Elliot D. Cohen, Ph.D.: Chavez Had a Right to Call Bush the Devil - And Pelosi, Rangel and other Dems Should Have Said So
A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Elliot D. Cohen, Ph.D.
In his famous essay, "On Liberty," John Stuart Mill made plain the danger of censoring the opinions of others. "The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion," he said, "is that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error."
In our democracy, freedom of speech also means the right of Neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan, and other hate groups to express their views. The point is not that these groups speak the truth and are therefore entitled to speak openly. Rather, we tolerate the expression of these views because the danger of silencing the opinions of others with whom society or government disagrees means that any view -- no matter how credible -- may end up on the chopping block.
As Mill also recognized, the danger of being cocksure of oneself is that one takes no pains to subject one's views to the court of public opinion. Witness the recent remarks of Donald Rumsfeld in which he likens those who disagree with the Bush administration's stand on the Iraq war to Nazi supporters. And witness the President's own recent accusation that a media that questions his Iraq policy is aiding the terrorists -- and thus by implication is on their side.
In a true democracy, the formidable power of the state should be checked by an almost absolute right of political free speech -- so long, said Mill, as the speech in question does not place anyone in imminent danger.
It is therefore ironic that some of the most ardent opponents of the Bush administration have elected to place themselves on the very side of the government regime they so ardently oppose. I am referring here to Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi and Charlie Rangel.
In addressing the United Nations, Hugo Chavez made no bones about his scorn for the President of the United States when he referred to him as "The Devil." No term of endearment, this gesture of ill-will is likely to prove abundantly less "incendiary" and dangerous than the President's own demonizing denouncement of entire nations as members of "The Axis of Evil." Just how incendiary the President's remark is perceived to be obviously depends on what side of the axis you are on. The point is not that this damning rating of nations such as Iraq, Iran, and North Korea (and more pointedly, of their leaders) was degrading, provocative, and foolish -- it was all that. The point is rather that ours is supposed to be a nation that embraces freedom of speech, and if a President is entitled to indiscretions without censor, then, lest we face the fact that we live under a totalitarian regime, so too are others so entitled.
About Chavez's remark, Nancy Pelosi stated, "Hugo Chavez abused the privilege that he had, speaking at the United Nations"; and Charlie Rangel stated, "You do not come into my country, my congressional district, and you do not condemn my president." He told Chavez that he shouldn't "think that Americans do not feel offended when you offend our Chief of State."
For such "champions of democracy" to gloss over the distinction between indiscretion and offensiveness, on the one hand, and the right to free speech on the other, is not unlike a President who condemns the media for disagreeing with his war policy. The fact that Chavez's remark came in the form of a personal attack is irrelevant from the perspective of freedom of speech. In a democracy no federal government authority -- Democrat or Republican -- has the right to hold itself out as the arbiter of what etiquette freedom of speech must embrace. In the United States, there are civil courts that exist for such purposes. If Chavez or anyone else who rightfully has the bully pulpit wants to get up in front of a distinguished body of statesmen or a crowd at a rock concert and proclaim the President of the United States a devil, that is surely their prerogative. If the speaker demeans himself or his nation -- as Pelosi said of Chavez -- that is clearly the speaker's problem. It is the nation's problem only if this indiscretion is censored. From Mill's perspective, we are then prevented from "the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error."
To be credible, Democrats like Pelosi and Rangel need to stand firm against a government that likens those who dissent to its policies to Nazis and terrorists. In order to do so, they need to stand firm for freedom of speech. The main issue was not that Chavez was right or wrong; discrete or indiscrete. The important point is that he was exercising free speech -- and they (all of us) should support the right to do so, even if this means recognizing the right of another (even a foreign leader such as Chavez) to call the President of the United States The Devil.
A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
Elliot D. Cohen is a media ethicist and author of many books and articles on the media and other areas of applied ethics. He is the 2006 first-place recipient of the Project Censored Award for his Buzzflash article, Web of Deceit: How Internet Freedom Got the Federal Ax, and Why Corporate News Censored the Story.
