Eight Values of Free Expression
There are Eight recognized values of Free Expression including, the Marketplace of ideas, Participation in Self-Government, Stable Changes, Individual Self-Fulfillment, Checks on Government Power, Promoting Tolerance, Promoting innovation and Protecting Dissent. Of these Eight values Protecting Dissent is arguably the most important. I believe this because without this value just about every other value would be null and void. Without the right to criticize our government the country would fall into mob rule and the market place of ideas would crumble. If opposing ideas are not permitted to grapple it out in search of the truth then the truth will never be found and our government will be free to impose their decisions on us without question.
The United States is already a two-party system successfully silencing any other parties which attempt to break into the system. Imagine for a moment though if the majority party had the power to silence the minority party, to void their votes, and bar new candidates from straying from the majority opinion. We have already seen them try right here in North Carolina when Republicans in the House of Representatives tried to sneak in a vote to override a veto of the proposed budget by tricking their democrat colleagues. The Republicanattempted this surprise vote while the Democrats were at a 9/11 memorial. Without dissent and differing views entire groups of people risk losing their representation. the Republicans may have been the majority present in the House that day but it did not give them the right to profit from their trickery.
The mere existence of stable change requires dissenting opinions to exist. By definition alienated or disgruntled groups are going against the stream of masses. However, I strongly disagree with this value to a slight degree. While I believe that as citizens of this country these groups have the right to express my opinion I must argue against the degree of openness this value calls for I believe that part of our government's duty is to set a standard for the country to live up to. by this I mean, while these groups have the right to exist and express themselves I also believe that our government has the duty to condemn hateful, racist, sexist, and borderline dangerous groups publically so that their existence is not confused with approval of their ideas.
Free Speech enables people to freely state their opinions whether they be dissenting or not. It is typically when people speak out against things that they not only find out more about who they are but also find others that share their beliefs. Without the ability to dissent from the opinions of the government this would simply not occur. Likewise, Checks of Government Power require dissenting opinions. If we were to strip the press of its ability to publish view opposing the government we would find it being used for government propaganda in a manner similar to that found in a totalitarian regime.
Finally, as mentioned in class, dissenting opinions are vital to creativity, if no one is challenged nothing new will ever be invented, without differing views innovation is suffocated. Dissent is vital to the progress of our country but it is also important that it be conducted properly. One person's right to free speech does not override other's right to feel safe within the borders of their own country. This is clearly established within the framework of the first amendment with the limitations regarding the incitement of violence. However, as has been stated previously it is important that the government fulfill its duty to condemn incitement and hate speech even before it reaches the level of violence.
The United States is already a two-party system successfully silencing any other parties which attempt to break into the system. Imagine for a moment though if the majority party had the power to silence the minority party, to void their votes, and bar new candidates from straying from the majority opinion. We have already seen them try right here in North Carolina when Republicans in the House of Representatives tried to sneak in a vote to override a veto of the proposed budget by tricking their democrat colleagues. The Republicanattempted this surprise vote while the Democrats were at a 9/11 memorial. Without dissent and differing views entire groups of people risk losing their representation. the Republicans may have been the majority present in the House that day but it did not give them the right to profit from their trickery.
The mere existence of stable change requires dissenting opinions to exist. By definition alienated or disgruntled groups are going against the stream of masses. However, I strongly disagree with this value to a slight degree. While I believe that as citizens of this country these groups have the right to express my opinion I must argue against the degree of openness this value calls for I believe that part of our government's duty is to set a standard for the country to live up to. by this I mean, while these groups have the right to exist and express themselves I also believe that our government has the duty to condemn hateful, racist, sexist, and borderline dangerous groups publically so that their existence is not confused with approval of their ideas.
Free Speech enables people to freely state their opinions whether they be dissenting or not. It is typically when people speak out against things that they not only find out more about who they are but also find others that share their beliefs. Without the ability to dissent from the opinions of the government this would simply not occur. Likewise, Checks of Government Power require dissenting opinions. If we were to strip the press of its ability to publish view opposing the government we would find it being used for government propaganda in a manner similar to that found in a totalitarian regime.
Finally, as mentioned in class, dissenting opinions are vital to creativity, if no one is challenged nothing new will ever be invented, without differing views innovation is suffocated. Dissent is vital to the progress of our country but it is also important that it be conducted properly. One person's right to free speech does not override other's right to feel safe within the borders of their own country. This is clearly established within the framework of the first amendment with the limitations regarding the incitement of violence. However, as has been stated previously it is important that the government fulfill its duty to condemn incitement and hate speech even before it reaches the level of violence.
Comments
Post a Comment