tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post9072757128505867625..comments2024-03-29T06:26:52.163-05:00Comments on Althouse: Camille Paglia says the Duck Dynasty debate really is about freedom of speech.Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger246125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-35149410604003085642013-12-22T15:26:45.113-06:002013-12-22T15:26:45.113-06:00Camille Paglia and I are miles apart culturally an...Camille Paglia and I are miles apart culturally and politically, but our constitutional principles are virtually identical. For more than 20 years I have considered her the conscience of the left, because she is rigorously intellectually honest about issues such as the Duck Dynasty outrage. She has correctly analyzed the attempt to muzzle not just Phil Robertson but all conservatives as the tendency toward tyranny, totalitarianism and despotism which has infected the left in the last decades.<br /><br />As for Ann's reference to the 60's outrage over anything resembling a chilling of free speech, I too recall it, having followed the counterculture movement from the days of Mario Savio's Berkeley Free Speech Movement in 1964-65. Throughout the 70's the left was adamant that there should be no limit whatsoever on speech, not even obscenity. And of course from 2002-2008 we heard the constant drumbeat from all liberal pundits and media outlets that "dissent was the highest form of patriotism" (which somehow magically disappeared in January of 2009). But until Obama came into office and brought us the real Big Brother and true-to-life thought police, the left and the Democrat party was all about unfettered speech. <br /><br />Which has now flip-flopped, and the Dems and leftists are urging not just censorship, but a change to the Constitution to muzzle what is essentially "wrong-thinking", by which they mean anything they do not like. <br /><br />What is worse about the current state of affairs, is that many of the same Dems and leftists urging and approving of muzzling Robertson, Christians, conservatives and virtually anyone who dissents from the Dem party line, are the very ones who in the 60's were marching (and throwing bags of offal at police) in protest over real and imagined threats to free speech. That they now are so openly in favor of shutting up and shouting down any dissent shows the falsity of their claims and the hypocrisy inherent in their characters. Jumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010872199201417401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-69882726531959281752013-12-22T14:13:17.342-06:002013-12-22T14:13:17.342-06:00"I remember the broad 1960s era commitment to..."I remember the broad 1960s era commitment to free speech. There was a special zeal to protect those who said outrageous things."<br /><br />Not I hope to be too nit-picky (I wasn't even alive then) but I think of the Smothers Brothers (I gather the Bircher crowd didn't have too much trouble with them losing their TV show [which truth be told probably wasn't that outrageous]), the crushing of Beatles records after that John fellow made the Jesus comment, the still quite pervasive unmentionability of homosexuality, and of course at the official level all the surveillance and harassment of everyone from the anti-war left to the Libertarian Party (to name a few examples).<br /><br />Or were we talking about the supposed broad commitment to free speech on the left? I'm sure they were thrilled to hear from the likes of Scoop Jackson Democrats, opponents of integration, Ronald Reagan...<br /><br />What makes the Duck flap unique among these things of late is that to date the people who have lost shows for disparaging remarks about gay people - including Dr. Laura and Alec Baldwin - had shows no one was watching anyhow. Lots of people watch this one. <br /><br />My own view is that part of its broad, national success is that it was southern fried culture sanitized the stuff liberals don't want to hear. Everyone likes a rags to riches story, especially when it involves good old fashioned American ingenuity and colorful people with southern accents. Even liberals like to think of themselves as earthy hunting types - even if maybe in only some kind of potential sense.<br /><br />If Phil comes back (which seems to me the best possibility given all the money the show makes) is it going to continue to have the same broad national appeal? I guess we'd find out.<br /><br />The original Amos and Andy radio show today but it was a huge hit in the 20s and 30s; it was also hugely offensive to African-Americans - some of whom protested it. Were they wrong to not want it on the air? Lots of people - especially in the south - agree with old Phil about homosexuality but times change. I'm not sure a black face show would have any success today (in the extremely unlikely event it ever saw the light of day in the first place) but what if it did? Times change.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-9160350593246575342013-12-22T12:30:10.417-06:002013-12-22T12:30:10.417-06:00"Why is the left taking the narrow view of th..."Why is the left taking the narrow view of the concept of freedom?"<br /><br />Could it be the history the left remembers did not actually happen [the way they remember it]?<br /><br />For example; I've read some about the Berkeley free speech movement. All I see in the record is they were for [i]their own[/i] free speech. Not seeing anything pointing to it being a free speech [i]in general[/i] issue at the time. SHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01995326486815143436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-88246657579291630092013-12-22T12:29:26.065-06:002013-12-22T12:29:26.065-06:00" I remember the broad 1960s era commitment t..." I remember the broad 1960s era commitment to free speech. There was a special zeal to protect those who said outrageous things."