Preserving Freedom Of Speech

[brandondrury]

Abe Lincoln threw people in jail who sympathized with the confederacy. Winston Churchill did the same in Great Britain in WW2.

When Oppenheimer denounced the atomic bomb which he was most responsible for creating, he was labeled a communist.

Does freedom of speech have to be controlled (and sometimes banned) in order to preserve it?

My gut says that freedom of speech should always be maintained no matter what the costs. Am I being idealistic?

Brandon

[MetalDave]

We really need to try to preserve all of our freedoms. The patriot act has taken alot of them away. The Bush administration tried to kill the second amendment. Our current president stated "the the Constitution of the United States is nothing but a god damn peice of paper"! It is pretty bad when third world contries have better health care than we do. Now as for Freedom of speech. go here Michelle Malkin Student tasered at John Kerry forum Update: A University of Florida student/eyewitness shares what he saw; 12:15 pm Eastern 9/18 update: Another UF student speaks; Update: UF president schedules 2pm press conference…plus: Andr look what has happened to our country!

[izzme]

I get a **** feeling when I think I can say shit without some asshole telling me I can't! Do you get that **** feeling like I do or does it leave youcold!! **** is the best way I can describe it even though I know **** does not adequately describe it ,but **** works for me and I'm sure **** works for a few others. **** just feels right!!!

[brandondrury]

I found my answer to this specific question in the 1970 movie: Patton.

In a democracy, public opinion is a factor. If the public is insulted or shocked, they freak out. In a dictatorship, public opinion doesn't mean a damn thing so there really isn't anything short of a military que that you can do about it.

When Patton slapped a private who was in the med station for shell shock, Patton was making a point and in the end he probably inspired the kid who was scared out of his mind. However, it became a political nightmare. Even though nearly 40,000,000+ died in that war, the American people were outraged by a slap. It's ridiculous, but that's human nature, I guess.

Patton was damn near fired over the deal. On the other side of the lines, the Germans considered Patton the best general the Allies had. They instantly smelled a rat and thought the Allies were up to some trickery. The Germans, living under a dictatorship, could not relate to how politics work in a democracy.

Of course, the other side of that was illustrated when Hitler refused to reinforce the Nazi troops at Normandy because he was convinced that Patton was going to be leading the real invasion. Even though the head of German command at the time (I want to say it was Field Marshall Van Runstedt, but I'm guessing) was convinced that Normandy was the actual D-Day invasion. The dictator was the boss. That's something we can't relate to much here in a democracy.

So you have a complicated situation where there are advantages and disadvantages of running the war as a democracy or dictatorship.

Of course, this does not factor in the possibilities and such for revolts which were very possible in the UK at the time. For all I know that may have been a major factor in suspending habeus corpus.

Brandon

[gradgt]

You remind me of something though, that Abe Lincoln is not all that he's cracked up to be! And neither is Churchill, he was a jerk. These people manipulated the public and then years later history writes them as heroes.... which illustrates one of the failures of democracy. Public opinion is easily manipulated.

I agree with you that freedom of speech should always be maintained! But unfortunately it hasn't, even in America where it's supposedly a guarenteed right. One of the reasons people tolerate it is because of public fear- fear of terrorism, fear of communism, etc. Which reminds me of the famous Ben Franklin quote: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." I find it ironic that this advice is forgotten by flag wavers who support the Patriot Act.

[brandondrury]

Abe Lincoln is not all that he's cracked up to be!

I read a book entitled The Real Lincoln. For a while there I was really wound up with my anti-Lincoln views. Then I watched the Ken Burns documentary. The Shenandoah Valley massacre was sickening and I don't think I'll ever be able to justify that one (just like I can't understand the WW2 firebombing of Dresden and Tokyo).

With Lincoln you have to shed a way his hero status and look at him as a human being. I still have my issues with him some of the things he's done, but it appears that a middle ground with Lincoln is probably the right path. He did succeed at holding the country together....but at what cost?

It's the South that gets the worst end of the Civil War. I think the bigger lesson learned was that history nerds to this day are debating who was wrong or right in the Civil War. I haven't decided for sure, but I'm not positive the good guys won.

And neither is Churchill, he was a jerk.

The Churchill thing is interesting. No one wanted him as Prime Minister until the shit hit the fan for the UK. Then, he became a legend. I'm not really aware of too much bad he had done thus far. My WW2 reading hasn't taken me that far.

I find it ironic that this advice is forgotten by flag wavers who support the Patriot Act.

These are the same flag wavers who supported Joseph McCarthy too. It's sad that most people don't have a clue what the America WAS really about and what it really MEANT. People like to speak with pride of their fathers, grandfathers, etc who fought in wars (that were for a good cause) as reason to promote our imperialistic tendencies of post WW2.

Brandon

[gradgt]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I read a book entitled The Real Lincoln. For a while there I was really wound up with my anti-Lincoln views. Then I watched the Ken Burns documentary. The Shenandoah Valley massacre was sickening and I don't think I'll ever be able to justify that one (just like I can't understand the WW2 firebombing of Dresden and Tokyo).

