Well, things have calmed down (not really any less crazy, just quieter). It's nice to think of a world where we don't really have to think about Trump much longer and we can start to solve actual problems, like the pandemic response. I'm curious to see what the right-wingers say after we are still talking about the virus for the next several months--at that point, it should be clear that we didn't make it up to hurt Trump, because we will still all be dealing with it after January and into the next year.
I've had a couple of thoughts relevant to the right wing bubble this week. Mainly because I still know people that back the current admin and enablers. One is about risk perception, and the other is about what the First Amendment actually means. They both are tied to our ideas of freedom.
I bring up risk because it seems to contrast in the people who don't believe in the danger of the virus and people that do. It's a spectrum, and some people are probably overly risk averse, while too many others, unfortunately, seem to engage in risky behavior that right now is endangering everyone. Many people's version of American freedom is selfish. Freedom to do as they please, and not be constrained by someone else's idea of restraint. Great risk takers often succeed in life, but often after failing numerous times. We need some of these risk takers for business, innovation, science and art. But for some areas, the risk taking affects other people, and those are the times where moral dilemmas develop. People I know that are extreme risk takers, to me exhibit a lack of caring about other people. Not that they don't care at all about others, but they definitely do not think about the consequences of their actions long term. Great artists are often insufferable people that ultimately sacrifice their good relationships in order to create. We have a large section of our culture that doesn't think long term. They claim to be good people, but don't really place the well being of others above their own interests.
Our culture also has a large misunderstanding about what Freedom of Speech actually is. Many people think it just means that you are free to say anything you want. While this is true, there are also conditionals. Is is not freedom from the consequences of your speech. And it also doesn't apply if it's not from the government. I am under no obligation as an individual to let you say anything. I can scream over you if I want (it might make me an asshole, but I'm free to do that, along with having to accept the consequences of my own behavior). I am certainly not under any obligation to let you say what you want without rebuttal or difference of opinion. Right now, people on the right are trying to act like their freedom of speech is being repressed (both in simply expressing their opinions and also the movement of so-called religious freedom). The thing about freedom within the First Amendment (and in general really), is that there are TWO types. Freedom TO do something, and freedom FROM something. The current war the left and right are fighting, I think boils down to this. The right wants the freedom to do what they want, but don't see how their freedom to do some things (like hate speech, discrimination and oppressions based on their beliefs) come into conflict with others' right to be free from discrimination and oppression, or the freedom to simply live their life unmolested. The "freedom" to not get vaccinated or wear a goddamn mask, tramples on others' right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Because we are in a social contract. I know it is scary when something appears like mob justice. Part of that is the price we pay where we live in a society where, in general, the majority rules. And a lot of it is simply overblown. It's hard for me to feel sympathy to comedians and right wing people complaining about political correctness and cancel culture, when then enact policies that are actually oppressing and harming people.
I'm starting to digress, so let me return to freedom of speech. Being fact-checked is not a violation of freedom of speech, nor are you being oppressed. Trying to protect minority groups from faith-based discrimination is not a violation of your freedom either. You are under no obligation to personally engage in behavior your find unacceptable, but if you have a business or job that supplies goods or services to the general public, you aren't being oppressed when you are expected to deliver those goods and services to the general public. Especially if you hold a State or Federal job. Your religious beliefs are irrelevant to anyone but yourself. You want things to change? Change hearts and minds, like we are trying to do. When you try to do it through force, willful ignorance and just belligerence, you seem like a fascist and an asshole, and will be treated as such. And that isn't oppressing you either; it's just a consequence of your actions.
So run off to Parler if you want. Get your feelings hurt over being called out on your willful ignorance and your "alternative facts". You'll get over it. You'll be back. Or you will simply be left behind.
No comments:
Post a Comment