Silence is...
Some of you may have heard about the Ann Coulter/UC Berkeley mess. Ann Coulter is a known to come from a conservative viewpoint, being a Fox News contributor. She planned on speaking tonight on the campus but was not allowed to do so due to security concerns. It seems that groups from the left threatened violence and riots as when Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak on campus earlier this year. Ironically, UC Berkeley is considered the roots of the Free Speech Movement from back in the 60's when the campus was trying to limit political activities on campus. Peaceful 'sit ins' were staged by students to protest what they felt like was their inability to promote viewpoints in opposition with campus administration. Now it's the birthplace of a new irony.
What is crazy to me is that those who are supposedly are the fiercest supporters and promoters of civil rights, tolerance, and free speech are the ones who seem to be the most violently opposed. And when I say violently opposed...unfortunately that's intended to be understood both figuratively and literally.
And why the attempt to silence? Why the intolerance? Why the violent riots? This is where it gets truly stupid: It's because they don't agree with what someone else has to say.
So, here's the formula:
There's a leadership principle I learned a long time ago which I've used as a boss, a father, and a friend which says, "what gets rewarded gets repeated". I knew that if my sons demonstrated negative behavior...like throwing a fit in the middle of WalMart...and I responded to it with taking them to Braums for ice cream, what would happen the next time we went to WalMart? What would happen every time we went to WalMart? My concern is that we're taking a giant eraser to the first amendment by rewarding horribly crappy (might I add illegal?) behavior. I don't like what you have to say? Ok, all I have to do is threaten to set fires, break windows, loot storefronts, throw things at police, and beat the thunder out of people I don't agree with (or think a lot about blowing up the White House *coughidiotmadonnacough*) and voila!! You're shut down! That only frustrates YOU because now only my side is going to be heard...that's not a good option to me! A knife slips into the heart of the first amendment.
Genius (and I use that term not in it's highest and purest form, i.e. Freaking Genius, rather I use it dripping with sarcasm) Howard Dean (you remember ol' YELLER from the 2004 presidential campaign) claimed on Twitter that Coulter wasn't protected by the first amendment because it doesn't protect 'hate speech', citing an old legal case stating that the amendment doesn't cover "fighting words that were likely to incite violence".
Well, Howard, we know you tend to let crazy things fly out of your mouth when you're all wound up about something, but who is inciting violence?? To incite to violence is to encourage others toward violent behavior. For example, I send out an email saying, "Meet me on campus tonight (or the town hall meeting with the Senator, or the White House, or some random march) bring lighters, ski masks and gloves, wear black and we're going to raise some hell so this person goes home." If I say something that you don't agree with and you act out violently in response...I didn't incite you to violence. Your immaturity incited you to violence...your weakness, your lack of control, your lack of intelligence, your lack of ability to articulate rational thoughts, your inability to debate....THAT is what incited you to violence.
For the life of me I wish I knew how it happened, but it seems like overnight we have a huge crop of people in this country that can't use their words. When my kids were small and they were frustrated about something, they would often act out in anger and have a fit of temper. I would always do my best to get them off to themselves, let them cool off a bit, and then talk to them and encourage them to use their words when they got frustrated.
Where in the world did safe zones and safe spaces come from?? What ever happened to rational debate? Whatever happened to talking through issues, points and counterpoints with people with whom you don't necessarily see eye to eye? I'm wondering if it's indicative of the culture in which people are spoon fed what they should believe about virtually anything, but particularly political and social issues. People!! Use your words!!...but maybe you can't.
It reminds me of when I was teaching introduction to philosophy classes. It was always interesting when it came to the existence of God and theological issues. Ironically, the students I had the most problems with in that section of class were the kids who were raised in the church. They had been spoon fed facts about God and the bible since they were in diapers. They always had some good Sunday School answers (a lot of Sunday School questions could be answered with God, the church, or the Bible)...but when they were challenged by the POSSIBILITY that God doesn't exist, they'd be all kinds of defensive. Some would get downright ANGRY! Their reaction wasn't because they were offended that anyone dare question the existence of God, it was because they had no idea how to DEFEND their belief for the existence of God (just one of many issues). They had beliefs (faith), but it wasn't THEIRS. It was their parent's faith, or their youth minister;s faith, or their pastor's or their grandma's faith. They never developed a faith of their own. They didn't know why they believed what they believed.
