>>> "Nathan Newman" <nathan.newman at yale.edu> 03/15/00 08:36AM >>>
All of this, going back to past debates on free speech, is why I go for absolutist positions on free speech, defending Nazis et al, since one of the hardest fought victories in US politics has been the elimination of most criminal and civil threats to unpopular speech.
***********
CB: Well, I take an "absolutist" position on freedom from racism, and when freedom of speech conflicts with it, freedom from racism must prevail. The victories in US politics against racism have been at least as hard fought as those against limitations of speech. For example, the Civil War. Or in World politics, WW II, the Viet Nam war. The UN Convention against Genocide is the legal codification of the victory of WWII over fascistic racism.
The idea that freedom of speech is a more important political value than freedom from racism, especially fascistic racism, is not supported by history. Over the last 500 years, racism has resulted in 100's of millions of premature deaths and hundreds of millions of lives lived in incredible misery, genocidal destruction of whole peoples, as in North America. Repression of speech has not come even close to that.
So , I say the political value of freedom from racism is more important than the value of freedom of speech.
CB