Both Democrats and Republicans seem to agree that criticizing Israel is not only something that they disagree with, but something that should be outright criminalized.
Never mind a little inconvenient thing like our freedom of speech, which is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, right in the first amendment. Not the second or the third or whatever, no. The right to free speech was the very first thing that our forefathers felt deserved to be protected. And this was not restricted just to opinions about what is going on here in the United States. It does not specify freedom of speech on domestic matters only. When criticism of another country becomes to distasteful to member of our government that they feel it needs to be criminalized, this becomes a very direct violation of the right to free speech, as well as free thought.
Somehow, the Democrats and the Republicans are supposed to bitterly oppose one another, and disagree with everything, right? The Republicans are supposed to be fixated on less government, and cutting taxes and expenses on the budgets, while Democrats are supposed to believe that government should be used to benefit the people, and are supposed to take enlightened positions on social issues.
Yet, here the two major parties are, agreeing with each other on this topic, and seemingly wanting to make it a crime to criticize another nation's policies.
This is the problem with two major parties - and only two major parties - ruling the roost. When they agree with each other, and they seem to do that way too much, then the hell with anyone who disagrees with them. It is not illegal to criticize Israel's policies inside of Israel itself. But here, supposedly in the land of the free, it might become a crime to criticize Israel?
Unbelievable.
This is not even about Israel. Really, the way that you feel about what is going on in Israel today matters little in terms of this story, because this has nothing to do with the specifics of that debate. Even if you feel that there is too much criticism of Israel, you cannot simply agree that silencing any and all debate on this issue is the right approach. After all, it should be stressed that criticism of Israeli policies regarding Palestine and the settlements are not only not illegal in Israel itself, but there are strong and serious debates on the issue. To suggest that here, in the United States, where many people take pride in enjoying the benefits of freedom, and particularly in having the right to express yourself and your opinions without fear of persecution, it should be a no-brainer that criticism of Israel's policies, however distasteful high-ranking government officials might find it, nevertheless clearly falls within the legal framework of free speech. To suggest that criticizing Israel should be regarded as criminal activity is beginning to really play with fire, especially at a time when it seems like our rights are being stripped and are in danger like never before.
This is about free speech, regardless of your position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And perhaps it is also a reminder that the Democrats, who admittedly have rarely looked or sounded as progressive in the past three decades or so as they have since the rise of Trumpism, are anything but actual progressives. After all, Glass-Steagall was repealed on President Clinton's watch, and it was President Clinton who set up the for profit prison system that has proved so disastrous. And President Obama's first term sure resembled a third George W. Bush term a little too closely. And there are a whole range of issues where the Democrats hardly seem like a serious progressive alternative to the inflexible positions of the party of Trump, at a time when we clearly need it.
So, regardless of your position regarding Israel, please take a look at this story, and try to understand the full ramifications of it. Again, this is not about Israel, as much as it is about your and my continued ability to express our thoughts freely. Once we give government officials the power to silence us, we are heading down a very real path towards actual totalitarianism, where we will no longer have to imagine what a fascist America would look like.
Democrats Join Republicans In Bill Criminalizing Speech Critical Of Israel MJ Rosenberg, Contributor Worked on Capitol Hill for Democratic Senators and House members for 20 years Democrats Join Republicans In Bill Criminalizing Speech Critical Of Israel, July 27, 2017:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democrats-join-republicans-in-bill-criminalizing-speech_us_5978bc17e4b0c6616f7ce6d9?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003
Although I read the entire article, the first sentence says it all: "With Trump as president, it is easy to forget how utterly hopeless many Congressional Democrats are, including many who look like progressives." As a matter of fact, I'd go so far as to say that Democrats have essentially been coasting on that strategy for decades. "If you don't want people like Dubya and Trump in the White House or in Congress, you'd better vote for whoever we nominate with little to no actual scrutiny of those candidates. If you refuse and we lose the election, not only will we not do any soul-searching, we'll blame everyone but ourselves." People who should know better chronically fail to take them to task for this shameless complacency, cynicism, emotional blackmail and entitlement, the result being that, as you and the author of this piece accurately point out, the Democrats are only nominally an opposition party – we're essentially told to choose between conservatives who masquerade as progressives when it's politically expedient to do so (Hillary Clinton is the perfect embodiment of such disingenuousness), and ultra-conservatives who openly condemn and oppose progressivism at every turn. Then people wonder why this country has shifted so far to the right.