<br /><br />You remember too much. There were a mere handful of free speech absolutists, like Nat Hentoff, on the left. That's a handful more than exists today, but they were the same shout-you-down, thuggish cowards they are today.wuzzagrunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03293011873941804862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-90578222138874738502013-12-22T09:17:50.784-06:002013-12-22T09:17:50.784-06:00Ah those ever evolving liberals: first gay marriag...Ah those ever evolving liberals: first gay marriage, now blacklisting.jvermeer51https://www.blogger.com/profile/14133322863326210581noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-42738627949208712712013-12-22T09:17:24.105-06:002013-12-22T09:17:24.105-06:00Ah those ever evolving leftists: first gay marriag...Ah those ever evolving leftists: first gay marriage, now blacklisting.jvermeer51https://www.blogger.com/profile/14133322863326210581noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-42918826975196123672013-12-22T09:13:56.570-06:002013-12-22T09:13:56.570-06:00Something has been lost in this discussion. The R...Something has been lost in this discussion. The Robertsons are worth something like $500,000,000. They can buy A&E. If they want to continue with the show they will find a network the will be all to happy to take them and their fan base. <br /><br />A&E violated the spirit of the First Amendment rather than its essence. It only applies to the government. They are fools for doing so because they listened to a small pressure group instead of their customer base. However, A&E did violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by ending the show. Phil Robertson expressed a standard biblical view not only of homosexuality but any sexual relations outside of marriage. He put what the bible called [heterosexual] fornication on the same level as homosexual sex. As such he called out sin equally on both gay and straight. He was clearly fired over his religious views.<br /><br />GM claims not to understand the difference between the Dixie Chicks and the Robertsons. That is just a pose. He knows the difference but like all Fascists he plays word games because he thinks he is smarter than everyone else. GM lives in a Fascism bubble where leftist misdeeds go down memory hole. It's even worse than that. He attributes actual Fascist misdeeds to his political opponents.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00299385974593246145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-81919576041668749252013-12-22T08:54:25.698-06:002013-12-22T08:54:25.698-06:00" As an informal libertarian, I only think of..." As an informal libertarian, I only think of 'freedom of speech' in the Constitutional sense: the government can not restrict speech."<br /><br />When the government has set up a legal and regulatory system (EEOC? Title IX? for 2 examples) which allows one private individual or entity to drag another private citizen or entity through the courts forcing them to bankrupt themselves in the process of defending against the most ridiculous and baseless charges, then there is nothing but government-enabled restriction of free speech.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16168560849164741274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-35272772934134073782013-12-22T08:03:22.305-06:002013-12-22T08:03:22.305-06:00I wonder if Phil knows that a disproportionate sha...<i>I wonder if Phil knows that a disproportionate share of the people preparing, selling, and consuming pate and duck confit are gay, and that he is on the receiving end of a big pink dollar?</i><br /><br />I don't think he cares. You haven't been paying attention. Phil is a "hate the sin, but love the sinner" type of guy.Gahriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795449308207016641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-69474350090441063712013-12-21T19:07:39.961-06:002013-12-21T19:07:39.961-06:00I wonder if Phil knows that a disproportionate sha...I wonder if Phil knows that a disproportionate share of the people preparing, selling, and consuming pate and duck confit are gay, and that he is on the receiving end of a big pink dollar?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18253124557275792455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-47681402698598719112013-12-21T12:21:55.543-06:002013-12-21T12:21:55.543-06:00"Because her principles matter more to her th...<br />"Because her principles matter more to her than a stranger's opinion of her lifestyle does? Just a guess"<br /><br />Camille can remember when advocating for gay rights was considered "vile speech." But hey, the right people are in charge now so only approved free speech is now required.tim in vermonthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06547980465313241972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-42045707947739637962013-12-21T11:57:19.542-06:002013-12-21T11:57:19.542-06:00I think it started with the liberals moralizing ab...I think it started with the liberals moralizing about everything. I have heard a number of liberals say "Steve King doesn't represent my VALUES." They think that they have the moral high ground. But then, when you are fed a steady diet of TV commercials showing Paul Ryan pushing granny off cliff, well, this is the end result.RecChiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08332736695988953550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-54765294175558313302013-12-21T10:03:58.868-06:002013-12-21T10:03:58.868-06:00Hmmmm. An interesting point. It does seem like thi...Hmmmm. An interesting point. It does seem like this case could fall under the "<a href="http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/qanda_religion.html" rel="nofollow">Disparate Treatment based on Religion</a>" prohibition of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But I am not a lawyer, so I could be talking out of my ass.Paco Wovéhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00053886112561036768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-16449933873637282712013-12-21T09:34:34.631-06:002013-12-21T09:34:34.631-06:00Paco Wove:
