User Rating: 0 / 5

Star inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactive
 

Freedom of Speech does not really exist. Politicians won’t tell you this, but in its current form freedom of speech is a figment of your imagination.

 

IS IT A RIGHT?

Freedom of speech is supposed to be a right with few limits. This would actually make it a Franken-hybrid. Half-monster, half-something else. This should come as no surprise since in our current collection of dysfunctional Political Systems, there are no true rights. They are all either castrated rights, or privileges granted to us by our overlords: the government.

Freedom of speech is supposed to be this permission for us to say whatever we would like without fear of persecution. Emphasis on "supposed".

Now, let’s see if this is true. Let's test its limits.

  • Can I say that Mary is a thief? No. That would be defamation of character.
  • Can I say that all Chinese people are members of a no good race and should all be exterminated in a glorious nuclear blast? No. That would be racist.
  • Can I say fuck-you to Pope’s face? No, not if you are in the Vatican. You would be arrested.
  • Can I say that that you should hate all races except the glorious white that brought civilization to the world, and will dominate again? No. That would be hatred.
  • Can I say that Mahoma was homosexual? No.  Not if you are in any religious dictatorship (sorry, kingdom or democracy). You would be arrested and probably hanged or beheaded.

So… Let’s see if we understand this correctly. Freedom of speech protects what we say publicly, as long as it is true, it is not racist, there isn’t an arbitrary rule in the law, is not hatred and it does not break any religious law. Give or take. More or less. If we abide by the many other limitations of this so-called freedom which depends of the country your reside in.

The inevitable conclusion is that the freedom of speech is actually a permission to talk.

 

IS IT FREE OR AT LEAST GOVERNMENT SUPPORTED?

But what about the media. Does the freedom of speech force the media to print or broadcast our ideas? No.

Then, do we get a specialty channel, a radio station, a dedicated newspaper that will print our ideas? Of course not!

But what about government media? You know, those media that we all actually pay for through taxes. Do we get any space in them? Of course not! There are bureaucratic rules that prevent us from using what we pay for. Silly us...

So… Freedom of speech is not free? You got it. Not even if we have already paid for it? Correct!

 

THE REAL THING: AUSTRO-LIBERTARIAN FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Theory and Responsibility

Freedom of Speech is a figment of your imagination that politicians and lawyers love to use. There are no drawbacks if you declare yourself in its favor or if you are seen protecting it (whatever that may mean).

This freedom is barely a permission to speak, if our overlords of the day allow the topic and if we pay twice (once for the actual broadcast and once through taxes).

Contrast this nightmare with an AL System.

First we need to elucidate who owns thoughts. Seems something stupid to ask, but it is important. Out thoughts originate in our brain. We own that brain without restrictions. Therefore out thoughts are ours. As they are ours, we can think anything we want. There are no limits. These are private thoughts.

Now, what happens if we make those thoughts public? We are exposing our thoughts to other people. But, and this is the critical part, we are not forcing these people to accept them. They may choose to hear or read them. They may choose to dismiss or pay no attention to them. It is entirely up to them.

Actually, if we want to be specific, it is a contract. We provide an offer to see our thoughts, a consideration (out thoughts), and the opportunity for mutuality (a voluntary agreement) and they either accept or decline our contract.

It is their decision not ours. If they accept our offer, they are responsible for the thought they are bringing into their own minds and brains, which are their absolute property. 

This contract may have two outcomes:

1 – They do not accept, in which case our thoughts are lost

2 – They accept. In which case a copy of our thoughts are now their property

The first outcome has no consequences. But what about the second? Neither. For this simple reason. Once they have accepted our contract, a copy of our thoughts has become their property, to which they, and only they, have absolute rights. What they do or do not do with their property is totally unrelated to us. The Master Contract says so, because we have no further contract with them.

Any other assumption of responsibility is erroneous. The bottom line is that in an AL System, we are not responsible for what other people do. Only they are.

We understand that this type of thinking goes against all that you have been thought and it is difficult to process. That’s OK. Nobody said that the AL System is easy to adopt.

Let’s go a step further. Let’s say that Fres convinces Joao that it is a good idea to rob a bank. However, Fres had no other interaction with Joao. Fres just talked to him. Is Fres responsible if Joao robs a bank? The answer is no. How could she be? Joao owns his own body. Fres did not receive anything from Joao other than ideas.

But, but, but, isn’t Fres responsible from “inciting” Joao? Ahh… here it comes. The old way of thinking.

Let’s analyze this. What exactly means “inciting”? At its most basic it simply means transmitting a message. Our thoughts. And as we have seen above, transmitting our thoughts does not held us responsible for anything. It cannot.

In an AL System, the freedom to say anything is absolute. There are no made-up, relative, opportunistic, subjective or arbitrary rules that limit this right.

What other people do with those thoughts is their problem.

It may seem strange, but in an AL System everybody is responsible for their actions, not their thoughts. So, before you perform an action based on a thought that is not yours, you should think it through very carefully.

Through this process the AL System fosters responsibility, because you simply cannot blame other people for their thoughts!

There is yet another reason why an AL System is balanced. In the same manner that you can express your thoughts without limit, so can everybody else. So, before accusing Mary of being a thief, you would do well in thinking what may Mary accuse you of.

MAD. Mutually Assured Defamation.  Lose, lose situation.

Through this process the AL System fosters responsibility, not because there is a law or regulation, but because it is in your best interest to do so. This interest is the single most important incentive a human can possibly have. It is so strong that is even heavily encoded in our genes!

In this sense, the AL System is brilliant insofar it uses our stronger instinct to create a balanced civilization. No rules required.

Logistics

Now that we have elucidated who owns our thoughts, how about figuring out the logistics of freedom of speech under an AL System?

This is actually quite simple. You are free to say anything at all as long as it is through your property or through whatever media you are able to contract with.

In other words, your freedom of speech is limited only by your greed. You want to get your message out there? You will need to pay for it. Nothing is free in an AL System.

Is this better than the current situation? Sure it is. In our current “society” (and we use this term with disgust), you are paying twice. Once for all the media you can’t use and once for the media you can. How is that fearer than paying only once?

But, but, but, this would mean that whoever has the biggest budget wins. This correct? In terms of purchasing broadcasting ability sure. In terms of having a compelling message, not so. But in this argument, there is also a detail that must not be overlooked. This unbalance of capabilities exists today. This is nothing new.

The AL System is superior in many areas to current systems, but it is not superior in all of them. Trying to do so inevitably leads to communism simply because we are physical beings and as such require physical means and those means are limited. Stealing from somebody to give to somebody else is simply communism, plain and simple.

In the end, in an AL System you are free to say whatever you want through any media you can afford and you pay. None of the current Political Systems beats that!

In conclusion, your speech can be free or muffled and expensive. Your choice. Choose well.

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.

 

 

Comments | Add yours
  • No comments found
English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It