Same here. I will never be able to understand how it's okay to torch people because of diplomacy they had nothing to do with. That doesn't seem like something the "good guy" would do. After the war is over, the publics opinion is always manipulated to portray the victor as the good guy who was fighting a necessary war. Rest assured, if the Nazi's had won WWII, we would be praising the Fuhrer for fighting the necessary war to vanquish Western Imperialism.

Of all the wars i've studied, there's never been a clear "good guy" and "bad guy", but rather just a collection of bad guys doing bad things to eachother.

It's the South that gets the worst end of the Civil War. I think the bigger lesson learned was that history nerds to this day are debating who was wrong or right in the Civil War. I haven't decided for sure, but I'm not positive the good guys won.

Niether am I! The civil war still to this day cost more American's lives than any other war (this is obvious though since it was Americans fighting Americans...lol) and left the south a complete disaster. In my opinion this is another example of bad guy vs. bad guy.

The Churchill thing is interesting. No one wanted him as Prime Minister until the shit hit the fan for the UK. Then, he became a legend. I'm not really aware of too much bad he had done thus far. My WW2 reading hasn't taken me that far.

Pat Buchanan's written a new book about this topic recently, it's called "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War". Probably some good reading there! Pat Buchanan seemed pretty knowledgeable on this subject.

These are the same flag wavers who supported Joseph McCarthy too. It's sad that most people don't have a clue what the America WAS really about and what it really MEANT. People like to speak with pride of their fathers, grandfathers, etc who fought in wars (that were for a good cause) as reason to promote our imperialistic tendencies of post WW2.

It's also sad to see that people like McCarthy use nationalism and fear as a means of getting what they want. If people just would wise up to it, it wouldn't work anymore. That's what I hope for.

[brandondrury]

Rest assured, if the Nazi's had won WWII, we would be praising the Fuhrer for fighting the necessary war to vanquish Western Imperialism.

Hitler once said that he would go down as the either the great or worst man in history. He was right!

In regard to imperialism, the United States took quite a bit of time off from the imperialism game after they slaughtered the indians, didn't they? (France and England sure were hitting it hard though). WW2 is often looked at as the death of the empire (with the exception being the United States).

The civil war still to this day cost more American's lives than any other war (this is obvious though since it was Americans fighting Americans...lol) and left the south a complete disaster. In my opinion this is another example of bad guy vs. bad guy.

I haven't hit the Civil War as aggressively as I want to, but I'm still looking for reasons the south was the bad guy. We have to rule out racism because it was disgustingly prevalent everywhere. You were weird if you weren't racist in 1860 (thankfully its the opposite now).

Pat Buchanan's written a new book about this topic recently, it's called "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War". Probably some good reading there! Pat Buchanan seemed pretty knowledgeable on this subject.

wow!! Bad ass! I'm buying it for sure! It's interesting that Buchanan is taking an approach that other than Ron Paul hasn't been mentioned since the days of Rober Taft. I guess he was the last influential republican isolationist. I've got to get that IMMEDIATELY!

It's also sad to see that people like McCarthy use nationalism and fear as a means of getting what they want. If people just would wise up to it, it wouldn't work anymore. That's what I hope for.

I'm reading American Prometheus now, a biography about Openheimer. His entire career was trashed because McCarthy. It turns out that his views were pretty in line with that of Obama or Hilary Clinton. It's amazing what 50 years does. (Of course, it's also interesting that we've seen what communism/socialism does in the past 50 years and there are still quite a few people who embrace it. When communism was still an experiment I think it was perfectly acceptable to consider that style of government.)

Brandon

[izzme]

When Patton slapped a private who was in the med station for shell shock, Patton was making a point and in the end he probably inspired the kid who was scared out of his mind. However, it became a political nightmare. Even though nearly 40,000,000+ died in that war, the American people were outraged by a slap. It's ridiculous, but that's human nature, I guess.

Your insight is profound! General Petraues could really be a great help just by stopping by the Va hospitals and slapping the soldiers that have post truamatic stress! Gosh I wish somebody would have come around when I was the VA hospital for PTSD from Vietnam and gave me a good slap for being such a weak dick! He would probably have to do it when I was heavily medicated,cause if I wasn't I might not appreciate the good he was doing for me and I would have jammed one of his eyes out of its socket with my thumb. But I would salute him afterward out of respect for knowing just what I needed.Wow what a great idea I'm sure you can think about and come with some more. Thanks I guess I needed that!

[Strangedogs]

We don't think too kindly of Lincoln here in the South. When Sherman started his "March to the sea" he was ordered to BREAK THE SPIRIT of the Confederate troops. They began marching towards Savannah Burning, Looting, RAPING and murdering all under the orders of this "President"... They burned farms, shot their livestock in the fields, robbed and pillaged all the way. Many farms we're just women and children as their men were gone off to fight the Yankees. They were like a gang of "Huns".

We'll never forget.