More handpicked essays just for you.
Significance of the freedom of speech
Significance of the freedom of speech
Significance of the freedom of speech
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The term political correctness (PC) has infringed on our freedom of speech by assuming that the populace is too ignorant to realize what appropriate speech is. This term is now as common in our society as the term, ‘freedom of speech’. It is incomprehensible how these two words have had such an effect on the manner in which our society communicates. The trend casts a negative view on our society by letting political views determine what is appropriate in our social sector. Political correctness, as applied in today’s society, seeks to control freedom of speech and poses a true danger to a free society. The First Amendment’s focus is the protection of our right to express our thoughts through speech, whether written or verbal. By PC’s intrinsic infringement on these rights, it has become a subtle tool used for dismantling freedom of speech and manipulating the flow of information to the masses.
The similarities between political correctness and Marxism are nearly endless. Marxism bred political correctness; therefore, its roots lie in a version of Marxist ideology, derived from the Frankfurt School, which sees culture, rather than the economy, as the site of class struggle. Marxist social theory projects the importance of mass culture and communication in social reproduction and domination. The Marxist theory attacks free speech and the demand for diversity and tolerance over everything except individuals and ideologies deemed ‘intolerant.’ This theory is the beginning of the process of transforming a free nation into a Marxist state. When this theory is presented in a subtle manner, it accomplishes its goal. Although it is often the subject of humor, the political correctness’s of Marxist roots impose societal control and denial...
... middle of paper ...
...rrectness: For and Against. Lanham, Univ Pr of Amer. 1995. Print.
Kellner, Douglas Critical Theory, Marxism, and Modernity. Cambridge and Baltimore:
Polity and John Hopkins University Press. 1989 Print.
Heston, Charlton, Winning the Cultural War Speech delivered 16 February 1999, Austin Hall, Harvard
Law School
Levine, Lawrence W. The Opening of the American Mind: Canons, Culture, and History
Beacon Press; 1st ed. 1997
---Media Culture. Cultural Studies, Identity, and Politics Between the Modern and the Postmodern. London
and New York: Routledge; 1995
Mirkinson, Jack . “Juan Williams: Muslims On Planes Make Me ‘Nervous’” The Huffington Report
on the web 21 Oct. 2010. 07 Dec 2010 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/19/juan- williams-muslims-nervous_n_768719.html
Wheatland, Thomas. The Frankfurt school in exile. Univ of Minnesota Pr, 2009. Print.
Michiko Kakutani's essay “The Word Police” is a refreshing look at a literary world policed by the Politically Correct (P.C.). She pokes fun at the efforts of P.C. policepersons such as Rosalie Maggio, author of The Bias-Free Word Finder, a Dictionary of Nondiscriminatory Language . But in mocking authors like Maggio, Kakutani emphasizes that efforts of the P.C. police are often exaggerated to the point of silliness and can even become a linguistic distraction from the real issues. In fact, such filtering or censorship of words can lead to larger problems within the English language: “getting upset by phrases like ‘bullish on America' or ‘the City of Brotherly Love' tends to distract attention from the real problems of prejudice and injustice that exist in society at large” (686). According to Kakutani, over-exaggerated political correctness just serves in complicating our words and diluting the messages. But really, the problem in P.C. advice on word-choice is the exaggeration of inclusive ness. Kakutani addresses the P.C. police's righteous motive: “a vision of a more just, inclusive society in which racism, sexism, and prejudice of all sorts have been erased” (684). But where does one draw the line between writing inclusively and walking on eggshells? What is politically correct? Must writers assume the worst of their audiences when debating whether to mutate the spelling of “women” to “womyn” in order to avoid sexist language? The truth is, writing purely inclusively is an arduous task; it requires consistent and careful consideration of many exterior elements such as audience, literary content, and societal context. An examination of these elements reveals just how difficult ...
This source supplies my paper with more evidence of how freedom of speech is in a dangerous place. American has always stood by freedom of speech, and to see how social media platforms try to manipulate and take off as the choose to increase slight bias is unpleasant. The article establishes a worry to the fellow readers that hold freedom of speech so high and that it is at risk. The article manages to explain why freedom of speech is in danger, and why there should be no limits to free speech.
Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. Although this amendment gave people the right express thier opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech.
