The Importance of Freedom of Expression in America
Would life be the same without freedom of expression? Expressions of hate, sometimes called hate speech, are highly prevalent in today's society; one group using them is the KKK, in particular Charles Brandenburg. Government leaders may also want to repress free speech for the motive of keeping the citizenry in the dark so they don't learn about corruption in the hierarchy of our country. The aforementioned corruption is what freedom of expression was created for; to give the populace some control over the government's actions. The Vietnam War was one of the largest events where freedom of expression was used. From wearing black armbands to the massacre at Kent State University, people definitely showed their discontentment. For these and many other reasons, American citizens should have absolute freedom of expression with no interference from the government.
Expressions of hate can be tolerated, but become a responsibility of the government when they are acts inciting violence, such as hate crimes. In the Supreme Court Case Brandenburg v. Ohio, the KKK leader Charles Brandenburg's rights of freedom of speech were violated. He gave a speech to a group of other Klan members with a reporter there filming it. Brandenburg encouraged taking revenge upon the branches of government because they were restraining the white race, according to him. This went against the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism statute of 1919. That law made it illegal for anyone to advocate action against the government. This case was instrumental in how freedom of speech is looked at today. The Supreme Court decided that the, "...constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to ...
... middle of paper ...
...he end of the United State’s involvement in Vietnam.
The government should have no interference in the absolute freedom of expression rights the American people have. These many things affected our right to freedom of speech in their own way, but always the American people have come out stronger because of it. Because these rights are guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States of America, the U.S. government should have no say whatsoever in changing or limiting them. If the government takes away our rights of freedom of expression, then what is the war in Afghanistan and Iraq's purpose? What are we fighting for if not the civilians rights to freely express themselves?
Works Cited
* No named author. Kent State, May 4, 1970: America Kills Its Children:. 1 June 1995. The Ethical Spectacle. 8 Dec. 2004 <http://www.spectacle.org/595/kent.html>.
The docudrama ‘13 Days’ depicts the conflicts between the United States and the Soviet Union which nearly ended in a cataclysmic crisis; widely known as the Cuban Missile crisis. The course of events and the escalation of the crisis during the intense 13-day period in October 1962 are conveyed to the audience through the perspective of US political leaders. The crisis begins as U-2 spy planes evidences that Soviet leader, Khrushchev, had intermediate-range missiles deployed to Cuba in secrecy and is in the process of activating them. The movie surfaces the conundrums faced by President Kennedy in deciding appropriate actions to be undertaken, such that the missiles in Cuba are removed without resorting to war. Audiences are acquainted with the various complexities involved in the decision making processes, as President Kennedy not only had to deal with the antagonistic Soviet Union, but also disagreements within his own administration.
“Fag burns.” “DIE.” These slurs were scrawled outside the GLBT office at N.C. State last October. Should the instigator be indicted for hate speech in addition to vandalism? Was this expression an act of hate speech? Or was it free speech? Is the message he conveyed protected under the First Amendment? Two and a half centuries ago, the nation’s forefathers drafted the Constitution of the United States. The aim of the Constitution is to protect the values that this nation was built upon. This document, arguably one of the nation’s most important, encompasses values such as democracy, equality, religious tolerance, as well as the freedom of speech.
...ntinuously keeping people from saying what they want, the government is simply making them want to act out and speak out even more. To become a better nation or better citzens, we must learn to tolerate or accept the ideas of others no matter how absurd or profane they may be. No one has to agree with these ideas. Being able to tolerate the opinions of others leads to order and peace ( Tinder 44). For us to really be a free nation we must allow true free speech. “Order and peace are spontaneous and will tend to prevail wherever there is freedom” (Tinder 45).
According to Roger Rosenblatt “since free is the way people's minds were made to be”, freedom of speech is important to speak one's mind in a way that expresses his/her opinion even if this opinion does not seem to convince others. In my opinion, without freedom of speech, the United States would have failed to be such a powerful country as it is today.
According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).
The world was at the edge of a third world war. This was the result of a variety of things: the Cuban Revolution, the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion, US anti-communism, insecurity of the Soviet Union, and Cuba's fear of invasion all made causes for war. However, war was not the result due to great cooperation from both President Kennedy and President Khrushchev and each of the decisions made by the leaders was crucial in the outcome of The Crisis. Kennedy's choice to take action by means of quarantine instead of air-strike and Khrushchev's decision to abide by the quarantines were perhaps the two most significant decisions made by the leaders in order to prevent war. The Cuban Missile Crisis showed the world that compromising and discussion can in-fact prevent war. As Khrushchev said in 1962, "They talk about who won and who lost. Human reason won. Mankind won." 1 The world had almost seen another world war, the effects of which would have been devastating because of the weapons involved. Humanity, indeed, was the prevention of the war.
