-final clash with Tottenham Hotspur at White Hart Lane. Now while his remarks were pitifully distasteful “LOL (laugh out loud). F*** Muamba. He's dead!!” - the far bigger concern and danger is the idea that we are not permitted to write or say what we think without the risk of being imprisoned. Stacey was sentenced to 56 days in prison.
What is quite incredible is that those who once would have held the line against such an outrageous act, those who consider themselves as Liberal or formerly 'Left wing' seem to so often be at the forefront of encouraging this chillingly censorious climate. No doubt, because Stacey went on to respond with racist comments, he was deemed as someone who was not the 'right kind' of person who deserves freedom of speech. If freedom of speech is only allocated to certain 'types' of people, we have lost any meaningful sense of it. As Musa Okwonga explained on The Independent blog in what seemed to be misgivings about the sentence – if the aim is to prevent rampant racism then certain popular offensive sites such as TheFunnyRacist should be pursued and closed. This is the logical conclusion of banning sentiments we do not like.
Of course, historically, almost any challenge to widely held views was offensive. Universal suffrage, freedom and equality for all regardless of race or gender – and the idea that we are children who cannot cope with nasty ideas, or worse, that we will somehow be overtaken by age old psychotic madness when reading certain words, is far more insidious and dangerous for society than drunk students or racist ideas – which are far better exposed to the daylight of enlightened debate, where those of us confident in our ideas to dispense with flawed ideas can win the intellectual and practical arguments.
Across the water, Rutgers University was the setting for a tragic situation – that then solidified the idea of “hate crimes”. Tyler Clementi, an eighteen year old student was filmed in September 2010 in his dorm room with another man, by his room mate Dharun Ravi. Ravi posted the video of the two kissing online and made comments on Twitter and had allegedly planned to post a second video. Ravi and Molly Wei a female student, were charged with Cyber-voyeurism at the time. However in March, following an outpouring of anger from a range of groups and individuals, Dharun Ravi was charged with a “Hate Crime” - namely, he was found guilty of “invasion of privacy, hindering apprehension, witness tampering, and all four of the bias intimidation charges”.
In regard to the viewing on September 19, the jury concluded that Ravi did not act with the purpose to intimidate either Clementi or his guest because of their sexual orientation, but that Clementi was intimidated and reasonably believed that he had been targeted because of his sexual orientation. Tyler Clementi committed suicide by jumping from the George Washington Bridge on 22 September 2010.
Once again, it is certainly the case that some people have some views that many consider “beyond the pale”. However, “hate crimes” seem to magnify something where already we have laws for crime. As Richard Cohen wonders in the Washington Post, why is it that beating up someone is somehow less of a crime if they are not black or Jewish? Worse though, is how “hate crime” and “hate speech” is now intertwined – and students on campus and adults everywhere run the risk of being prosecuted, whether at a soccer match or in the local pub, for making comments.
Emily Bazelon, Senior Editor at Slate, wrote in the New York Times Op-Ed of how Ravi should be held, as an 18 year old adult, accountable for invasion of privacy on campus – and for that there are already policies established. However, as she rightly pointed out, the precedent for using so-called hate crime legislation leads to freedom eroding consequences.
We all know that famous video of Paris Hilton having sex which made her “career” and the claim to privacy by celebrities is problematic, as pointed out by UK journalist Tessa Mayes. Certainly, context is everything, however if the video that Ravi filmed of his room mate had been a man kissing a woman and he'd then been shunned or embarrassed in front of his fellow students and decided to kill himself, the hate crime tag could not have been applied. The obsession with bullying has mixed alongside the freedom-eroding “hate speech” outlook to create an America where formerly there is freedom of speech, but only if you do not say something that is offensive to certain particular groups.
We cannot hope for a second to win the hearts and minds of people to change and improve and transform this world if we continually try to limit, stifle, shut down and censor unpallatable words and ideas. The real outrage in all of this, is that it has become acceptable to fall back on the Mantra “Well, I am all for free speech, but...”.
At a time where journalists and academics seem to be falling over themselves alongside celebrities such as Hugh Grant to support the Leveson Inquiry and further shackling of the press on the spurious basis that Tabloids control the masses' minds and in reaction to the Murdoch Moment, I think the quote from the former footballer Stan Collymore goes to the heart of the matter. Distrusting of ordinary people and their ability to make decisions independently of some noxious ideas, he rants, “Seems to be a few who think that calling someone a W*g, ni***r or c**n and being arrested for it is an infringement of F[reedom] o[f] S[peech]. Idiots,” he tweeted. “It starts with a word, it ends in a stabbing somewhere. That’s why it’s illegal. Soppy liberal tree huggers. Don’t have a clue.”
