Posted on 05/16/2004 12:59:53 PM PDT by jmstein7
There is now a debate raging on FR about trolls, honest dissent, and the value of free speech. I would like to weigh in on this and then solicit opinions from all of you on the subject.
The First Amendment was a response to the English experience of viewpoint suppression by requiring licensing of the press – i.e. requiring pre-approval of books – the doctrine of construction treason, which held that writing can constitute treason, a capital offense, and the law of seditious libel, criminalizing unfavorable reporting of the government. However, the debate in the United States did not truly reach maturity until the early half of the 20th Century.
Justice Holmes (in, I believe, Abrams v. United States) famously averred that “[t]he best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” Even opinions which we “loathe and believe to be fraught with death” should not be suppressed, “unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country.”
Alternatively, the self governance rationale posits that, because the general welfare depends on the citizens making enlightened decisions, in a democratic society, free expression and discussion are essential to deciding matters of public policy. The autonomy rationale holds that for an individual to regard himself as autonomous, he must see himself as free to decide which beliefs to hold. The First Amendment is also justified on the basis that it checks the abuse of power by public officials, it diffuses dissent by creating an atmosphere of open discussion, and it fosters a tolerant society.
I am inclined to agree with Justice Holmes – and that is why I support, as I think most FReepers do – honest dissent. Although such expression of opinion may make us angry, as the Court insinuated in Terminiello v. Chicago, the most valuable expression may well be that which because it is provocative and challenging, produces these emotions. This type of debate aids us in our perpetual search for the truth.
There is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries, but on the competition of other ideas. However, what we are concerned with is false statement of fact – this type of speech, particularly speech that is intended to be deceptive, adds nothing to public debate. False statements of fact, e.g. intentionally deceptive or libelous utterances, are not within the area of constitutionally protected speech. Deceptive or defamatory speech is “low value speech,” and it adds nothing constructive to the marketplace of ideas. This is why trolls are prohibited – because they add nothing to the debate and exist only to deceive and distort the truth we are seeking.
In a nutshell, we at FR do not support viewpoint discrimination. However, what we do ask for, at a minimum, is open and honest debate as we, together search for the truth. That is, per se, the value of free speech in a Free Republic.
But let me posit my opinion anyway. :)
FR is not obligated to tolerate the point of view of anyone. God forbid, Jim Robinson goes through a horrible demon possession tonight by driving too close to Art Torres' house, and he becomes a flaming liberal. Well. He wakes up Monday morning and decides "Free Republic" is now "Democrat Underground II". He can boot all of us off and foment whatever discussion he desires.
The marketplace, in the end, is open to "honest dissent". I guess that might be the argument the first judge you mentioned (Holmes?) made. But that argument has to find a place. No constitutional right exists for that argument to be made on this forum.
Where is there a right for a Protestant, a Buddhist, a Muslim and an atheist to be invited subsequent weeks to speak to a Roman Catholic church audience?
As far as "inner faith", or "intra party" discussions, I think in a practical manner they do exist...perhaps occasionally some honest dissenters get "booted", but not too often. Certainly in a practical manner if you look at this conservative discussion group, there are more divergent points of view expressed here than I would expect could be found in the halls of Democrat Party Operatives.
I hope this provides something to your thoughts. Good luck with your studies. :)
RD.
No twisting needed. It is your post. It is your charge against FreeRepublic. You have become so divorced from reality, you cannot recognize it....or you're just lying.
I simply do not see that sending her resumes to the President is a way to solve her problem..finding a job!
I simply do not see that sending her resumes to the President is a way to solve her problem..finding a job!
I know Cyborg. You can't get some of them to be sensative to another's plight; but, one could hope to expect that they would at least try to treat others with respect.. even if you disagree with them. If a person comes to you in good faith or bad faith, the way which you treat them will determine how thy approach you next time. Defensive mentality. You put one of mine in the hospital, I'll put one of yours in the morgue. If you treat someone like crap and try to do a bangup job of it, it just escalates the sourness of the ongoing dialogue and then no one will listen to you. That's why the public got sick a few years ago of listening to the Democrats. If Republicans act the same way, the public can change their minds. So it is all important the face we portray to the public. Some will read that as "oh, we should just beat up on poeple in private.." For those, there isn't much you can do save ping 'em tween the eyes with a 2x4 and hope they wake up (that's a joke). But, what we can do is try to be civil. And I don't find that the way to do that is to kick people in the teeth and say - "see, our ideas are better."
So much for being able to debate like intelligent adults.
Obviously, there is no value in the post. But, is there any "value" in the person? She sounded young, she took the time to sign up and post. She whined about a perceived problem and a ridiculous solution to that problem.
Maybe she signed up, with the purpose of disrupting the site, directly from DU. Maybe she's just too immature and not too bright, and thought she was doing something about her problem. I don't know. But, I wonder if there is a way to find out; some way to reach young people like this, before they settle into a long life of voting against the best interests of their country.
Trust me, the first source that reaches through to her, and directly or indirectly helps her with her "problem," will have the philosophy she emulates the rest of her life. It sure would be nice -- and constructive --if that source could be us, here.
Good grief!
I hate to break it to you now, but all that was a lie!
There was no republican attack machine!
Excuse me for my momentary incredulity; but, did you pass highschool reading? That is not what I said and you danged know it.
Having just arrived, I would like your take on the accuracy of this post before I blast you. Could you clarify your position in response to this description?
Okay fair enough...suppose tammy was for real now. I don't actually have a problem with sending a resume attached to a nice letter of protest to the President. However, what exactly is the president supposed to do about all the other people unemployed who aren't in IT?
Yep. And that's the way it should be. You also have an endless line of people just waiting for the next person to abuse for sport. It's the latter I'm concerned with.
I believe I've read and responded to them all so far. Taking each one in turn. If I missed one, please point it out; but, I'm getting flooded as per usual.
Up Yours Jimbo!
It's extra chromosome right wing nuts like you why we are in this mess in Iraq. You sit in your wheelchair and act like a frickin' military wannabe general while our kids are dying for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in Iraq.
Go ahead and ban me for the 5000th time ASSHOLE. I'll be back On the day after the election when John Kerry becomes President-elect to laugh in your weasly little face. And it goes a little like this, give me a kiss:
LOL BABY!
Regards,
Toiletman :-)
You don't seem to like FR...have you always felt this way?
Whoa!
Consider yourself toasted!!
Thank you!!!
If everyone could just settle down when a newbie posts a vanity, maybe the person is merely guilty of receiving a public school education, which would explain the lack of communication skills.
This post which everyone is using for an example, is one I didn't see. These people who post vanities on subjects like this, are looking for validation...and we should give it to them. We should take these young people under our wing, and help them navigate their way through life...and vote Republican. We have to show these confused, poorly educated kids, that conservatives actually give a damn.
We also have to resist the urge to correct spelling and grammar errors...
Right about now someone will call me a troll.
Well... leave it to the DUers to thoroughly trash any attempt I make to reach out. I wonder how the heck we're supposed to cull only the people who need to be convinced? That's the trick, I guess... being able to tell the difference. That above post was disgusting. Geez!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.