Ebbs and flows in free speech

From Taboo or Not Taboo, That Is The Question by Dominic Lawson.

A recent article in The Spectator has caused consternation in America. Dominic Lawson explains how two nations are becoming increasingly divided by a common language

Occasionally I receive plaintive letters from our small but loyal expatriate readership in Saudi Arabia. Usually, they complain that their enjoyment of an issue of The Spectator has been diminished by the actions of the Wahabbi religious censors of Riyadh, who had taken their scissors to an article in the magazine, and removed some offending passages before they could be read by the intended recipients.

I am beginning to wonder how long it will be before The Spectator will receive similarly subtle vetting at the hands of the arbiters of political correctness in the United States of America.

That is from 19 November, 1994. Lawson was pointing out that at that time, you could write things in England which, because of political correctness, could no longer be said in public or polite company in the US.

Regrettably, we have not rolled back the tide here in the US, but there are signs that the enemies of facts and free speech have pushed the public too far. People are beginning to speak up for free speech and reality.

Meanwhile, in England, the forces of intolerance and authoritarianism have leapt ahead and overtaken those similar forces in the US. I have seen headlines in The Times and elsewhere of widespread arrests (3,300) and even jailing of people for offensive comments in on-line forums. The horror of the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal has been laid at the feet of excessive political correctness.

Things are not nearly so bad here and, as I say, people are beginning to stand up for free speech, due process, rule of law, etc. in a way which I am not yet seeing in the UK.

But there is no room for complacency. From today's New York Times.

Social Media Is Making Us Dumber. Here’s Exhibit A. https://t.co/DMprxOnp6U

— Charles Bayless (@CharlesBayless) January 12, 2018

In a recent panel, Pinker points out that there are numerous empirical statements which are indisputably true and yet which cannot be mentioned or discussed on campus. As if to prove his point, someone edited the video to make Pinker appear to be endorsing interpretations of hateful sentiments. The deceptive video predictably went viral.

No deep conclusion, just a striking juxtaposition between that old UK article and the headlines of the day. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. The enemy of facts are blinkered ideologies.