Technorati Tags: Guest Contribution- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Buzz this on Buzzflash.net
Fight Ignorance: Read BuzzFlash.com
BuzzFlash: Editorials | Interviews | News Analysis | Alerts | Perspectives | Radio Ads | Reviews: Books, Movies, Music | Television | Books, DVDs, CDs, Hats, T-shirts
Community: BuzzFlash Mailbag | Reader and Guest Contributions | News Releases
Columns: Wings of Justice | GOP Hypocrite of the Week | Last Chance Democracy Cafe | Libby Defense Fund | Jeffrey Feldman's Frameshop | The Daily Buzz | Independent Thinker of the Month | World Media Watch | Blue State Jukebox | Verse-Case Scenario | Ms. Smith Goes to Washington | Caption This
Columnists: P.M. Carpenter | David Lindorff | Barbara's Daily Buzz | Ann Davidow | Thom Hartmann | Steven C. Day | Steven Jonas | Tony Peyser | Shirley Smith
Cartoonists: Kirk Anderson | Steve Bradenton | Tony Peyser | Andrew Wahl
Poets: Tony Peyser
Other: About | Frequently Asked Questions | Headlines | Search BuzzFlash | Put BuzzFlash Headlines on Your Web Site | Get BuzzFlash Alerts | Contact | Home
Support Independent Media: Click Here to See How
Unless otherwise noted, all original content
and headlines are © BuzzFlash.
Contact BuzzFlash for reprint rights.
General Disclaimer: Guest and Reader Contributions, News Releases and Mailbag Letters posted on BuzzFlash are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions of BuzzFlash or its editors.
Unconstitutionality
No hope from the Despotratic Party, either!
Chavez Had Right To Call Bush The Devil
Of course anybody ought to have the right to call El Diablo ( I refuse to call Bu** by his real name anymore, either ) the Devil anytime they want to, no matter who they are or what country they represent. They can call him the Anti-Christ, Traitor, Murderer or whatever they choose, and the American Fundamentalists can stop whining and shoving their corroded brand of Christianity down everyone's throat too. Wouldn't that be a gOD-send? Chavez is not the one who is causing problems for his own country and others. That would be the USA and El Diablo and his cohorts doing that, which they have a right to also, I guess(?), unless we the People MAKE him stop, even though Diablo's politics cause dissent and problems for everyone else in the world practically. The "Liberal Media" is just as at fault as El Diablo himself for letting this debacle go on as long as it has and not apologizing or in the media's case, brown-nosing El Diablo for his life threatening lies and love of torture, rigged voting machines and downright murder, instead of calling him on it. What a traitor to his own country, and we sit back and let him to do it. El Diablo and his buddies need to take a first class trip The Hague and then attend a nice necktie party for what they have done to millions of innocent civilians and to our once proud, democratic(?) and inspirational country. Sorry, Diablo, the verdict comes back as GUILTY in the 1st degree. Do some homework people, it's not that hard to see or find proof of what Diablo and friends have done and keep doing. If you think he is protecting us or keeping "terrists" and "nu-cular bombs" at bay, you're dead wrong and an idiot to boot. At least Chavez is trying to help his own country and even ours even though we constantly treat him like trash and the once again "Liberal Media" portrays him as another Fidel Castro or Che Guevarra. And excuse me.......but who is the dictator here? Chavez or Diablo? Not Chavez. Like I said, do your dang homework!!! Diablo is the one who said:" It would be much easier to run this country as a dictator, as long as I get to be the dictator". Oh yes, of course, Diablo. Sorry, ( No, I'm Not )but Diablo's new name of El Diablo fits him perfectly.....but some Americans are so dense, Diablo could come into their house and murder their children and they would yet still agree with him 100%. How sick and wrong is that, eh? Well, I've said as much as I'm gonna on this subject unless forced so thank you for letting me vent and state my opinion!!! - The Duke Of Helena
Charles Rangel shows his connection to the his paymasters
Nancy Pelosi and Charles Rangel are both agents of the same forces that the neo-cons are agents of.
