|
Censorship in a Time of Need - No Need of Censorship at Any Time.
NMB, Florida October 6, 2001 A.H. Schectman
THINKING ALLOWED
Essays on Issues, Ideas and Reflections on the Times. Published Now and
Then. Opinions Pro or Con Are Welcome.
CENSORSHIP IN A TIME OF NEED - NO NEED OF CENSORSHIP
AT ANY TIME
I confess I am not partial to censorship at any time. I have had friends,
wife, children and recipients of my essays complain. Some wish I would not
write what I do. These complaints are not censorship. On my own I sometimes
decide not to send out some of the things I write. I may have phrased
something in a way that is not right or have not said what I wanted to
really say. Censorship is when I am told I cannot send out - for any
reason - something I choose to comment on. Censorship is preventing free
expression of thought. I am for allowing thinking at all times.
Censorship in a time of need is particularly onerous. I don't think
censorship is needed at any time but - and this is an important but -
withholding news of military actions that would help an enemy is not
censorship. It is only common sense. The news can be reported later for
inquiring minds need to know.
The unwelcome kind of censorship or interfering with the free flow of
commentary and information is that which tells a communicator that angry
dissenting words about official actions are unpatriotic. In other words,
democracy cannot allow loyal opposition. Democracy cannot afford censorship
of opposition voices for fear it will help an internal enemy. Opposition
does not mean unpatriotic motives or actions. Voicing fears of outcomes is
a brake on rush to action without thought to all possible consequences.
Thinking before you speak and thinking before you act will not prevent loyal
opposition. You will always have someone who thinks unlike you. In fact, it
is necessary to have someone think differently.
I think George W. Bush is a puffed-up miniature version of his father who
cannot speak without someone thinking for him. His recent impressive showing
as leader of the free world is owed to shrewd decisions of his managers. Is
this disloyalty or is it just my opinion? So what?
Voicing opposition may be unpopular but to squash free opinion is ugly
censorship. There is an important distinction here. What do you think?
Carol's Evaluation:10 out of 10. Carol thinks, by contrast Tony Blair is a
leader/speaker compared to Bush.
|
 |
|