Flushing Away Our Civil Liberties
The so-called hate speech codes—censorship of criticism against a state-sponsored “victim population”—are among the primary threats to liberty in the West. This has become a central battleground in the struggle between PC-esque collectivism and the classic idea of liberal democracy (what’s left of it).
In Europe, the muzzling of free speech, now reaching epidemic proportions, has been a powerful weapon in the arsenal of the soft totalitarianism that is creeping across the continent. Naturally, the main victim population are the darlings of Diversity, the Muslims.
A recent test case has been the attempt to organize a demonstration in Brussels against the Islamization of Europe. The Socialist mayor, Freddy Thielemans, denied permission to the protesters, saying that
such incitement to discrimination and hatred, which we usually call racism and xenophobia, is forbidden by a considerable number of international treaties and is punished by our penal laws and by the European legislation. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly pronounced judgments condemning this type of act.
In the US, we are not lagging far behind, despite that little inconvenience known as the Constitution. For a generation, hate-speech codes have been used to stifle freedom of expression in our universities, of all places. The erstwhile campus radicals, who turned protest into a sport, have proven to be quite adept at instituting a reign of intolerance as soon as they took control of the campus.
A sobering incident was the recent “flushed Koran” case, in which a student at Pace University was arrested by the NYPD for criminal mischief and aggrevated harrassment after placing a Koran in a toilet. Arrested. Not mocked, not reprimanded, not disciplined—arrested. And this is the same city in which a major museum exhibited a cross in a beaker of urine.
It is now possible for a citizen to be arrested and jailed in the United States because he dares to actively protest the deities of Diversity and Multiculturalism.
The logic works like this: Everyone is the same; all cultures are equal in value. Therefore there are no grounds for the opinion that a group of people (read: victim population) can be different than any other, or can pose any particular danger. Anyone who expresses this position is guilty of a heinous transgression, usually called racism, that threatens the entire foundation of the New Diverse Order. Any means of suppression are thus justified.
The high priests of Diversity have borrowed a page from the Leninist playbook. It remains to be seen whether the courts will fully abandon the First Amendment and cave in to the pressures of soft totalitarianism.
[Quote taken from Paul Belien, "Belgium's anti-terror watchdog Jean-Claude Delepière isn't worried," Pajamas Media (on line), Sept. 7, 2007]
Bookmark this article!
September 12th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
I would like to help clarify the “Koran flushing” incidents (there were two, taking place in Oct. and Nov. 2006). As I feel some facts should be mentioned. The copies of the Koran were taken from the University library, and thus, accordingly, a vandalism complaint was filed with police(after the first incident actually this was filed.) He was later questioned for vandalism charges of Pace property (they caught him from a surveillance photograph). Only after questioning the Pace student, who admitted to the crimes and that he did it specifically against other students (yes, Muslim), did the police purse the hate crime charges.
I don’t think distroying/vandalising of university property is free speech. Did the police go too far on the “hate crimes” issue and arresting him, yes, most likely…I am guessing (pure speculation here I admit), but the student “went off” on how he was pissed at the students…and that is where the other charges came from. I am not defending either, but this issue has been blown way out of proportion on both political sides. This 23-year old student has been made a free speech martyr on the right, and the left has gone in a freenzy over ani-muslim hate crimes. He was a kid that got pissed-off and did something stupid, vandalized property.
September 14th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Sadly this is correct. Things are getting really serious now. It is okay to be a mass murderer so long as you kill indicriminately, and even better if you’re a member of a state designated victim group.
I am of course talking about 7/7. People were “Shocked but not surprised” you may remember them saying. There was also no teeth to their condemnation of the bombers: People simply said “The Iraq War is to blame”. They didn’t see themselves as victims of aggression because it would require making a negative characterisation of a non-western group.
Laws of P.C.
1. No negative characterisation can ever be arrived at regarding a non-western group.
2. No matter how badly a non-western group behaves the west is always to blame (“Iraq War made ‘em do it.”)
September 18th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
How about vitriolic sermons in American mosques against America and against non Muslim infidels? Has anybody seen them considered as hate crimes or hate speech?
How does the entire scenario work in reverse? Does multiculturalism mean that some cultures are more equal than others?
September 19th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Officerkrupke, the best short-hand definition of “multiculturalism” I’ve ever heard came from Conservative Comanche Indian college professor Dr. David Yeagley: “Multiculturalism is the insistence that all people must celebrate their heritage- except Whites.”
Says it all, doesn’t it?