Wednesday, November 26, 2014



Dartmouth student: America must ‘fix free speech’ with censorship

An Ivy League student says that America “has gone too far in allowing people to say whatever they want,” and asserts that the country needs to censor free speech.

In an editorial in The Dartmouth titled “ Fixing Free Speech,” Traynor claims the extent in which the First Amendment protects American’s right to express their views and ideas is “distasteful.”

“[T]his country has gone too far in allowing people to say whatever they want, and should curtail speech that is obviously harmful to society, such as hate speech,” writes Traynor. “This kind of speech, despite being clearly distasteful, has long been upheld as legal in America because of the First Amendment.”

Traynor claims that censoring speech in America would never progress to the degree of authoritarian regimes such as China because of cultural norms and social media presence.

“[G]iven America’s deeply-held cultural norms and the power of the Internet and social media, such a scenario is highly unlikely,” writes Traynor. “We need only small but significant change to the freedom of speech in this country: namely, the prohibition of unambiguously destructive, hateful speech.”

Traynor goes on to cite examples of other democracies that do not legally protect certain kinds of speech, and suggests Americans can learn from them.

“South Africa outlaws ‘advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion’ and war propaganda,” writes Traynor. “Many European countries, as well as Australia and New Zealand, have similar laws regarding racist speech.”

He continues to ask readers how America can justify allowing speech that other democracies “have wisely deemed to be against their modern values?”

However, Traynor’s proposition did not settle well with readers who voiced their concerns about censoring speech through comments posted below the article.

“Mr. Traynor, your views are repulsive, and I am ashamed of you for propagating them. There are no ‘sensible restrictions on free speech,’ and whoever thinks that stifling speech eliminates hatred, anger, and violence, is plainly wrong. The answer to hate speech is more speech, not less.”

SOURCE

I find Mr Traynor's speech offensive.  So should he be censored?

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Traynor claims that censoring speech in America would never progress to the degree of authoritarian regimes such as China because of cultural norms and social media presence.

Really???

PC will insure that it does. Who decides? Him?

Anonymous said...

Funny I thought that the MSM had already beat him to the punch. No criticism of dear leader is allowed.

Stan B said...

This "fix the First Amendment" type of speech is most offensive and harmful to our society. It is hateful, as well, and does not conform to our societal norms. This type of speech - critical of the rules under which we conduct public discourse - will be the first type of speech to go. After that, they'll come for your favorite expression.

Anonymous said...

So like the allegory in Orwell's 'Animal Farm' where the constitutional articles daubed on the barn door were skilfully altered.

Dean said...

Always someone out there who wants to decide what others may or may not say. Well, that's ok as long as I get to say what is acceptable and what is not. And therein lies the problem. Who gets to define hate speech, violent speech or offensive speech?

Best to leave free speech just that. Free.

Bird of Paradise said...

Sounds like just another intellectiual idiot with STUPID written all over their fat bloated face

stinky said...

One day each and every useful idiot like this guy inevitably finds out what his dear leaders really think of him when his usefulness has run out.

Anonymous said...

I'll protect my first amendment rights with my second amendment rights.