Maybe we should argue for Collymore's arrest on the basis that it is offensive to call any human being an Idiot. It is not used to describe patients any longer and is pretty unpleasant if you look it up in the dictionary. But I am for having all the stupid, idiotic and offensive ideas fought out and not shoved under the carpet and banned. It is only when ideas and views are “beyond the pale” that freedom of speech matters. In these oh so sensitive, yet desensitized times, where Moral Panics play out in a realm of little morality, anyone who believes in freedom needs to take a stand against the attack on free speech.
Just in case you think these are isolated incidents, from sport to theater, University and beyond this chilling climate is expanding. It isn't only sports fans who will have noted the recent outrage at Miami Marlins manager Ozzie Guillen's suspension for five games. This was for saying, in a Time magazine interview that he "loved" and respected Fidel Castro for avoiding being killed when so many people were out to get rid of him. For that offence to some people (his admiration, not even of the Cuban leader's politics, although that hardly matters) he has been vilified and hung out to dry somewhat. Closer to the UK, there is an attempt to ban the Israeli National Theater group, Habima, from performing at The Globe Theater's Olympiad series because it had performed in settlement areas. Of course, we should remember, when groups get uninvited, banned, silenced, self censor or censored, it is not discriminatory but ends up being simply about any group that feels "offended". (Hence Leeds University Jewish Society recently uninvited a guest speaker for fear of offending Muslims and so it goes on). Adults can be offended without dying. We in fact, have a right to offend and be offended - and our great achievement is that we can use our intelligence to win arguments and expose flawed ideas - or be beaten by better ones.
Just in case you think these are isolated incidents, from sport to theater, University and beyond this chilling climate is expanding. It isn't only sports fans who will have noted the recent outrage at Miami Marlins manager Ozzie Guillen's suspension for five games. This was for saying, in a Time magazine interview that he "loved" and respected Fidel Castro for avoiding being killed when so many people were out to get rid of him. For that offence to some people (his admiration, not even of the Cuban leader's politics, although that hardly matters) he has been vilified and hung out to dry somewhat. Closer to the UK, there is an attempt to ban the Israeli National Theater group, Habima, from performing at The Globe Theater's Olympiad series because it had performed in settlement areas. Of course, we should remember, when groups get uninvited, banned, silenced, self censor or censored, it is not discriminatory but ends up being simply about any group that feels "offended". (Hence Leeds University Jewish Society recently uninvited a guest speaker for fear of offending Muslims and so it goes on). Adults can be offended without dying. We in fact, have a right to offend and be offended - and our great achievement is that we can use our intelligence to win arguments and expose flawed ideas - or be beaten by better ones.
It's time to grow up...and go on the offensive.
Alan Miller is Director of The Vibe Bar in Brick Lane and co-founder of the Old Truman Brewery and runs The New York Salon in NYC where he is a film producer and director Www.nysalon.org
http://www.theamerican.co.uk/pr/index.php
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Friday, November 12, 2010
What a riot
Recent events in France where violence erupted in response to proposals to raise the pension age to 62 from 60, seemed to demonstrate that rather than any kind of revolution occurring, what we were seeing was more of a reaction that reflected a widespread disappointment amongst middle class and older people - where the youth took up the mantle not of a new world and another dawn, a brighter tomorrow - but rather something that, for them, would be decades away. It seemed that this was a riot with extremely narrow preoccupations - as riots may often be - but not tagged to any sense of some alternative solution to ideas of resources, aging population and society.
Fast forward to the students in London who on Wednesday were protesting against government cuts and lifting of caps on university tuition fees and we see something similar. For the most part, as all commentators have noted, it was a peaceful demonstration. Then, a small contingent broke away and then some smashed windows at Millbank, where the Conservative offices are and went up on the roof.
Various young people have now been arrested - one of which is the young man who allegedly threw a fire extinguisher off the roof. The fact that these students were utterly naive and somehow expected that there would be no consequences - and hence not trying particularly hard to disguise themselves - is indicative of the broader sense of childish outlook of both the students: who are absolutely in their right to be outraged and to challenge the deep and problematic cuts, but also of the police, who were completey taken by "surprise" on Wednesday.
Comments hurtling around the blogosphere, that students were "finally protesting" or "up in arms" and by commentators who thought this reflected some kind of sea change miss the point here that unfortunately, even though some young people have aspirations to see challenge things, the limited political outlook and the domination of the idea that TINA rules - (There Is No Alternative to the market) ensures that while these outbursts look radical and can take a violent form, they have little to offer by way of alternatives.
