I admire FAIR’s non-partisan stance and appreciate the good work that it does. I unwaveringly support free speech, but when speech turns to obvious harassment and support for genocide there must be a strong response such as that old term “repercussion.” We must guarantee the right for people to exercise freedom of speech without legal ac…
I admire FAIR’s non-partisan stance and appreciate the good work that it does. I unwaveringly support free speech, but when speech turns to obvious harassment and support for genocide there must be a strong response such as that old term “repercussion.” We must guarantee the right for people to exercise freedom of speech without legal action (as long as the speech does not instigate violence — a dicey call), BUT we must not protect people from the other repercussions of speech that promotes evil or harm to the innocent. Thus, colleges, businesses and other organizations should be able to evict any who seriously violate their basic codes of ethics.
The problem that I, supposedly a chapter leader, have with FAIR is that it assumes people are basically good and can be reached through their better angels. I hold no such fantasy and believe that many, maybe even most, people have a capacity for evil or, at the very least, cruelty that borders on the reprehensible. I believe far to many people are susceptible to groupthink, mob-rule, rushes to judgment, and primitive impulses that cannot be altered by compassion and reason.
Yes, very clear codes of behavior or ethics are an obvious and apparently long forgotten solution. Many years ago some students at UCSD were putting large "FUCK BUSH" signs in their dormitory windows and the administration said there was nothing they could do about it. A good advertisement for a week-kneed and unimaginative administration. Their choice!
I admire FAIR’s non-partisan stance and appreciate the good work that it does. I unwaveringly support free speech, but when speech turns to obvious harassment and support for genocide there must be a strong response such as that old term “repercussion.” We must guarantee the right for people to exercise freedom of speech without legal action (as long as the speech does not instigate violence — a dicey call), BUT we must not protect people from the other repercussions of speech that promotes evil or harm to the innocent. Thus, colleges, businesses and other organizations should be able to evict any who seriously violate their basic codes of ethics.
The problem that I, supposedly a chapter leader, have with FAIR is that it assumes people are basically good and can be reached through their better angels. I hold no such fantasy and believe that many, maybe even most, people have a capacity for evil or, at the very least, cruelty that borders on the reprehensible. I believe far to many people are susceptible to groupthink, mob-rule, rushes to judgment, and primitive impulses that cannot be altered by compassion and reason.
Yes, very clear codes of behavior or ethics are an obvious and apparently long forgotten solution. Many years ago some students at UCSD were putting large "FUCK BUSH" signs in their dormitory windows and the administration said there was nothing they could do about it. A good advertisement for a week-kneed and unimaginative administration. Their choice!