Double Standards In Freedom of Speech
I'm writing this to escape the stifling backload of english work I'm trudging through.
On Monday an Austrian court sentenced British historian David Irving to three years in prison for denying the existance of the Holocaust. The implications for free speech are staggering, since we have here someone who was not violating any of the traditional tenets of free speech protection exemptions (inciting violence, causing undue emotional injury, etc.) and not only was he denied the right to state his opinion, but he was thrown in jail for three years for doing so. What is so hypocritical about this is the fact that much of Europe is siding with Jyllands-Posten in their arguments about their right to print cartoons that are offensive to Muslims. Protestors throughout the Muslim world have argued that their is a double standard in the West, one in which it is illegal to offend Jews and perfectly legal (and, some argue, encouraged) to offend Muslims. While most could (myself included) dismiss such statements as overblown posturing, this recent decision makes me second-guess this assumption.
Granted, the guy is loony. Anyone who denies, in the face of overwhelming evidence, the existance of a Nazi program to exterminate an entire race is either ignoring reality or is insane. However, they are granted the right to their beliefs, just as I can believe the sky is green if I so desire. Europe has become so touchy about its image that it has become reactionary in regards to discussion about the Holocaust, and anti-Semitism in general. Furthermore, the spokesman for the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, declared that "While Irving's rants would not have led to legal action in the United States, it is important that we recognize and respect Austria's commitment to fighting Holocaust denial, the most odious form of hatred, as part of its historic responsibility to its Nazi past." What I find appalling about this statement is the insinuation that, because of the actions of men who have been dead for over a generation, the current generation of Austrians have a "historic responsibility" to, it seems, counter their country's past transgressions. This is the same argument as that made by advocates of reparations for slavery, which most Americans dismiss as unfair and impractical. Not only is free speech being curbed excessively, it is being curbed in the name of fighting past injustices. Such premises are very slippery slopes.
On Monday an Austrian court sentenced British historian David Irving to three years in prison for denying the existance of the Holocaust. The implications for free speech are staggering, since we have here someone who was not violating any of the traditional tenets of free speech protection exemptions (inciting violence, causing undue emotional injury, etc.) and not only was he denied the right to state his opinion, but he was thrown in jail for three years for doing so. What is so hypocritical about this is the fact that much of Europe is siding with Jyllands-Posten in their arguments about their right to print cartoons that are offensive to Muslims. Protestors throughout the Muslim world have argued that their is a double standard in the West, one in which it is illegal to offend Jews and perfectly legal (and, some argue, encouraged) to offend Muslims. While most could (myself included) dismiss such statements as overblown posturing, this recent decision makes me second-guess this assumption.
Granted, the guy is loony. Anyone who denies, in the face of overwhelming evidence, the existance of a Nazi program to exterminate an entire race is either ignoring reality or is insane. However, they are granted the right to their beliefs, just as I can believe the sky is green if I so desire. Europe has become so touchy about its image that it has become reactionary in regards to discussion about the Holocaust, and anti-Semitism in general. Furthermore, the spokesman for the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, declared that "While Irving's rants would not have led to legal action in the United States, it is important that we recognize and respect Austria's commitment to fighting Holocaust denial, the most odious form of hatred, as part of its historic responsibility to its Nazi past." What I find appalling about this statement is the insinuation that, because of the actions of men who have been dead for over a generation, the current generation of Austrians have a "historic responsibility" to, it seems, counter their country's past transgressions. This is the same argument as that made by advocates of reparations for slavery, which most Americans dismiss as unfair and impractical. Not only is free speech being curbed excessively, it is being curbed in the name of fighting past injustices. Such premises are very slippery slopes.
posted by Jimmy at 7:08 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home