xie_xie_xie
22 January 2007 @ 10:30 pm
Censorship  
For those who stubbornly seek freedom, there can be no more urgent task than to come to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination. These are easy to perceive in the totalitarian societies, much less so in the system of 'brainwashing under freedom' to which we are subjected and which all too often we serve as willing or unwitting instruments. -Noam Chomsky

Disagreement is not censorship.

Criticism is not censorship.

Debate is not censorship.

Fair opposition is not censorship.

So, what is?

Having your viewpoint, writing, art, criticism, opinion or other expression silenced by force, by unfair opposition, by threats, is censorship.

If someone tells me they'll kill my child if I speak at a political rally, or fire me, or burn down my house, I'm being censored. If the government passes a law depriving me of my right to say what I think about something, I'm being censored.

If someone removes my post from their website, I am being censored, although it's the website owner's right to do that... nonetheless, I'm being silenced.

However, freely expressing your opinion, forcefully and well, with documentation, even ruthlessly and brilliantly ... IS. NOT. CENSORSHIP.

It's the OPPOSITE of censorship. It's the CURE for censorship.

The remedy for speech you don't like is MORE SPEECH.

It's a complete reversal of the meaning of the word "censorship" to say that those of us who express concerns about someone's written work are "censoring" that person. No one is being censored... well, except us, who have repeatedly had our posts removed from the feedback section at Midnight Whispers, where someone made the accusation, in a sneaky way, that speaking out against a story is censorship of the author of that story.

It is a subtle and dangerous message, to say that someone's criticism of your speech is a form of censorship, because whether people do it to themselves or have it forced on them, silence is silence. 

One person's right to express herself doesn't outweigh mine. If she has the right to write her story, then I, or anyone else, have the right to critique it. Freedom of expression is a double-edged sword.
 
 
( Post a new comment )
[identity profile] court1429.livejournal.com on January 24th, 2007 04:12 am (UTC)
Re: Part II
I think it's that the arts and one's experience of them/reaction to them are a lot more subjective than a law or engineering project (though there's plenty of room for argument regarding passing a new law or building a highway).

Ben Brantley (New York Times theatre critic) can give me an analysis of the script and place it in historical/political/ whatever context, that I may not be aware of and it can really enrich my experience of the play for having read his words. And he can write a discussion of the quality of the acting and set design, writing, etc. But regardless whether or not he gives a pan or a rave, his opinion is still just his own and I may adore something he says should close tomorrow so as to spare the public and I may hate something he give huge compliments to. So, I just think arts criticism is less definite than something in the hard sciences.
(Reply) (Parent) (Link)