October 2, 2004
DRAGGING BRITAIN DOWN:
Censorship in drag is still censorship: the homophobia-phobics who banned reggae singer Buju Banton (Mick Hume, 9/27/04, Spiked)
When I was an angry young man living in Manchester in the early Eighties, the police were fond of raiding gay pubs and banning punk bands, using flimsy excuses about preserving public order and decency. This week Greater Manchester Police banned a concert by the Jamaican reggae singer Buju Banton, on the ground that his homophobic lyrics were likely to provoke public disorder and hatred. The police might have changed their tune on gay rights. But it still sounds like censorship to me, and it is still reactionary, even if it is done in drag.Then, the Chief Constable of Manchester was James Anderton, a born-again, big-bearded Christian. Mr Anderton famously accused those suffering from Aids of 'swirling around in a human cesspit of their own making', declared that male buggery should be a crime and advocated flogging some criminals. These days he would be thrown out of the force for saying that, if not arrested and flogged.
Explaining the ban on Buju Banton, a police spokesman summed up the new official attitude of intolerant tolerance. 'Greater Manchester Police accepts the right to public freedom of expression,' he said, 'but does not encourage anything which could cause possible hate or dissension within any community.'
'Hate or dissension'? It is bad enough that they want to make hating something a crime. So long as we are talking about thoughts and words rather than violent deeds, I'm afraid that in a civilised society we should be free to hate whomever or whatever we choose, regardless of gender, race, religion or sexuality. Now, however, it seems that the Manchester police also want to outlaw 'dissension' - which my dictionary defines as 'difference of opinion'.
There's nothing less tolerant than secular tolerance. Posted by Orrin Judd at October 2, 2004 9:33 AM
I had a strange, postmodern moment this week. While arguing with another lawyer on behalf of my client who has a seriously disabled child, I referred to the child as retarded. She blanched, acted shocked and chewed me out royally for using such degrading language.
The funny thing was she was doing her darnedest to keep her client, the father who never saw the child, from having to pay anything towards the child's special care.
Posted by: Peter B at October 2, 2004 11:55 AMThe Left thinks that you can't be tolerant with out complete acceptance, while the Libertarians think that being selfish is the only way to be self-interested.
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at October 2, 2004 12:59 PM"
“Banton's big hit song, Boom Bye Bye, incites the execution-style killing of gay and lesbian people. He urges listeners to shoot queers in the head, pour acid over them, set them alight, and burn them like
car tyres,” said Peter Tatchell, of the gay human rights groupOutRage!, which is lobbying to have Banton taken off the concert line-ups."
Tatchell's a git but I can't summon much sympathy for Mr Banton.
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at October 2, 2004 2:01 PMThe problem is that Freedom of Speech cases involve defending scumbags. I support the notion that people who deny the Holocaust should be permitted to pubish their blather, even though I have visited camps where siblings of my grandparents were killed and the camp records demonstrate that. We are better off as a society if we allow all the crap into the public square because otherwise they become a kind of 'forbidden fruit' which attracts adherents because of its perceived naughtiness.
We should allow speech but we should punish acts. If someone hits me over the head, whether he does so to grab my wallet or because I am Jewish is of no moment. The government should be in the business of keeping people from hitting me over the head for whatever reason.
Posted by: Bart at October 2, 2004 4:59 PMI'm not a lawyer, but isn't there a legal qualification to free speech (in the US) that it not be an incitement to violence? Or does "artistic expression" cover that?
Posted by: Robert Duquette at October 3, 2004 11:26 AMArtistic expression covers some of it.
One cannot stand on stage and exhort the audience to find some police officers and kill them after the concert, but one can sing lyrics about how great it is to kill police officers.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at October 3, 2004 8:07 PMJust exactly how this example of intolerance is more extreme the religious intolerance is beyond me.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at October 6, 2004 2:04 AMReligious intolerance protects the good. PC intolerance protects evil.
Posted by: oj at October 6, 2004 8:52 AM