THE NEW CENSORS OF THE LEFT

OFFENSE IN THE AGE OF THE ONLINE PETITION 

In the 19th and 20th Century’s one of the great fights of the non-communist[1] left was the struggle for free speech. The struggle against censorship in literature, the arts, and political discourse. The enemies off free speech always came from the right whether in a clerical, military, or politically authoritarian guise. 
Now the enemies of free speech are more often to be found on the left. Concerned to maintain politically correct standards of discourse they are happy to close down exhibitions, slander writers and commentators,[2] or in the current jargon ‘deny platforms’ to those of whom they disapprove. This war on free speech and artistic expression is sometimes linked with demands from the Muslim community to censor any comment on Islam deemed to be ‘Islamaphobic.’[3] The link is always the magical word ‘offense.’ Once uttered the heavens must full. The new crime of the 21st Century is the crime of giving offense.
However the extraordinary quality of this crime is its flexibility; anyone, anywhere can make a claim and demand redress. Consequentially the capacity to receive offense is growing exponentially. Amongst the weapons at the new censor’s disposal is the online petition; this serves to attract numbers and with numbers you can  assemble a mob. Thus this week saw the enforced closure of an exhibition at the Barbican following an online petition and a protest that forced its doors closed.  
As far as I can tell, now having been prevented from seeing this exhibit for myself, nobody was forced to attend this exhibition and none of the participating actors was coerced to participate but did so willingly, as they believed in the project. This project, again from what I can ascertain, was aimed to be particularly unsettling and yes offensive, in that it directly placed in your face the reality of man’s inhumanity to man. Racism is offensive and that seems to have been the whole point of the project.  I can understand that some people found the piece troubling as well as offensive. That is what art sometimes does. I can also accept some wanted to criticize the exhibition, after all that is also what a free society is all about. However in the age of the petition it is not enough to criticize, or even to protest an event, if it ‘offends’ it must be closed down.
Those who set out to close this exhibition demonstrate a complete and utter failure to understand freedom of speech and expression. What can they now say when exhibitions of which they do approve are censored and closed down? For make no mistake about it there are plenty of those on the right who wish to follow the example set here, UKIP councillors and EDL activists, to name but two potential complainants waiting in the wings. Already there are groups of people, Christians, Muslims, political activists, metaphorically standing on the toilet cistern to watch the couple across the road so that they can be ‘offended.’
 So something to ponder the next time you feel moved to sign an online petition demanding the closure of some particular ‘offensive’ event, ask yourself whom do you elect to serve as censor in your own case, who will arbitrate over what it is permissible for you to read, to view, to experience?


[1] The communists always opposed free speech, seeing it as merely a bourgeois luxury.
[2] Fascist and or racist being the preferred slur. Both terms are consequently now in danger of becoming meaningless.
[3] To witness this at its most extreme and absurd I recommend Mark Steyne’s book Lights Out, which describes the attempts made by a small group of ‘offended’ Muslims to get his book America Alone banned. It also shines a light on the unholy alliance between some on the liberal left and Islamism. 

Popular posts from this blog

NESRINE MALIK AND THE UNSUNG VIRTUES OF HYPOCRISY

Image
As I write this a 27 year old woman, Mariam Ibrahim, has just had a baby in a Sudanese prison, ‘the condition of the mother and baby is not known as Ibrahim's lawyer and her husband, a US citizen, had been denied access to her. Omdurman women's prison has a basic clinic, where the child is thought to have been born. Ibrahim has been shackled since being imprisoned.’ [1]   Mariam also has an 18 month old child who is also being held in prison with her. The ‘crime’ for which she is imprisoned is apostasy, for which she has received the death sentence. She has also been sentenced to 100 lashes, for the additional crime of having sex with her Christian husband. Although she has been a lifelong Christian her father was a Muslim, Sudanese sharia law forbids women to marry outside the Muslim faith, men needless to say can do as they please in these matters. Mariam Ibrahim and her husband.  Nineteen countries punish their citizens for apostasy, and in 12 of those countries...
Read more

INTERVIEW WITH TOM VAGUE

Image
Tom Vague At the top end of All Saints Road there is a refuge, an enclave in which a local Bohemian culture retains a foothold, this is the Book & kitchen , a café/bookshop with adjoining terrace. Here the bustle of the nearby market gives way to conversation, conversation in the presence of images of the recent, and not so recent, past. The past of an area that has contributed so much to the life and culture of the city. I was there to meet local historian Mr Tom Vague a man intimately familiar with so much of this history. What Tom doesn’t know about the recent history of the area probably is not worth knowing. With Tom’s energy and effort Colville Community Forum, supported by City Living Local Life, recently held a gathering at The Book and Kitchen to celebrate this rich history. February 16 6-9 Pm, with Film Screening and Readings Exhibition February 16-26 2016. Featuring 30 Classic Westway Photographs and Posters. This represents one of a number of initiatives of t...
Read more

VOLINE AND TROTSKY

Волин и Троцкого A Footnote in Russian History In April 1917 the Russian anarchist revolutionary Voline* and Leon Trotsky were both stranded in New York as the Russian revolution broke out in Petrograd , inevitably coming into contact with one another. Voline stated that he felt that the Bolsheviks, given their ruthlessness and single minded determination, would ultimately come to power. They would then begin eliminating their opponents, amongst whom of course were the anarchists; this persecution would end with the Bolsheviks shooting the anarchists “like partridges.” Trotsky was dismissive, they might have their differences but they were comrades in arms, they had different interpretations of the revolutionary process but shared the same goals. It was nonsense to speak of Bolsheviks shooting revolutionary comrades, “we are socialists, comrade Voline! So we are not your enemies….” [1] In December of 1919, whilst gravely wounded Voline was captured by the Bolshe...
Read more