ReplyDeleteAs for free speech, I find that many of the people who are the quickest to spout platitudinous clichés about this being the "Land of the Free" are also the quickest to curtail the very freedoms they claim to champion. Network television stations (and even most cable networks) aren't authorized to feature nudity or "bad" words in their programming. Hell, the world "censorship" itself is censored. Have you ever noticed how the disclaimer preceding network broadcasts of movies never mention that word? No, it's always "This film has been edited for content". That's precisely the sort of euphemistic bullshit, sorry, "bovine stool samples" which the late George Carlin abhorred and with which he routinely had a field day. Ditto for radio stations: I find myself turning off Pink Floyd's "Money" when it comes on the Q or WDHA, because I'm sick and tired of the word "bullshit" being muted lest the real-life Ned Flanders of the world have their delicate sensibilities offended.
Of course, recent high-profile examples of censorship have taken on a more blatant, not to mention overtly political form – I'm thinking specifically of the NFL's punishing players who take a knee during the anthem, and the attempt to criminalize speech that is critical of Israel. As you rightfully point out, people's individual views regarding these issues are neither here nor there in the bigger scheme of things. If the goal is to be intellectually honest and consistent, there's no room for equivocation or double standards: we either support the right of people to express views that don't necessarily coincide with our own (and in some cases that we find deeply offensive), or we don't. TV news is another example of censorship by another name. During the Vietnam War, images of flag-draped caskets were sometimes shown, serving as a very real and poignant example of the cost of war in human terms. Not surprisingly, showing such images was deemed "inappropriate" and "disrespectful" and therefore discontinued. Tellingly, the circumstances that caused those deaths aren't subjected to quite the same scrutiny or harsh judgment. As always, we're not supposed to ask questions or challenge the status quo.
Aside from the standard exceptions (i.e. not yelling "Fire!" in a crowed theater, committing slander or libel, child pornography or threatening people), I tend to be an absolutist where free speech is concerned. There's no such thing as the right not to be offended. We've seen the results of societies that openly reject that idea, and the results speak for themselves.
ReplyDeleteGetting back to the criminalization of speech that's critical of Israel, I feel there's a clear and unmistakable correlation between such a brazenly undemocratic initiative, and the knee-jerk reaction too many people have to any and all criticism of Israel: baseless accusations of antisemitism. Mind you, I'm certainly not denying that antisemitism exists. What I do take issue with however is when people use that word indiscriminately to deflect any and all criticism of the Israeli regime. There isn't a country on earth that should be exempt from criticism and scrutiny, and Israel is no exception. Those who fail to recognize that also fail to grasp that they're ultimately doing themselves and their cause a disservice, because it becomes a case of the boy who cried wolf: people who actually think critically and ask questions will inevitably stop taking them seriously.
Hey, I will respond by posting something on the inadequacies of the two party system next. But just wanted to make sure that you got the message that Pop is in the hospital. This is his last night at Chilton, and he will be transferring to Morristown tomorrow. He was in tremendous pain and had those waves of pain, but when I visited yesterday with Sebast, he was doing a lot better. Still, he needs to get a procedure for a blockage in his arteries, which I think will take place tomorrow. Hope all is well otherwise on your end.
ReplyDeleteYes, I received a voicemail from Mom to that effect, and visited him at Chilton yesterday afternoon. As for your post, as you may recall censorship is something I've been passionate about for roughly three decades now, going back to my teen years, so I obviously wanted to respond to this. It just never ceases to amaze me that so many people presume to determine what is or isn't appropriate or offensive on everyone else's behalf. Worse, too many people don't seem to have any real problem with that.
ReplyDelete