click for the homepage!

 

Liberty Con

 

Liberty / Equality / Participation / Property / Surveys / Notre Dame Web Group / Teaching Tool Contact Us / Other Groups / Public Private Home / Definitions

Introduction

Turning to the Liberty aspect of democracy, we focus mainly on free speech and open dialogue.  Implicit and explicit in many of the definitions of democracy gathered for this project is the importance of broad-based discussion.  Bill Clinton’s popular “town hall” meetings in the 90s emphasize the importance of public opinion.  In fact, many argue that the former President placed an inordinate amount of weight on only one lens in the kaleidoscope which is democracy.  Clinton’s definition is certainly unique, but throughout this project, we came to realize that there are as many definitions of democracy as there are people, making it hard to arrive at one solid definition.  

Limited Censorship and Tempered Discussion
In contrast though to the ideology that views no holds bar free speech as imperative for democracy, are those that feel tempered discussion and limited censorship are absolutely necessary and beneficial for healthy democracies.  We turn to a few of these arguments now.
The Threat of Hate Speech
Viewed in a light that exposes the more controversial sites on the web, the arguments above prove very convincing.  Controversial sites, such as the “Nuremberg Files,” are argued to incite violence through hate speech, which according to those more supportive of restriction, is not free speech and is not a right afforded by the First Amendment.  The Nuremberg site case, which was recently overturned in favor of the site creators, was determined not to be true threats and is thus protected speech under the First Amendment.  The site keeps track of the living/deceased status of pro-choice advocates and abortion doctors, applauding when one of them dies.  Some see this as a promotion of violence and a direct threat to those persons’ names featured on the site.  Decide for yourself whether the site constitutes a direct threat that needs to be censored.  
Inappropriate Exchanges
One can also trace the history of the Internet to note the recent trends toward a more legalized web.  Many see the Internet as a physical realm, not unlike other mediums such as TV and radio that must be controlled in some form.  Moreover, as a marketplace tool, the Internet should guard against false advertising and trickery.  This form of advertising “speech” shouldn’t infringe upon the liberties of consumers.  They should be protected.  In keeping with Internet advertising and exchange belongs the numerous Ebay instances in which material deemed “inappropriate” for sale were withdrawn from the site. The links section has various examples.  Yet another example involves the French government’s demand that Yahoo remove Nazi memorabilia sites; French law prohibits the trade and exhibition of racist materials.  The case points to the myriad of problems that arise when different State’s butt heads over unique laws in a medium that reaches all nations.
Protect Our Children!
Much of this discussion ties into the screening of chat boards/rooms as well as newsgroups in order to prevent children from viewing hateful or pornographic material.  Some contend that the right of parents to decide what their child should or should not see, must be retained and argue for the use of filters and monitoring of public Internet forums.  Others advocate the complete removal of all explicit and violent “filth” from the web, as it corrupts the moral society, which is claimed, is an imperative component of decent democratic society.  Order, a part of democracy, will break down if too many people become “hooked” by the “evil” powers of the web.  
Conclusion
Overall, the arguments advocating a stronger censorship presence provide significant backing and examples.  The question usually comes down to an evaluation of what the individual’s own idea of democracy is and what aspect he or she places more emphasis on.  As in the case of the “Nuremberg Files” website, those who feel freedom from threats or threatening material is an important aspect of democracy, are more likely to advocate greater censorship of sites that can be considered hate sites.  Those who feel free speech is the most important aspect of any democracy will most likely argue otherwise, an idea is covered on the liberty pro page.
Links

http://www.southernillinoisdemocrats.org/SidEdit/SIDArticles/SIDArt01-02-2003.htm

http://www.isil.org/resources/libertystrategies/town-hall-democracy.html

defenses and explanations of the town hall democratic form.

http://www.townhallcoalition.org/main.html

an example of an online grass-roots town hall group.

http://www.wam.umd.edu/~gjbush/procensr.html

a great site listing out many of the organizations advocating Internet censorship.

http://www.gaijin.com/EvilPeople/info/censorship/

a funny page mocking the blue ribbon free speech Internet campaign.

http://eserver.org/bs/37/brady.html

Visit this website to read one person's objection to town-hall democracy

http://www.christiangallery.com/atrocity/

http://www.seidata.com/~neusys/colm0102.html  

Free speech or hate speech?

http://news.com.com/2100-1017-236426.html?legacy=cnet http://news.com.com/2100-1023-244365.html?tag=bplst http://news.com.com/2100-1017-250214.html?tag=bplst http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/2002/0502Bulletin/0502Bulletin34.html

What some believe to be inappropriate material for exchange on Ebay and the implications and problems created on an International medium.

http://sundial.csun.edu/sun/96s/070396op1.htm

Site advocating censorship in order to protect children from smut and pornography.

click here to view the pro argument!