|From Twitter 01-09-2011
||[Jan. 10th, 2011|03:01 am]
Tweets copied by twittinesis.com
07:48:37: RT @LAGilman: Accountability does not negate freedom of speech. Likewise, freedom of speech does not negate accountability.
Yep. After all if that wasn't true, we wouldn't have libel and slander laws.
2011-01-10 07:54 pm (UTC)
Ah, but if your heart is in the "right" place, and you look cute enough for prime time, you don't really have to think about what you're saying and can argue with impunity. Voters don't want to think much anymore and media no longer has any duties to educate these days. I'm wondering when our President Putin will come along.
There really is nothing new under the sun, is there? "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?"
Did you ever see the play or the movie "A Man for All Seasons"?
I'm reminded of a line from the script, which may have some from Thomas More himself (not a scholar of that time, so I don't know), in which an unscrupulous clerk suggests that More go outside the law, knock down the fence between what's right and what's not, to benefit himself. And the character More says (as best I remember) "And what will you do then, Richard, when you need the law to protect you...all the laws being knocked flat?"
The law can protect a citizen only if citizens protect the law. Lawlessness looks like fun to gangs of kids...but it is not fun to live with, as the people in gang-ridden and war-torn areas can attest--have attested, time after time. The people who think it's fun--who feel brave and heroic when they're posturing in groups and still have the law's protection of free speech and a free press--will find it less fun should that law fail and they actually have to defend themselves. They will fall. They are not invincible--the gated communities, the safe rooms, the home arsenals, do not make people safe. (If they knew any history--if they knew how people lived--and some still live--in the conditions they think they want, they just might re-think their strategy. But they've gone a long way down this road in the past forty years. And it's clear today that although yesterday should've been a wake-up call for them, they've got their eyes, ears, and minds closed to it.)
It is on my Netflix queue, but I've just bumped it up the list, as yours is the second out-of-the-blue rec for it in as many days. Thank you.
What I do recall of the history of those times is that Thomas More was a very complicated man, but my actual history classes were mostly earlier--ancient and medieval, and my Renaissance class (the only one) focused more on Italian and French stuff. England was relatively backward.
What I recall of the movie that I saw it four times in one year and I'm not much of a moviegoer. Somewhere around here I have the script of the play (bought years later in a used bookstore--it was published as a thin book) but I couldn't find it tonight.
Politics, though, has been politics a long, long time because humans are still humans.