Wednesday 11 April 2001

Pic of the day: Some times it seems like an uphill struggle ...

Free speech!

No energy at all should be devoted to fighting nazism and communism.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that the allied nations during the World War II had to defend themselves against the attempts by the Axis to grab the world. But this was not an ideological fight, except in the fact that the people with the wrong ideologies were attacking. Democratic nations rarely do that, though it can be pretty close sometimes. (See Pakistan vs India, Greece vs Turkey. OK, they are at least usually democratic, when not in the middle of some coup.) What I mean is that in an already democratic nation, no energy should be wasted trying to "fight" the ideologies of nazism or communism. Instead, the focus should be on maintaining and expanding free speech.

Free speech and totalitarian ideologies are like fire and water, like life and death. They cannot exist together. By defending the positive value without budging, you automatically exclude the negative, and you need not define it in any way or call attention to it.

***

Why cannot nazism or communism exist along with free speech? Because they are lies. And not just any random lies: They are big fat stupid lies, who look ridiculous compared to truth (as well as compared to more refined, modern lies). Any competition will simply leave these retarded relics in the dust. There is no reason to kick them while they're down either ... they'll be run over often enough.

Take for instance communism. There are some nice hopes and dreams in there, which I guess could otherwise have some value. But communism necessarily supposes that people will work even if they don't have personal profit from it. Well, yes, but only as long as you point at them with a weapon. Any reasonable sane adult knows that a man works harder and better if his economic status depends on his work. Even if you like to believe that you would not act like that, you will still be aware that all of your neighbors are greedy. Therefore, communism just plain doesn't work. There is no need to combat it ideologically: It will self-destruct as soon as its adherents meet an alternative.

(Of course, there will always be some idealists left. But there will always be people who feel the need to do something extreme, and they should be left to experiment on themselves alone.)

Or take neo-nazism and racism. These ideologies are based on the big fat lie that there is a particular (ethnic) group who causes the pervasive social problems. Never mind that social problems like crime and waste have existed since well before the pharaohs, and still exist in areas where these ethnic groups have little or no influence. This all is of no interest to the true believers, who seem to assign nearly miraculous power to their supposed enemies. The Jews control the United Nations? Yeah, in the same way that witches make cows sick by looking at them.

Incidentally, the same reasoning is used to explain why Europeans are the reason for poverty, corruption and genocide in developing countries. Europeans have done some pretty disgusting things in those areas, and could definitely improve their trade treaties with most of the third world. But it's not like we magickally sit here and summon demons into the heart of people half a world away. Actually it would be in our best interest if they could become rich and peaceful, as it would boost our own commerce. And any which way you see it, restricting the freedom of press (as is now being done in Zimbabwe, for instance) will only hurt your own people and help no one.

***

Wherever there is freedom of press, good things follow. Whenever there are restrictions on the freedom of speech, it is a certain proof that someone is trying to hide the truth. For the truth is no more overcome by lies than light is overcome by dark. The more walls you build, the darker it will grow. The truth needs no protection. Lies need protection.

How about blasphemy, pornography and outright insults? Should those also be allowed? Oh yes, definitely! Because if they are not, then someone will slam that stamp on truths they don't want to hear, in order to get their own lies protected. I would like to point out that Jesus was killed for blasphemy ... and incidentally, he also used a language that would have resulted in lawsuit in some civilized nations, calling his opponents various names from fox to hellspawn. OK, he didn't resort to pornography, as far as we know, but some of the prophets were pretty close. (I leave this as an exercise to the reader...)

What I don't think should be allowed is for one part to accuse another without the other being able to defend his honor. When the press gangs up on a civilian with no means of distribution, there's an imbalance. Luckily, the move to the Internet is changing all this. Half the populace now has their own printing press, if only they learn how to use it. This can be nothing but a good thing. There will be all manner of lies and madness on the Net - indeed, there already is - but light will always conquer darkness, and truth will always win over lies in the long run.

But don't some people believe the lies? Don't some people get deceived? Oh yes. And some people cut themselves on kitchen knives. The stupid will always be among us; they should not set our agenda.

Join the bright side! Use your freedom of speech, or you may lose it.