This land is your land, but it’s really my land
Kurt Anderson at New York Magazine says, Who cares if the meany weirdo president of Iran came and spoke at Columbia? So what? As Roland says to his comrades-in-arms in The Song of Roland, What are you, a bunch of sissies?
For a while now, I’ve fretted that we’re turning into a nation of weenies and permanently enraged censors, that too many of us are afraid of letting disagreeable or uncomfortable ideas into the limelight. If it’s not the p.c. overreach of campus “speech codes” or the attempts to criminalize “hate speech,” it’s the FCC’s crackdown on cussing in PBS documentaries and the Secret Service’s keeping protesters fenced off in “free speech zones.” But during the last month, this impulse to squelch-indulged by the left and the right and the milquetoast middle-seems to have reached some kind of tipping point, as if we’ve entered a permanent state of hysterical overreaction.
This is a good read, and my contrary nature wants to agree. But it’s not that easy. We live in a pluralist society, and one thing we don’t really like to discuss is that each worldview within that culture really claims supremacy to itself, as in “I believe X, and you believe Y, and they believe Z, and you can keep believing in Y and Z, but it’s really X that makes all that possible, so X is really the driving worldview of the culture…” And X doesn’t like it when This happens, and Y doesn’t like it when That happens, and Z doesn’t like it when The Other Thing happens. And all this means that somebody is complaining all the time about something, which makes it sound like we’re a nation of complainers. And maybe we are. But the bigger issue is, Whose culture is it?
HT: AL DAILY




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top10 Comments to “This land is your land, but it’s really my land”
I suppose it was a good chance to let his crazy views be known better, to see them for what they are.
Report comment to moderator
The solution is to promote true tolerance.
X and Y and Z need to put up with each other and use peaceful means to try to accomplish their differing goals.
Report comment to moderator
forget “true” tolerance and try open debates in your face with elbows up.
Watching American politcal debates which are heavily controlled and snaitized with little chance for give and take, one is reminds how afraid all political elites are afraid to subject themselves to the public arena.
Report comment to moderator
As little as I agree with HRW, he’s right on this – we need old school Lincoln-Douglas style debates.
Of course, the audience might fall asleep. Sigh.
Report comment to moderator
Our own president denies the Armenian holocaust, and is right nowurging Congress not to recognize it, and yet no one calls him a madman.
Report comment to moderator
Night Train, Congress is almost 100 years late on this issue. Why did the Democrats decide that in 2007, after years of silence, that they must recognize the Armenian holocaust as genocide?
Report comment to moderator
That’s not the bigger issue, Harrison. Who’s culture? The question itself is offensive.
I agree with the article you quoted. If I were president of a university I’d let Hitler speak if he asked. The fact is that the only way to defeat ideas is to hear them and destroy them. Not with censorship, but with full an open inquiry.
Report comment to moderator
DCL – We don’t have open inquiry and debate on the US campuses anymore (just ask Lawrence Summers formerly of Harvard).
Open inquiry and debate is the disinfectant of propaganda and other bad/wrong ideas.
I would not want to let the known propagandists come talk on campus unless there was open inquiry and debate to test and correct the errors.
Report comment to moderator
Key — still athirst for your hero, I see. Now that you’ve read the Song of Roland, you need to keep going to the Quijote. Title to the farm used to be held by Cervantes, but it’s been subdivided quite a few times into parcels as small as WorldMagBlog, the monuments have been moved, the boundaries are disputed, and you can’t get title insurance. Plagiarism has more prestige than copyright. You are right to express the claimants as x, y, z but you’re mistaken to think that time is any respecter of priority
Report comment to moderator
This is the link which will take you to the ENTIRE article written by Kurt Anderson for the October 15, 2007 Edition of New York Magazine.
The name of the article is: “The Age of Apoplexy” Are the controversial comments of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (or Larry Summers or Bill O’Reilly or NARAL) really so threatening?
http://nymag.com/news/imperialcity/38948/
NOTE: If you check out the Title/beginning post – you will notice that “meany weirdo president of Iran” doesn’t exist in this Article – I’m not sure how a journalist will reply to this, but I’m not impressed – Kurt Anderson wrote this piece for the New York Magazine, but others want to add words to what he has said.
Is this an HONEST and fair journalistic practice? I would say NO, not even close -
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!