That would be true in any context exce...Paco Wove:<br /><br />That would be true in any context except religious discrimination in employment. <br /><br />Politics: no problems.<br />Religion: problem.<br />Parenting: no problem.<br />Global Warming: no problem.<br /><br />Et. Freakin'. Cetera.Birkelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14205292523499913507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-23434691704716421042013-12-21T09:01:36.658-06:002013-12-21T09:01:36.658-06:00"Anyone who thinks it was OK for A&E to f...<i>"Anyone who thinks it was OK for A&E to fire someone for saying something politically incorrect offline ought to take a few minutes to tell us why it was bad for the movie studios to fire/blacklist communist sympathizers in the 1950s."</i><br /><br />If a private company decides that some employee is a net negative for their public image, I don't have a problem with them cutting ties. That doesn't mean it's not craven and cowardly, just that they are fully within their rights to do so.Paco Wovéhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00053886112561036768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-28398475081000411792013-12-21T07:46:49.874-06:002013-12-21T07:46:49.874-06:00Because he doesn't hate her guts and never sai...Because he doesn't hate her guts and never said anything like that.Tankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04187906854627334164noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-32917743666088438712013-12-21T04:33:33.355-06:002013-12-21T04:33:33.355-06:00Why is Camille Paglia defending someone who hates ...<i>Why is Camille Paglia defending someone who hates her guts?</i><br /><br />Because her principles matter more to her than a stranger's opinion of her lifestyle does? Just a guess.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-62292072287793192972013-12-21T02:14:45.893-06:002013-12-21T02:14:45.893-06:00Why is Camille Paglia defending someone who hates ...Why is Camille Paglia defending someone who hates her guts?Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11205752419540502278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-76426380065101469442013-12-21T00:26:05.570-06:002013-12-21T00:26:05.570-06:00Seems clear to me that Gabriel Range fantasized ab...Seems clear to me that Gabriel Range fantasized about Bush's death in his film. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Cdd-I7wLk" rel="nofollow">link</a>. <br /><br />Garage's typical divisions.<br /><br />Merry Christmas, garage.chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-14532112377183465052013-12-20T22:56:14.020-06:002013-12-20T22:56:14.020-06:00To some extent I think you are misremembering. Whe...To some extent I think you are misremembering. When I was in high school in the early 70s I remember lots of leftist saying things like "no free speech for fascists" or "no free-speech for racists". Free speech has never been a left-wing value. I never experienced pressure to shut up or keep quiet about minority opinions from those in authority when I was in school. Only from those on the left.<br /><br />Maybe the man was more open-minded iand tolerant than he gets credit for.Ken Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12976919713907046171noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-56867404584761904042013-12-20T22:51:06.129-06:002013-12-20T22:51:06.129-06:00"Violently conservative" is an inside jo..."Violently conservative" is an inside joke. I'll retract and apologize. garage mahalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06485491995866513686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-18204673775924537032013-12-20T22:48:38.168-06:002013-12-20T22:48:38.168-06:00Anyone who thinks it was OK for A&E to fire so...Anyone who thinks it was OK for A&E to fire someone for saying something politically incorrect offline ought to take a few minutes to tell us why it was bad for the movie studios to fire/blacklist communist sympathizers in the 1950s. After all, it's just private action right? No government order, no criminal action against the offending speaker, just a company protecting its commercial interests, right? Douglas B. Levenehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07916420802096618688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-10367648503364103982013-12-20T22:43:57.942-06:002013-12-20T22:43:57.942-06:00Perhaps we employed the same sort of mad sleuthing...Perhaps we employed the same sort of mad sleuthing skillz which enabled Garage to tell that the anonymous people who supposedly threatened A&E are conservative.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-34595202060666158482013-12-20T22:38:46.710-06:002013-12-20T22:38:46.710-06:00Not only did garage not have this very conversatio...<i>Not only did garage not have this very conversation at least twice in the past on this blog site, but he's not even having it right now!</i><br /><br />Neither you, Paco Wove, Birkel, Michael, or Paul Zrimsek can offer one shred of evidence that the maker of this film is a liberal. <br /><br />BUT.A.FILM.WAS.MADE.DAMMIT! garage mahalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06485491995866513686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-66891489726908667622013-12-20T22:25:50.522-06:002013-12-20T22:25:50.522-06:00Lets just cut to the chase for garage and Inga: N...Lets just cut to the chase for garage and Inga: Not only did garage not have this very conversation at least twice in the past on this blog site, but he's not even having it right now!<br /><br />There.<br /><br />Now you can start tomorrow with the clean slate you so desperately desire!Dragohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079148433908004715noreply@blogger.com