There an argument being passed around that freedom of expression is not a freedom to insult or offend. This argument is objectively and factually wrong. This is exactly what free speech is.
Freedom of expression is not intended to protect traditional opinions. No constitutional protection is needed to protect traditional opinions. You need a law to protect your right to say that kittens are cute. Freedom of expression exists specifically to allow the taboo of being pronounced and expressed, in particular, to express marginalized.
Being offended the other hand, is something you choose. Everyone sees the same things, hear the same things, perceives the same things. Some things that you see go against your moral compass. This happens to everyone, every day. But each of us also choose what to focus on this neverending avalanche of impressions: if a person chooses to be offended by the opinion of someone else, which is exactly what it is - this is a choice and something that freedom of speech is not affected by or concerned.
freedom of expression is the right of idiots to be completely false, and that is a good thing, because as history shows, it may be that those considered idiots were those of the right.
When people in establishing an express non-mainstream opinion, they are not ostracized from society because they are influential, but non-mainstream opinion is politely ignored as if it never happened.
When outcasts or other marginalized people express a prevailing opinion, everyone agrees, and no social punishment is inflicted. It is not perceived as dangerous, either.
This is when marginalized people say dangerous things, that freedom of expression is necessary because there are no other restrictions in society against punishing these people to break taboos. And it happened several times that it is they are correct. Thus, freedom of expression can be summarized as the right for idiots to be completely false, insulting and offensive -. Because from time to time, they prove to be in the right
This is why privacy is crucial.
Some findings, opinions, and facts that may be correct are still so taboo that you can not express them safely with your name attached, despite the legal right to do so - there is still social sanctions attached. It is important to remember that freedom of expression is a right to the government it is not a right to your fellow people. Nobody is forced to listen to you, work with you, or lunch with you if they do not want - more social actions presuppose mutual agreement, and social sanctions have always been high for people who break social taboos, even when their moral compass dictates they should.
Therefore, freedom of expression does not exist in practice, without the possibility of anonymity. And this ability to break taboos led to most things that we consider "progress" in the mirror today.
Privacy remains your own responsibility.
0 Komentar