During Stalin’s regime, the individual Russian was the center of his grand plan for better or worse. Stalin wanted all of his people to be treated the same. In the factory the top producer and the worst producer made the same pay. He wanted everyone to be treated as equals. His goal to bring the Soviet Union into the industrial age put tremendous pressure on his people. Through violence and oppression Stalin tried to maintain an absurd vision that he saw for the Soviet Union. Even as individuals were looked at as being equals, they also were viewed as equals in other ways. There was no one who could be exempt when the system wanted someone imprisoned, killed, or vanished. From the poorest of the poor, to the riches of the rich, everyone was at the mercy of the regime. Millions of individuals had fake trumped up charges brought upon them, either by the government or by others who had called them o...
The Cuban Missile Crisis lasted two weeks in the midst of the Cold War, and brought the world closer to nuclear war than ever before. In October of 1962 multiple nuclear missiles of the Soviet Union’ s were discovered in Cuba, a mere 90 miles south of the United States. Given the communist ties between Cuba and the USSR, this poised a considerable threat to our national security. Throughout the 14 days the two leaders, John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev struggled to clearly understand each others‘ genuine intentions. Actions taken by each state during this crisis demonstrates the realist point of view, in a variety of ways. The fundamentals of Realism will be explored and explained along with actions taken during this crisis from a realist point of view.
Smith, William Y and Anatoli I. Gribkov. Operation ANADYR: U.S. and Soviet Generals Recount the Cuban Missile Crisis. Chicago: Edition Q, 1994.
What if people were punished, put in jail, or even killed, just for expressing their opinions?
The first five-year plan, approved in 1929, proposed that state and collective farms provide 15 percent of agriculture output. The predominance of private farming seemed assured, as many farmers resisted collectivization. By late 1929, Stalin moved abruptly to break peasant resistance and secure the resources required for industrialization. He saw that voluntary collectivism had failed, and many “Soviet economists doubted that the first plan could even be implimented.”1 Stalin may have viewed collectivization as a means to win support from younger party leaders, rather than from the peasants and Lenin’s men. “Privately he advocated, industrializing the country with the help of internal accumulation” 2 Once the peasantry had been split, Stalin believed that the rural proletarians would embrace collectivization . Before this idea had a chance to work, a grain shortage induced the Politburo to support Stalin’s sudden decision for immediate, massive collectivization.
When you think about America, the first thing that comes to mind is liberty. Liberty of the government and its citizens is one thing that colonists exceedingly desired during the British oppressive regime. When United States gained independence, the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution of the Unites States, a document that has been governing our country for more than 200 years. The constitution was drafted accordingly to ensure that people’s opinions were heard. What our Founding Fathers could not foresee is that in our 21st century, The Freedom of Speech not only gives a person such a massive power, but also an opinion even if it is immoral and goes against citizens’ values.
This analysis explained the Cuban rebels in the Bay of Pigs invasion, the importance of the great leaders of the United States, the important decision making by the U.S. leaders, and the crazy leaders of the Soviet Union and Cuba. The Cuban missile crisis was a very dangerous episode, bringing the world’s major military powers to the brink of nuclear war. This event was important to world history and to all the main leaders involved. President Kennedy was assassinated shortly after that, but is still regarded as one of the best Presidents in U.S. history mainly because of how he dealt with that event. Fidel Castro and the country of Cuba are not recognized by the U.S. to this day and are still banned from trade. The Soviet Union has collapsed since the Cuban Missile Crisis and is now known as Russia. The Soviet Union is no longer a communist government and now gets along well with the United States. The bottom line is that this one event prevented a possibly world wide tragic nuclear war and has greatly affected the way the world is shaped today.
Part of what makes Mary Crawford an appealing candidate as a heroine of the story is her ability to take action. Throughout Mansfield Park, Mary is an energetic participant in the activities of Mansfield Park, such as taking part in many conversations, arguing her own point of view, riding horses, entertaining herself and others with her harp, and acting in Lover’s Vows. Fanny pales in comparison in terms of her level of activity. In regard to riding, Fanny is attended to when she rides, either by a groomsman or her cousins (Mansfield Park, 59). When Edmund decides to procure Fanny a horse, he does so in consideration of her health, not her happiness, as he means to “procure for Fanny the immediate means of exercise, which he could not bear she should be without” (Mansfield Park, 32). Edmund’s concern is that the horse is good for Fanny’...
Freedom of speech is a fundamental liberty that should not be killed with qualifications ("Thoughts" 1). Truly free speech should not be packed with restrictions and qualifications because in retrospect it is not free speech (Black 1). Freedom of speech is too important to have limitations. It is the gateway to freedom of thought. If speech is compromised, soon thoughts will follow. When the First Amendment was written it was only seen in a positive light. Our Founding Fathers believed that the First Amendment was a principle that prevented a government from becoming a tyranny