Thursday, October 23, 2008

Reflection

This week I have been reminded how important my rights are. First, at Jasmine's event Totalitarian Islam and Free Speech, and then in class on Friday talking about the Second Amendment.

In regards to Free Speech, the U.S. needs to stand behind the rights of publishers/editors like Flemming Rose to publish material that might be offensive to some. Politicans need to stop being so politically correct, and we need to remember that the rights of individuals trump the rights of any group. Groups don't have rights, the individuals of the group do and give the group any rights it has. Censoring things that could be offensive to someone/group is a bad idea because it comes back to you. An example of this are Israeli groups that have tried to ban opinions that the Holocaust didn't happen, these groups are now being threatened as anti-Islamic.

Our right to offend is most important because what offends someone else might not offend you. But if the situation is reversed, you are not going to want to get in trouble for saying something that you don't think is offensive at all. Everyone has a right to free speech, but some governments and radical ideologies violate this and don't allow it. By limiting free speech we are self-censoring ourselves out of fear. We should not be let a certain groups rights become more important than others.

The Second Amendment is another right that needs to be protected. I first want to disagree with the person in class who said that the Second Amendment only applies to militias or an army. The Second Amendment applies to the individuals who made up the militias in case an overthrow of the government was needed. Guns are dangerous and they do kill people, but they can also be used for protection. The Second Amendment is important to our security as a country and as individuals.

I feel like it's hard to look at the good that guns do because they are capable of doing so much harm, but sometimes you need to. Guns are dangerous, but the way to stop gun violence isn't by taking guns away from people who want them legally and for the right reasons. Criminals will still get guns illegally and as U.S. citizens we should have the right to protect ourselves from them. I think that some gun regulation is needed and I don't think guns should be easily bought on the internet, but with certain restrictions, people should be able to own and carry guns.

One of the more interesting, but brief forms of security, we talked about I thought was Social Security. I completly agree with Jasmine when she said in class that it protects you from yourself. I think we should get rid of social security because it assumes we can't plan for our own futures and it relies on some people to contribute who won't get anything back. People need to take more personal responsibility when it comes to their money. If they would have, the financial crisis might not have happened.

Also, I liked the video we watched in class, A World Without the U.S. I think it was able to show why it might be important to secure the world if we want the U.S. to be secure. Although I don't believe we should try to democracize the world, I think it helped explain why a preemptive strike might not always be bad. I do want to disgree with Adam in class who said that the video promoted the idea of manifest destiny. I think the video just pointed out that if the United States doesn't step into some of the conflicts it does, then no one else will. I don't think it's so much that the United States has to step in, but sometimes I believe we should, as we did in WW II, becuase it's the right thing to do.

2 comments:

B.A. Baracus said...

"Groups don't have rights, the individuals of the group do and give the group any rights its has"

That's a curious statement. Does that mean that you reject the premise of the corporation, a legal entity with sovereign rights and status independent of its human components?

"People need to take more personal responsibility when it comes to their money. If they would have, the financial crisis might not have happened. "

Yes, people should take more personal responsibility for their money. That would be very nice. Unfortunately, it's a completely idealistic normative statement of the kind I discuss in my blog, which contradicts basic human nature. People always act to fulfill their lower-order needs first; they are incapable of complete objectivity or rationality; and any attempts they make at rationality are bounded by their fundamentally limited knowledge; they will not always act in a responsible, rational, and farsighted manner. Prosperity is very much a public good, as this financial crisis has shown: other people's inability to make wise financial decisions has triggered a sharp downturn in the market as a whole and hurt even those who were responsible. The only realistic solution is to acknowledge that people will not always act responsibly if given the choice, and prohibit them from making irresponsible decisions in the public realm.

Jasmine said...

Ben- your comment on social security is completely ridiculous. Why do you assume so little of humanity? I demand that people take some accountability for themselves. My parents worked overseas for many years and aren't getting any money from social security. Yet they managed to save and manage their money wisely enough to buy a house, put a kid through college (and working on another one (me)), all while putting aside money for retirement. The idea that it's against human nature or impossible for man to behave as such is preposterous.

Michele - Thanks for the free speech love. :)