In fact, the Metropolitan Police, in the age of therapeutic policing, was clearly ill prepared and did not know how to handle events (although were filming everyone and hence the subsequent arrests). This is very very different to the scenes of the Poll Tax riots 20 years ago or the inner city riots of London, Toxteth and elsewhere. It suits some, who have a yearning to go back to the past of easy formulaic assessments of what is happening around us, but, as was once said so eloquently, the past really is a different country - and things were done very differently there.
The British commentator and sociologist Frank Furedi has pointed out that in fact while young people have always been the ones ready to change the world, currently their views reflect the more entrenched views of older people in society, who if anything, are desperate to keep things somehow the same.
We can rest assured however that the police will aim to come down extremely hard on the protestors - there is talk of an attempted murder charge (for the fire extinguisher) - and this combination of not knowing how to handle situations and being naive will not help anyone searching for solutions to our problems.
While I responded to various hopefuls who thought a) the French protests were a sign of some new day and b) the London protests heralded a '68 moment, Claire Fox the Director of the UK Institute of Ideas pointed out how student activists when disrupting a Tory event had ‘F*** the Fees’ placards and their major political statement was ‘for every £1 invested in universities, the country gets £3.65 back!’ This type of attitude will never get to the root of the issue and shares a similar bean-counting mentality as the government. It's extremely frustrating that the appetite for something better among young people will be squashed so quickly for lack of better ideas. What we need, is a difficult debate, internationally, about how we organize our society, our resources, education and pensions as well as society generally. Until we get some serious discussion on this going, we won't get past naive knee jerk reactions.
Recent events in France where violence erupted in response to proposals to raise the pension age to 62 from 60, seemed to demonstrate that rather than any kind of revolution occurring, what we were seeing was more of a reaction that reflected a widespread disappointment amongst middle class and older people - where the youth took up the mantle not of a new world and another dawn, a brighter tomorrow - but rather something that, for them, would be decades away. It seemed that this was a riot with extremely narrow preoccupations - as riots may often be - but not tagged to any sense of some alternative solution to ideas of resources, aging population and society.
Fast forward to the students in London who on Wednesday were protesting against government cuts and lifting of caps on university tuition fees and we see something similar. For the most part, as all commentators have noted, it was a peaceful demonstration. Then, a small contingent broke away and then some smashed windows at Millbank, where the Conservative offices are and went up on the roof.
Various young people have now been arrested - one of which is the young man who allegedly threw a fire extinguisher off the roof. The fact that these students were utterly naive and somehow expected that there would be no consequences - and hence not trying particularly hard to disguise themselves - is indicative of the broader sense of childish outlook of both the students: who are absolutely in their right to be outraged and to challenge the deep and problematic cuts, but also of the police, who were completey taken by "surprise" on Wednesday.
Comments hurtling around the blogosphere, that students were "finally protesting" or "up in arms" and by commentators who thought this reflected some kind of sea change miss the point here that unfortunately, even though some young people have aspirations to see challenge things, the limited political outlook and the domination of the idea that TINA rules - (There Is No Alternative to the market) ensures that while these outbursts look radical and can take a violent form, they have little to offer by way of alternatives.
In fact, the Metropolitan Police, in the age of therapeutic policing, was clearly ill prepared and did not know how to handle events (although were filming everyone and hence the subsequent arrests). This is very very different to the scenes of the Poll Tax riots 20 years ago or the inner city riots of London, Toxteth and elsewhere. It suits some, who have a yearning to go back to the past of easy formulaic assessments of what is happening around us, but, as was once said so eloquently, the past really is a different country - and things were done very differently there.
The British commentator and sociologist Frank Furedi has pointed out that in fact while young people have always been the ones ready to change the world, currently their views reflect the more entrenched views of older people in society, who if anything, are desperate to keep things somehow the same.
We can rest assured however that the police will aim to come down extremely hard on the protestors - there is talk of an attempted murder charge (for the fire extinguisher) - and this combination of not knowing how to handle situations and being naive will not help anyone searching for solutions to our problems.
While I responded to various hopefuls who thought a) the French protests were a sign of some new day and b) the London protests heralded a '68 moment, Claire Fox the Director of the UK Institute of Ideas pointed out how student activists when disrupting a Tory event had ‘F*** the Fees’ placards and their major political statement was ‘for every £1 invested in universities, the country gets £3.65 back!’ This type of attitude will never get to the root of the issue and shares a similar bean-counting mentality as the government. It's extremely frustrating that the appetite for something better among young people will be squashed so quickly for lack of better ideas. What we need, is a difficult debate, internationally, about how we organize our society, our resources, education and pensions as well as society generally. Until we get some serious discussion on this going, we won't get past naive knee jerk reactions.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Saturday, November 06, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
Thursday, May 06, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)