Olde Europe
Diamond Member
- Dec 8, 2014
- 6,025
- 4,523
If an extremist cultural blowback to modern “liberal” values triumphs in the U.S., the “civil libertarian” perspective may indeed become untenable, just as genuine Republican values have been driven out of the old GOP by right populist demagogues. If “liberal imperialism” and a “crony capitalist” corporate liberalism re-establishes its dominance, as I believe is likely, then maybe it will survive. But either way, “free speech” in corporate media, on college campuses, and even liberal democracy and republican institutions of government themselves will continue to be endangered in the next period of the decline of the U.S. “Empire.”
Fortunately, new forms of individual expression via the Internet, non-corporate, non-national news and even “whistleblowing” institutions like WikiLeaks are struggling to find their mass audience and sea legs. The state will push its own agenda but must stay out of any sort of repressing of free speech. Corporations and other private organizations will push their own agendas and will censor, ban, and distort as they see fit and the zeitgeist requires. Pressuring and lobbying them is not a violation of free speech, but in fact is part of the give and take of a democratic society.
Actual physical confrontation over “free speech” is inevitable and necessary only in civil war conditions or if fascist violence becomes significant, and even then it is not “speech” but the violence itself that must be put down. Police measures, or popular mobilizations, can both fall into this category. But if our country falls into chronic instability, only our competitors win. Right now our Chinese competitors do not protect free speech. Unless they transform themselves in the next period dramatically, their political system’s rise and our political system’s collapse is not desirable. Empty talk of “civil war” — today coming mostly from rightwing extremists — is dangerous, idiotic, and counterproductive.
That was, as always, interesting, Tom. Not sure I follow every aspect, though, and my approach is far simpler and more near-term.
What I am looking for as concerns speech, most of all, is a decent respect for facts, and for language itself. One doesn't get to re-define terms, and thereby underhandedly deceive - see "freedom of speech" redefined as "You have to listen to me, freedom of speech requires no less!" That's ludicrous. Of course, what constitutes socially "acceptable speech", and the fight over it, is about as old as humankind, and, throughout history, the weakest and most vulnerable were worse off for it, quite obviously, since those of influence mostly defined what is acceptable speech, who gets to air their grievances, and who doesn't. The rightarded counter-offensive currently turns that on its head, finding they are occasionally having difficulties to find venues for their lashing down at those on the bottom rungs. Oh, the infamy.
Of course, that's a matter entirely different from (or is it, really?) state power getting into the business of regulating speech. Since empires, during their dawn, usually turn repressive, authoritarian, and brutal, there is a chance for that, if history is any guide. A militarized police state is, in the end, what keeps a recalcitrant population in check, at least for a while. The targets would be those standing up in opposition to imperialism, or in opposition to the plutocracy largely governing, and profiting from, it. In this light, again, the strident whining about how "liberal" campuses are turning oppressive against Nazis demanding a platform for their filth is risible.
As to some of your wording above, I find there is no such thing as "liberal imperialism". A cursory look at U.S. meddling in Central and South America, or Iraq, tells you as much. The high-minded claims to "spreading democracy" never were worth anything. There isn't going to be a "civil war". No State will mobilize the National Guard to go to war against Washington's rule. That's just rightarded geezers fantasizing about bringing about a return to the 1950s (and why stop there?), guns ablaze. China's development is going to be interesting, with tens of millions entering the middle class every year, along with the educational advancement and the intellectual independence that goes with it. As today's youth starts to advance through the ranks of society, the country is going to change. Just where they are going to end up, I find impossible to predict. Let's hope the U.S. is wise enough not to do anything overly hasty about it.