Marxism is a method of analysis based around the concepts developed by the two German philosophers Karl Marx and Fredrich Engel, centered around the complexities of social-relations and a class-based society. Together, they collaborated their theories to produce such works as The German Ideology (1846) and The Communist Manifesto (1848), and developed the terms ‘’proletariat’ and ’bourgeois’ to describe the working-class and the wealthy, segmenting the difference between their respective social classes. As a result of the apparent differences, Marxism states that proletariats and bourgeoisie are in constant class struggle, working against each other to amount in a gain for themselves.
Karl Marx 's writing of ‘The Communist Manifesto’ in 1848 has been documented by a vast number of academics as one of the most influential pieces of political texts written in the modern era. Its ideologically driven ideas formed the solid foundation of the Communist movement throughout the 20th century, offering a greater alternative for those who were rapidly becoming disillusioned and frustrated with the growing wealth and social divisions created by capitalism. A feeling not just felt in by a couple of individuals in one society, but a feeling that was spreading throughout various societies worldwide. As Toma highlights in his work, Marx felt that ‘capitalism would produce a crisis-ridden, polarized society destined to be taken over by
In order to understand Hay’s article, it is important to have a basic understanding of the fundamentals of Marxism – this will provide the necessary context to identify and understand the Marxist perspective in the article. Marxism is a political philosophy which focuses on social class and conflict as one of its main ideas. This is where one political class (the
Rankin, Aidan. “The repressive openness of political correctness.” Contemporary Review 282.1644 (2003): 33+. Literature resource Center. Web. 15 Feb. 2011.
Unlike many other countries America has freedom of speech. Even in other countries in Europe people are not allowed to use “hate speech” and they can be sent to prison for it. Fortunately, the American constitution defends people’s freedom of speech, no matter how controversial it is. Political correctness diminishes people’s free speech. It may not be direct but even indirectly the knowledge that someone might have adverse consequences; such as losing a job as a result of their speech is unacceptable. People have the right to state their opinions without others infringing on them, it was the principle in which America was founded. The first amendment of the constitution of the United States declares that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (US Const. amend. I, sec. i). While the first amendment only affects congress’s control over free speech, it indicates that free speech is a right that people must have. Some people are of the opinion that if something can be found offensive
The “Politically Correct” movement’s purpose is to bring historically condescending terms, offensive music and art, and controversial educational content to an end and replace them with more positive and less-offending references. Offensive and demoralizing efforts are wrong, but the censorship and deletion of words and phrases that do not contain the intention to demoralize are taking political correctness too far. Politically correct (or “PC”) antics have created a social decline that is growing worse with each generation, specifically regarding areas of art, education, language, and our right to freedom of speech; the degradation they have brought to the American psyche has even led to name-changing.
The First Amendment is known as the most protected civil liberty that protects our right to freedom of speech. There has been much controversy regarding hate speech and laws that prohibit it. These problems have risen from generation to generation and have been protested whether freedom of speech is guaranteed. According to our text book, By the People, hate speech is defined as “hostile statements based on someone’s personal characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation.” Hate speech is a topic of issue for many people and their right’s, so the question is often proposed whether hate speech should be banned by government.
Whether one thinks that the ideas of communism are good or bad, by taking a look a today’s society, we can certainly see the affect The Communist Manifesto and other books of its kind have had. Karl Marx’s ideas have shaped many programs and organizations to attempt following along the lines of equality.
Why is it, that people’s feelings seem to be more important than free speech in today’s society? Is “hate speech” not covered by free speech? this frightening trend present in society – the idea that words cause harm, and should therefore be limited.
Freedom of speech cannot be considered an absolute freedom, and even society and the legal system recognize the boundaries or general situations where the speech should not be protected. Along with rights comes civil responsib...
Companies are afraid. Very afraid. They are not offending anyone, catering to all ethnicities, cultures, and backgrounds, and being “politically correct” in every sense of the word. In fear of offending any potential customers they might have, companies adopt an “all-inclusive” approach to their image. Advertisements depicting groups of people of identical race have become an endangered species; all walks of life are being crammed into any group of people representing a logo. This practice may seem insignificant, but it has infiltrated everything, everywhere, and has reached an unrealistic level.
As a matter of fact, his teachings can definitely be applied to today’s society. This paper will give a summary of Marx’s political philosophy. It will also discuss a contemporary issue: the current economic crisis— and how Marx believed racism played a crucial role in it. Finally, through the lens he has developed, I will explain how Marx would analyze this issue and how one can argue that it spurred the current movement known as Occupy Wall Street. Karl Marx was a German philosopher and political theorist.