Dear Sir,
Once again the issue of free speech has been raised in the Newton News and once again it appears to be local councillors who feel it is their civic duty to indirectly attack other local politicians for no other reason than they hold a different opinion on a wide range of topics.
So there is no misunderstanding these are the same people who put themselves forward to be elected to serve the community, to be worthy to speak on your behalf and work to provide the best service for the electorate regardless of the voter’s political views. Now you would think having received the public’s vote they would act in a way that justified that decision. But unfortunately it appears the corridors of power no matter how small or parochial can turn the head of even the most rural official and lead to delusions of grandeur.
We witness it time and time again where a new member of parliament takes their seat in the house swearing undying loyalty to their constituents only to fall foul of party politics, to quickly learn to do as they are told and follow the party line, and to boo, jeer and hurl insults across the house at the opposing party. Obviously it’s an unsavoury demeaning political practice now accepted as the norm at grass roots level.
I like so many people today take for granted the freedoms bought and paid for by a generation of people who were motivated by personal decency and character and the desire to do the right thing rather than any kind of high ideals or political rhetoric. We have become a generation who speak loudly of their personal rights but fall silent when it comes to the subject of personal responsibility. A generation so easily offended and so demanding of apologies for their bruised sensibilities plain speaking is becoming sanitised and totally meaningless in order to neutralise all possibility of upsetting anyone.
Free speech isn’t free it was bought and paid for by countless men and woman who are no longer able to voice their feelings. Those who were lucky enough to survive have every right to question whether their sacrifice was worth it.
If you advocate free speech then it must be for everyone regardless of race colour creed or religion or political persuasion. This by definition means we must also be free to express views others will be opposed to. If you seek limit that freedom to a select or chosen few because you don’t like what another person is saying you are advocating the suppression of those opinions and views. This is dictatorship no matter how you want to dress it up or justify it.
Those with the loudest voice usually have the weakest argument and seek to strengthen their own case by attacking the other person’s point of view. If all else fails attack the person and try to undermine their position and political credibility. Unfortunately another tactic from main stream politics that appears to be prevalent at grass roots level. I wonder if the people involved know or even care how demeaning it makes them appear to the man and woman in the street.
The ancient Greeks who are recognised as one of the founding cultures responsible for modern civilisation used a forum of discussion we today would recognise as a ‘’Community of Enquiry’’. The sole purpose was to discuss and debate in a calm and rational way various ideas, not with the intention to apportion blame or fault but by using the platform of free speech gain a better understanding of the other person’s point of view.
Those ancient Greeks knew a thing or two about democracy. Maybe we could learn a lesson from them, before we reach the point where we begin to repeat history for all the wrong reasons.
Name & Address Supplied