This is a hold over from the discussion in the DVD forum regarding the bernardo/homolka film.

When Gord put forth that it's usually conservatives who are associated with limiting free speech, i was intrigued by this thought and think that it merits a discussion in it's own rights.

My initial gut reaction is that i agree with Gord's statement, though i am a lefty myself. don't get me wrong, I don't think that *all* conservatives also want to limit free speech, but it does seem that those who want to limit free speech are usually conservatives. It reminds me of 1st year math class and the prof talking about 'not all 4 legged animals are sheep but all sheep have 4 legs' - what is that principle called? always makes me think of a poor 3 legged sheep but i digress...

i think it has to do with most (socially) 'conservative' people wanting to go back to a more wholesome, simpler, 'less offensive' time (did that ever exist anyway?) and if you look away from all the offensive, ugly bits of society then it will cease to exist...

on the other hand, from a left wing perspective, i suppose you could argue the whole 'politically correct' thing run amok as a sign of limitation of free speech...

Good idea. I'm going to expand on my posts in Movies when I have time to put something detailed together.

Damn - time has gotton away from me and I do want to put this in e-text. For now a copy of this should do as a start:

The modern day Republician start of censorship:



Joseph Raymond McCarthy (November 14, 1908 – May 2, 1957) was an American politician of the Republican Party. McCarthy served as a U.S. Senator from the U.S. state of Wisconsin from 1947 to 1957. During his ten years in the Senate, McCarthy and his staff became notorious for aggressive campaigns against people in the U.S. government and others who were suspected of being Communists or Communist sympathizers.

As a result of these controversial actions the term McCarthyism was coined to specifically describe the intense anti-Communist movement that existed in America from 1948 to about 1956, a time which became popularly known as the Second Red Scare. During this period, people from all walks of life who were suspected of Communist sympathies became the subject of aggressive witch-hunts, often based on inconclusive or questionable evidence. People from the media, the motion picture industry, politics, and the military often became the targets of McCarthyism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy

Cessation of free speech is not a left or right wing thing.. There are examples of totalitarian regimes from both sides who severely limit the right to free speech.. The most obvious examples are probably Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. One side supremecist facists, the other xenophobic socialists..

That said, in our relatively free and open western culture, the accepted standpoint of the "left" seems to belong more in the "free and open discussion - as long as others' rights and views are respected" whereas the right seems to be more into the whole strict adherence to dogma and using a two thousand + year old book to tell them right from wrong..

I would say that restrictions on free speech, particularly on University Campuses where it should be most wide open, are by far perpetuated by the left. The leftists are the bastion of political correctness and its negative impact on free speech. The left are also masters of "free and open discussion" so long as the discussion is in agreement with the left.

As far as what people base their opinions on, I again see the repeated assertion in this thread that somehow ancient religious beliefs are by default not worthy of inclusion in "free and open discussion". This assertion entirely misses the point that "religion", modern philosophies, atheisim, humanism, etc, etc are all "world-views". Why should one class of world-view be excluded? How is one more worthy than the other. What makes a modern philosopher more valid than Jesus or Buddha or any other number of figures from history near and far? Is the idea of multiple-truths or single, absolute-truth beyond debate and discussion? To me this is the greatest attack on free speech in the current era; an attack on the assertion of truth of any sort vs relativism.