Re: [Leica] Freedom of speech and political correctness (off topic)

[Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>]

Hello, Mikiro (pardon spelling if I messed up)

I hope you don't have the wrong impression of the US....

There is a difference in courtesy/consideration of others and 
"political correctness".  I live in a state that is the butt of 
many jokes, as are some surrounding states.  If you came to 
Denton, Tx.,  I feel sure that you'd be treated with consideration 
and respect, just as you have in Europe, and just as I'd expect 
if I went to Asia.  BY MOST PEOPLE.

"Political Correctness" is a much abused term (by me/others)....
When a local entity (city, state, employer, school) tries to 
limit speech/thought that is considered "offensive", it limits 
the free exchange of ideas.  Even though the offending thought/speech
may be "wrong", by your standards and mine, the freedom to express 
such thoughts is guaranteed by an amendment to our national 
constitution.  Such guarantees are not universal around the world.

There are limitation on free speech.  Speech that provokes an 
immediate danger to others (such as advocating violence or a riot)
is not guaranteed.  As many have stated before, yelling "fire" in 
a crowded building is NOT free speech, as other may be immediately 
injured by the chaos that results from such action.  Other than 
such irresponsible actions, tho, freedom of speech/expression is 
pretty much guaranteed.

In the late l970s thru 90s, there has been a trend in this country 
for local entities (local governments, schools, employers, media
providors) to impose restrictions on speech (spoken/written) and 
behavior (smoking, wearing certain types of clothing) that it deems
"unacceptable".  This is usually NOT by the passing of laws, as 
such laws are sure to be deemed unconstitutional, but by coming down 
hard on people who express "unsatisfactory" speech/behavior.  By 
threatening people with disciplinary action, one can alter behavior 
that isn't actually illegal.

While one can defend the restriction of "unacceptable" behaviors, 
who's to say what is offensive?   If I'm a vegetarian, your eating 
of a hamburger might be offensive to me.  If I'm deaf, your 
having a conversation that I can't understand might offend me. (not 
true of a very fine friend of mine who is also deaf).  It simply 
becomes ridiculous.  We all are "offended" by something, and 
tolerance of such things is what makes us human.

Add to this fiasco the fact that trial attorneys in our country 
are anxious to take on lawsuits anytime there is money to be made, 
and you have a very dangerous situation.  

I think you'd find people in the U.S. or Texas to be about as 
friendly as where you live, if not more so.  If you're assaulted, 
we'll be there to defend you.  If someone steals your things, 
we'll help you find them, if possible.  If I'm dining, sit at 
my table and I'll feed you.  But if the asshole at the corner
shouts something offensive, ignore it an walk on.  I do.  

Human consideration for each other knows few limits, if left 
alone.  99% of us will take you in and teach you and learn from 
you.  But deny the 1% their right to free expression, and we'll 
all chew on your ass.  That's what "freedom" means to us.

This group represents a TINY minority of folks in this fine country, and 
they are not as "representative" as they'd like to think.  They 
are better educated, better mannered, and in a higher income group
than "average".  They'll blast me for this one, but it's true.
(to fend of the deluge of posts, do not respond to this unless 
you post you gross l998 income -- $25,700 BTW)

But the guarantee of free speech ALSO extends to the garbage man 
and the guy at the corner store with the sixth-grade education.
(he's my brother :)-)

If you don't believe P.C. exists, ask the guy who was fired or 
has a lawsuit against him because of his words -- NOT his actions.
Shouldn't be hard to find one.  (but don't look in the white house
:)

Sincerely,
Walt