Isn't Charles a member of one of those groups, the Council of Foreign Relations or the Trilateral Group?
Being African like both Chavez and Rangel... Charles didn't need to go far outside of New York to find Non-whitres who call Skull and Bones George W. Bush the Devil.... Heck, his own people have been saying that. Every Black person not paid with White money and honest SAYS that about not only Bush but most servants of global capitalism and white supremacy.
A suggestion to Charles: from your own race, realize by aligning with evil the DEVIL... you are supporting the evil of the fake busk-nazi war on terror and the crimes made thereof.
but that is not surprising since what many mainstream and liberal whites do not know but many Africans in your own community know all too well... your deep in bedded relationship with the same DEVIL that otherwise you claim to fight against.
We thank our brother fellow in African blood, Hugo Chavez, this master of propsaganda, outdoing billions of dollars of pro capitalism, anti-truth, anti-informing media, for forcing the agents of EVIL out into the public so that we all can see that most of what is seen as a match between Democrats and Republicans is no more real than professional wrestling.
Chavez and the Devil
Chavez calls Bush the devil and it's such an appropiate assertion because Bush is certainly NOT an ambassidor for Christ! Do any of the Bush Adiminstration's actions reflect authentic christian values? I think not! Never did I ever think hell was such a bad place until I thought I might have to spend it with Cheney and Bush.
Bush Gets Off Easy
He only called Bush a stinking devil. Suppose he would have requested that Luis Posada Carriles a known terrorist being harbored in the US be released to fly back to Venezuela with him.
chavez avails himself of a freedom his people do not have
all you morons who claim that chavez has the right to free speech forget that this very right is denied the miserable people who suffer under his dictatorship. el caudillo has rammed laws through the rubber-stamp parliament to make it a crime to criticize the president or the government,on pain of imprisonment or death by his bolivarian circle terrorist group. you people are ignorant fools. this scumbag came here, insulted all americans, and you applaud him for it. you are so blinded by bush hatred that you cannot see that chavez hates all americans, wether patriot or traitor. move to venezuela and see how much freedom to criticize you will have there.
I didn't hear any insults
Where did Chavez insult any Americans other than El Diablo? He didn't say anything that applied to me, that is for sure. The El Diablo supporters deserve to be insulted. Chavez has decreased the poverty rate in Venezuela ( http://www.nacla.org/art_display.php?art=2600 ). Cons like to twist the numbers, but that's the bottom line. That also takes into account the El Diablo backed coup in 2002 that put significant strife on the Venezuelan economy. Venezuela should be one of the wealthiest countries on the planet and yet their citizens have lived in poverty for generations. The fact that Chavez has the crazy idea that fat lazy white American oil barons should not profit off of the natural resources of Venezuela, while the Venezuelan people live in abject poverty is what this really is about. A tiny amount of old- money rich people have no right to claim the natural resources of the earth as their own. They should be executed for stealing from all of us. Oil barons, and El Diablo have no more right to profit off of natural resources as they do the sun. If people in Venezuela support the oil barons instead of their own people they should be squelched, as they are guilty of treason. Just like the El Diablo supporters in this country who enable corrupt earth raping global corporations and Saudi monarchs.
4 words for you to google, mushmouth...
Islam Karimov boiling water. Fo extra credit, Uzbekistan, U.S. ally. Learn a little something about the company your torturemonkey prefers to keep before you come here and start spewing your stupidity.
You are wrong whoever you are
The United States Government for a long time has meddled in the affairs of other countries and also insulted those countries by looting, killing, sendig their army and taking whatever they want even the freedom of the poeple to keep them as slaves, this is over now and forever. I think that what Mr. Chavez did was right. You think that only the United States has all the rights on people, and how about you? Have you been to Venezuela, you dont know how the U.S. left Venezuela and now how it looks. Go to Venezuela and find out by yourself insted of hiding and talking crap behind a computer.
