{"id":28494,"date":"2015-11-06T01:00:16","date_gmt":"2015-11-06T06:00:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=28494"},"modified":"2015-10-27T13:00:35","modified_gmt":"2015-10-27T17:00:35","slug":"qotd-the-slow-erosion-of-freedom-of-expression","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2015\/11\/06\/qotd-the-slow-erosion-of-freedom-of-expression\/","title":{"rendered":"QotD: The slow erosion of freedom of expression"},"content":{"rendered":"<blockquote><p>This slow erosion of freedom of expression has come about in ways both social and legal. Before the 1960s, arguments for censorship tended to focus on sexual morality, pornography and obscenity. The censors themselves were usually depicted as benighted moral conservatives \u2014 priggish maiden aunts. Freedom of political speech, however, was regarded as sacrosanct by all. As legal restraints on obscenity fell away, however, freedom of political speech began to come under attack from a different kind of censor \u2014 college administrators, ethnic-grievance groups, gay and feminist advocates. <\/p>\n<p>The new censors advanced such arguments as that \u201cfree speech can never be an excuse for racism.\u201d These arguments are essentially exercises both in begging the question and in confusing it. While the principle of free speech cannot justify racism any more than it can disprove racism, it is the only principle that can allow us to judge whether or not particular speech is racist. Thus the censor\u2019s argument should be reversed: \u201cAccusations of racism can never be an excuse for prohibiting free speech.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the narrowly legal grounds for restricting speech changed, too. Since the 18th century, the basic legal justifications for restricting political speech and publication were direct incitement to harm, national security, maintaining public order, libel, etc. Content wasn\u2019t supposed to be considered (though it was sometimes smuggled in under other headings).<\/p>\n<p>Today, content is increasingly the explicit justification for restricting speech. The argument used, especially in colleges, is that \u201cwords hurt.\u201d Thus, universities, parliaments, courts and various international bodies intervene promiscuously to restrict hurtful or offensive speech \u2014 with the results described above. In the new climate, hurtful speech is much more likely to be political speech than obscene speech. <\/p>\n<p>John O&#8217;Sullivan, <a href=\"http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/articles\/no-offense-the-new-threats-to-free-speech-1414783663?tesla=y&#038;mg=reno64-wsj&#038;url=http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/article\/SB10415335274427634357204580246971759113314.html\" target=\"_blank\">&#8220;No Offense: The New Threats to Free Speech&#8221;, <em>Wall Street Journal<\/em><\/a>, 2014-10-31.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This slow erosion of freedom of expression has come about in ways both social and legal. Before the 1960s, arguments for censorship tended to focus on sexual morality, pornography and obscenity. The censors themselves were usually depicted as benighted moral conservatives \u2014 priggish maiden aunts. Freedom of political speech, however, was regarded as sacrosanct by [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,10,28,41],"tags":[459,186,99],"class_list":["post-28494","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-law","category-liberty","category-media","category-quotations","tag-censorship","tag-freedomofspeech","tag-racism"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2hpV6-7pA","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28494","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28494"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28494\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":28495,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28494\/revisions\/28495"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28494"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28494"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28494"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}