The RadioMouth crowd is in love with the saying that 'more speech will ameliorate bad speech' (or something to that effect.) That's largely because they make money with their "more" speech--not because common sense says otherwise.
As it turns out, Wilmoore Kendall ALSO said otherwise.
...Contesting the modern conviction that the chief purpose of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights was to safeguard individual freedoms, Kendall argued that Americans embrace a commitment to community and common good within which freedoms are both contextualized and necessarily tempered. The counter to the “let freedom ring” refashioning of the American Founding, Kendall said, could be found in the instincts of the people his colleagues studied like so many bugs. “One begins to suspect that the true American tradition is less that of our Fourth of July orations and our constitutional law textbooks, with their cluck-clucking over the so-called preferred freedoms, than, quite simply, that of riding somebody out of town on a rail.”...
For context, Kendall's interest was in speaking truth, not lies.
...To tolerate those who advocate destruction of Constitution and community was tantamount to slitting the throats of one’s great grandchildren. “My own instinct would be to let [American Communist Party Chairman] Gus Hall speak freely pretty much anywhere—until such time as the American people have the good sense to deport him to the Soviet Union.”...
Kendall--at one time a professor at Yale--also had a remarkably common-sense method of determining whose speech should be silenced:
...We must summon the fortitude, he believed, to cast the barbarians from our academies and classrooms. And just how does one spot a modern American barbarian? By his stripes. “The stigmata by which he is to be recognized are the various forms of the wish to live off our Civilization and benefit from the commitments it imposes upon others, but not live within them.”...
That would be a wonderful relief from such as Totalitaribitch Whitmer, no?
Post a Comment