And look how the United STates look like today, people do not have freedom of speech, dont you feel the hot air and the smell of sulfur around you?????
Goodbye and learn something, you have no idea about your country or others, read and educate yourself it will do you a lot of good, just remember, only the truth can set you free........
United we stand. Mrs. Pellosi - I ask you what for?
Face it - America is seen now as a rogue state. Well someone might think f**k the world and lets move on. But that will not work for the furture of this country.
China is and will be the winner, because these people have a sense for long term strategies and they start a diplomacy, which covers all continents without attacking and bully countries. Will they get Taiwan? I don't think so, but Taiwan will come to the Chinese motherland on free basis, because the current regime in Taiwan is ruining itself by buying sh*t weapons from the US.
The Bush gang has to be removed and prosecuted by the American people any changes including the law, amendments to the constitutions and all appointments for judges have to be rolled back.
The Democrats are quite stupid to defend Dictator Bush, may be the think if the don't support or at least not critizise the "presidential office" they might be spared from question of being accomlices in the war crimes comitted by the Bush gang.
El Diablo
I think it's only in keeping with the President's own habit of pinning monikers on individuals, including heads of state, that Mr. Chavez be given the opportunity to pin one on 'ole George. Touche', El Diablo!
Left Gatekeepers: "Silence is Betrayal"
Written by Chris Rose
It's getting harder and harder to be a "left gatekeeper". The Hugo Chavez story is a good case in point. Notice how tentative the "progressive" media were about jumping on the Rangel Pelosi band wagon.
While many of these gatekeepers are "adept at playing the public mind", they do so while knowing and to a certain degree, suppressing the truth within their own minds. It's kind of like the habitual liar who starts to believe their own B.S. It becomes harder to keep track of the actual truth. Here, the progressive media have implicitly "agreed" to remain collectively silent on the "9/11 Truth" issue.
So when a story like "Chavez calling Bush the devil" breaks, the progressives tend to sit back for awhile to see how the story is being played by the MSM. Remember, they kept "silent" on Chavez when he was ranting about Bush and his involvement in 9/11 only a few days prior. How can they possibly comment on the "Chavez called Bush the devil" story without simultaneously revealing themselves to be hypocrites? Keeping in mind the fact that the truth of the first story (Bush and 9/11) tends to prove the truth of the follow-up story ("Bush is the devil"). "Oh what a tangled web" indeed. This phenomenon is not unlike that of trying to avoid stepping in one's own B.S.
While they are doing that, the hard-core neo-con right is busy setting the agenda. They are actually engaged in producing more of the very same B.S. that the "progressives" are trying to avoid. They do this by literally feeding the MSM machine with talking points and bald faced lies and right-wing propaganda across all forms of media (print, radio, tv, internet). This neo-con machine of mendacity (for me, MSM = "Main Stream Mendacity") is so adept at staying "on message" it generally does not take them long to totally influence the "outcome" of virtually any story they choose. Regardless of whether or not that outcome is based in truth. Remember... "[we] can't handle the truth!"
Since the gatekeepers on the left have also determined to a certain degree that too much "truth" is (somehow) bad for the citzenry, they get caught up in the game. A game where the rules have been set by the neo-cons. A game they cannot possibly win. For example, one major rule has been, if you say anything at all supporting the 9/11 Truth Movement, you will have irrevocably surrendered your credibility. This particular rule has been held inviolate thus far by the "left gatekeepers"; therefore, they remain virtually SILENT on issues involving "9/11 Truth". In the words of Martin Luther King Jr., "A time comes when silence is betrayal." And that time has come for us in relation to 9/11.
But was it fair?
I agree that Chavez had thre right, but I think his comment was complrtely unfair. Poor Splitfoot!! He must have felt thoroughly demeaned to have been compared with GW.
tseving
-Surviving Bush one day at a time
http://tomcatsbox.spaces.live.com