Thinking more about what I wrote yesterday, it’s difficult to know where to fall on the spectrum of free speech vs. censorship. There is a slight problem with landing squarely on the side of uninhibited free speech, since it is somewhat likely to lead to mayhem. Conversely, I’m hardly a proponent of censoring, though certainly there are times when doing so benefits the public good. Not a blanket censorship, though also not a complete allowance of all thoughts, ideas, or ideologies.
How should we decide which of the two is better? Who should make the decision? How should we ensure that we have good systems and reviews in place? We are likely to encounter an even greater number of questions and even more problematic discussions if we were to answer these questions. However, we don’t have those discussions right now. Whether it’s standing on pulpits or milk crates, we proclaim that the world has gone mad and the other side is to blame for this.
To get to the heart of it, we need to communicate. And I think that is what we’re missing.
Michael's Musings 