ananarchist

Rights

In Politic on January 26, 2011 at 7:47 am

A question for our time, during the current resurgence of religious fascism, do we allow the voices of hate rule the debate? Is there enough tolerance in humanity to allow people to express themselves without violence? The ‘politically correct’ are the first sentinels of censorship. By narrowing the debate of what is acceptable the politically correct have become the assassins of free speech. The politically correct are the first to rat you out or to make sure someone else is offended by your free speech. It is not any different than sharing opinions with a closes friend, just to have someone snoop or listen in and then only later make moral judgments based on the difference of opinion. My point is, the politically correct are not involved in the conversation but are mindless reactionaries based on their own self-interest. Recently in Canada, the rock and roll band, The Dire Straits have a song from 1985 that was censored for using the word ‘Faggot’. In the USA this year, the novels of Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer had to drop the word ‘Nigger’ and replace it with the word ‘Slave’. My first reaction is WHY? And Why can we not teach context and history for what it really is? I don’t use the word Nigger or Fagot, I have no need, these term are dated, derogatory and simply free speech I just don’t use. As free speech, can we not understand context, history and a variety of other factors to grip the intended use of a word. The answer is yes! The politically correct can not distinguish context and history, they are extremists and must be treated as such. They are willing to sick rabid dogs on you for your opinion and if really piss them off, they will threaten you by sending boys in blue clown suits to take you away or worse, they will pull a gun on you. The bottom line is, we have to engage them in a debate, that debate can only be successful if from the onset the two parties agree not use violence over differences of opinion and free speech. You can not debate people who are committed to do you harm if they disagree with your free speech. So, upon a debate I clear the air very early, it can be awkward and dangerous until an agreement of mutual respect is made. It always show the true commitment of whom I am dealing with and to what measure I should take to protect myself. If anyone can not agree to reasonableness and has to resort to violence in order to make a point, they have already lost debate. Its best not to break bread with those who hate freedom.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: