[sixties-l] Re: Horowitz and Free Speech

From: Jeffrey Blankfort (jab@tucradio.org)
Date: Fri Mar 23 2001 - 02:38:10 EST

  • Next message: radman: "[sixties-l] Kent State May Fourth Commemoration Denied Funding."

    Free speech in America is uniquely equated with money as is our version
    of the Golden Rule: He who has the gold rules.

    Two Supreme Court decisions, the first during the time that the Senate,
    with the court's collaboration, was giving away most of the Western
    United States, and gave the corporations the same rights as an
    individual (but with fewer responsibilities) and later determined that
    giving money to politicians was and remains an act of free speech,
    besmirched the concept to the point where the issue of Horowitz's ad and
    the negative reaction to it by those it targets, is considered largely
    as a free speech question, rather than an example of how those with
    money in our society have, according to the law, greater access to free
    speech than those without it.

    If Horowitz wanted to contest the issue of free speech, he should have
    submitted his misguided missive as an op-ed piece as other writers
    normally do. There have been op-eds against reparations in most of the
    major dailies, so getting such a piece published for nothing, was not
    out of the question.

    By buying the space, however, Horowitz puts his opponents at a
    disadvantage, not because of the weight of his ideas but the weight of
    his pocketbook. Thus the question is not primarily about free speech but
    about money.

    This disparity is something we see every day in every form of media. It
    is part and parcel of a culture which is distinguished among developed
    countries by the immensity of the gap between its richest and its
    poorest inhabitants. Why is this business with Horowitz any different?

    Jeff Blankfort

    > >>
    > >> At 9:39 PM -0500 3/9/01, Sorrento95@aol.com wrote:
    > >> > >> >
    > >> >Horowitz, on the other hand, is an individual,
    > >> >and has rights, even though leftists don't like
    > >> >him. Since college newspapers enjoy support
    > >> >from taxpayers' money, he has as much right
    > >> >to run an ad there as anyone else, and those
    > >> >who confiscate and burn newspapers which publish
    > >> >opinions they disagree with are no better than
    > >> >Nazis, even if they do call themselves "progressives."
    > >> >
    > >> > ~ Michael Wright
    > >> > Norman, Oklahoma
    > >
    > >--

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Mar 23 2001 - 20:12:27 EST