Perhaps that's what's going on with others today. They're being spoon fed beliefs about politics or social issues, saying "x" is good, "y" is bad, from the time they were in diapers. Someone comes along to challenge that belief with one which is in direct opposition to what has been held close for years. Maybe they're like my old philosophy students...because they didn't know how to defend their belief system, they would get scared. What if it's NOT true! What if what I believe is wrong??
Beside our new office at work is a creek lined on each bank with small forests of trees. The other day when a strong storm came through, one of the tall, older and more mature trees blew over in the fierce winds. Why did that tree blow over and the others remain standing? I'm not sure, but looking at the exposed roots gave me the impression that the lack of deep roots caused it to go over. The stronger a tree is below the surface, the stronger it is when strong forces oppose it. Maybe the reason people resort to safe zones, to clicking the button to defriend on Facebook, resorting to the violent equivalent of a temper tantrum instead of using their words is because their roots really aren't that deep.
To those on the right: you too.
Maybe the first debate you need to have is with yourself. Why do you believe what you believe? What is it that YOU really believe about certain issues and why? Is it because that's what Dad always yelled about? Is it because that's what that professor said? Is it because of what your favorite news personality pointed out? You really shouldn't be on Facebook yelling about certain issues until you've had those arguments with yourself first. Oh, and how about this...how about not yelling, name calling, belittling...how about calmly discussing the issues with others, presenting point and counterpoint??
If you want an existence where you're only around people you agree with about everything, here's what you do: wrap yourself with bubble wrap nice and tight, lock yourself in your house by yourself, no cable, no radio, no internet, have someone designated to slide food under your door so you don't starve to death, and you'll have a nice, safe, agreeable life. Oh, and don't forget the duct tape. FG
What is crazy to me is that those who are supposedly are the fiercest supporters and promoters of civil rights, tolerance, and free speech are the ones who seem to be the most violently opposed. And when I say violently opposed...unfortunately that's intended to be understood both figuratively and literally.
And why the attempt to silence? Why the intolerance? Why the violent riots? This is where it gets truly stupid: It's because they don't agree with what someone else has to say.
So, here's the formula:
- Party A has something they want to say
- Party B does not agree with the viewpoint of Party A
- Party B labels the opposing viewpoint of Party A "hate speech"
- Party B protests disagreement with destructive violence to silence Party A
- Party A isn't allowed to express their opposing viewpoint to protect property/lives from destructive violence
- Party A is at fault for destructive violence if opposing viewpoint is expressed.
There's a leadership principle I learned a long time ago which I've used as a boss, a father, and a friend which says, "what gets rewarded gets repeated". I knew that if my sons demonstrated negative behavior...like throwing a fit in the middle of WalMart...and I responded to it with taking them to Braums for ice cream, what would happen the next time we went to WalMart? What would happen every time we went to WalMart? My concern is that we're taking a giant eraser to the first amendment by rewarding horribly crappy (might I add illegal?) behavior. I don't like what you have to say? Ok, all I have to do is threaten to set fires, break windows, loot storefronts, throw things at police, and beat the thunder out of people I don't agree with (or think a lot about blowing up the White House *coughidiotmadonnacough*) and voila!! You're shut down! That only frustrates YOU because now only my side is going to be heard...that's not a good option to me! A knife slips into the heart of the first amendment.
Genius (and I use that term not in it's highest and purest form, i.e. Freaking Genius, rather I use it dripping with sarcasm) Howard Dean (you remember ol' YELLER from the 2004 presidential campaign) claimed on Twitter that Coulter wasn't protected by the first amendment because it doesn't protect 'hate speech', citing an old legal case stating that the amendment doesn't cover "fighting words that were likely to incite violence".
