If someone like the BNP, HuT spout nonsense, you are going to have to argue against it anyway. Might as well make it legal, so we can hear it and answer it quick, than leave it to fester through rumour in a series of back rooms.
]]>Until this law has been tested in the courts, nobody knows what will and what will not be banned. Given that many Muslims have cited the Satanic Verses as an example of something that would be caught under this legislation, it’s hard to see how it won’t have a chilling effect on free speech.
In Australia, there is a similar law on the statute books. A Pakistani Christian convert from Islam was successfully prosecuted for describing how Pakistani apostates from Islam could be murdered with impunity in that country. Is it your view, David, that saying something like that, which is true, but could arouse hostility to Muslims generally, should be made a criminal offence?
]]>I’d go further. Some people will hold obnoxious views even after a lengthy period of re-education. The solution then is to allow them to proclaim their views from the rooftops. Ridicule will do the rest.
]]>Because of such “moral” shit-stirring, James Joyce’s Ulysses – one of the defining cultural artefacts of the 20th century whether you’ve read it or not (and I suggest you do) – was banned in the United States between 1920 and 1933, its publishers convicted of obscenity purely for some brief sexual sequences which by today’s standards are incredibly tame.
Because of such “moral” shit-stirring, Stanley Kubrick voluntarily withdrew A Clockwork Orange – an important if not especially good film – from the UK simply to avoid the hassle of the Mary Whitehouses of this world. It remained unavailable to UK audiences until after his death – while being freely available throughout the rest of the world and not causing any massive disintegration of society as its critics claimed it would.
Any kind of censorship, any kind of restriction to freedom of expression by definition stifles creativity. If you stifle creativity, your culture – such that remains – will begin to stagnate.
Which is hardly a good thing, I think we can all agree.
And – beyond all of that – what the hell right does the government have to tell us what we can and can’t say or think? I despise racism and bigotry – but I will always defend the right of racists and bigots to hold their stupid views. The solution is not censorship – the solution is better education.
]]>Well, trivially – criminal charges. If these ‘offences’ are reported to the police, they have a duty to investigate. That process is intrusive, and in some cases, it will go to court. It only takes one case to promote a media witchhunt.
It is not the law that is the problem. It is the perception of the law. Witness the debate over the amount of violence it is allowable to dole out to someone you catch filching your DVD player.
]]>