Well, Howard, we know you tend to let crazy things fly out of your mouth when you're all wound up about something, but who is inciting violence?? To incite to violence is to encourage others toward violent behavior. For example, I send out an email saying, "Meet me on campus tonight (or the town hall meeting with the Senator, or the White House, or some random march) bring lighters, ski masks and gloves, wear black and we're going to raise some hell so this person goes home." If I say something that you don't agree with and you act out violently in response...I didn't incite you to violence. Your immaturity incited you to violence...your weakness, your lack of control, your lack of intelligence, your lack of ability to articulate rational thoughts, your inability to debate....THAT is what incited you to violence.
For the life of me I wish I knew how it happened, but it seems like overnight we have a huge crop of people in this country that can't use their words. When my kids were small and they were frustrated about something, they would often act out in anger and have a fit of temper. I would always do my best to get them off to themselves, let them cool off a bit, and then talk to them and encourage them to use their words when they got frustrated.
Where in the world did safe zones and safe spaces come from?? What ever happened to rational debate? Whatever happened to talking through issues, points and counterpoints with people with whom you don't necessarily see eye to eye? I'm wondering if it's indicative of the culture in which people are spoon fed what they should believe about virtually anything, but particularly political and social issues. People!! Use your words!!...but maybe you can't.
It reminds me of when I was teaching introduction to philosophy classes. It was always interesting when it came to the existence of God and theological issues. Ironically, the students I had the most problems with in that section of class were the kids who were raised in the church. They had been spoon fed facts about God and the bible since they were in diapers. They always had some good Sunday School answers (a lot of Sunday School questions could be answered with God, the church, or the Bible)...but when they were challenged by the POSSIBILITY that God doesn't exist, they'd be all kinds of defensive. Some would get downright ANGRY! Their reaction wasn't because they were offended that anyone dare question the existence of God, it was because they had no idea how to DEFEND their belief for the existence of God (just one of many issues). They had beliefs (faith), but it wasn't THEIRS. It was their parent's faith, or their youth minister;s faith, or their pastor's or their grandma's faith. They never developed a faith of their own. They didn't know why they believed what they believed.
Perhaps that's what's going on with others today. They're being spoon fed beliefs about politics or social issues, saying "x" is good, "y" is bad, from the time they were in diapers. Someone comes along to challenge that belief with one which is in direct opposition to what has been held close for years. Maybe they're like my old philosophy students...because they didn't know how to defend their belief system, they would get scared. What if it's NOT true! What if what I believe is wrong??
Beside our new office at work is a creek lined on each bank with small forests of trees. The other day when a strong storm came through, one of the tall, older and more mature trees blew over in the fierce winds. Why did that tree blow over and the others remain standing? I'm not sure, but looking at the exposed roots gave me the impression that the lack of deep roots caused it to go over. The stronger a tree is below the surface, the stronger it is when strong forces oppose it. Maybe the reason people resort to safe zones, to clicking the button to defriend on Facebook, resorting to the violent equivalent of a temper tantrum instead of using their words is because their roots really aren't that deep.
To those on the right: you too.
Maybe the first debate you need to have is with yourself. Why do you believe what you believe? What is it that YOU really believe about certain issues and why? Is it because that's what Dad always yelled about? Is it because that's what that professor said? Is it because of what your favorite news personality pointed out? You really shouldn't be on Facebook yelling about certain issues until you've had those arguments with yourself first. Oh, and how about this...how about not yelling, name calling, belittling...how about calmly discussing the issues with others, presenting point and counterpoint??
If you want an existence where you're only around people you agree with about everything, here's what you do: wrap yourself with bubble wrap nice and tight, lock yourself in your house by yourself, no cable, no radio, no internet, have someone designated to slide food under your door so you don't starve to death, and you'll have a nice, safe, agreeable life. Oh, and don't forget the duct tape. FG
Comments
Post a Comment