• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Hidden Harmonies China Blog

Hidden Harmonies China Blog

As China Re-Awakens, Finding New Harmonies in a Brave New World...

  • About Us
  • China Charities
  • FAQ
    • Terms of Service
  • Recommended Readings

Free Speech Definitely Doesn’t Mean Cost Notwithstanding Speech

February 17, 2016 by Mr. Allen 1 Comment

The recent post by pugster about rioters in Hong Kong brought to my mind some thoughts I had as the Umbrella Revolution was flaming out a couple of years ago.

One of the arguments many people in the West used to denigrate the HK and Mainland government in support of the Umbrella movement was that the rioters had a right to block streets and shut down districts to get their message out.  When some Hong Kongers – siding with HK and Mainland government – pushed back that while freedom of speech grants them the right to protest but not a right to shut down entire districts, they were ridiculed and shamed by the Western press.

Of course, as we know, when the occupy movement flamed across the Western capitals of the world, those governments acted very differently.  The police (even paramilitary forces) soon cracked down and order was soon restored.  But in China, so-called rule of law quickly gets tossed aside in the name of mob rule (I mean “democracy”).  All this reinforced in my mind how “political” “free” speech is.  It is “free” when the politics is palatable.  But when it’s not, the “costs” – be it national security, social peace, whatever – gets framed as the main (only) issues.

This reminds me of another story last year when the Pope visited the U.S.  If people remember, the pope got a “rock star” reception from the media – with the press trumpeting how popular, socially and morally in tune the pope is, especially compared to China’s President Xi (also visiting the U.S. around the same time) who allegedly got a stiff and cool reception.

It turned out that same rock star pope also decided to canonize Junípero Serra during the trip.  Unfortunately, many native Americans see Junípero Serra in a very different light.  Instead of a saint, they see a sower of genocide, one who helped to impose a sad, tragic chapter on the native Americans.

When a few brave souls decided to graffiti and deface a statute of Junípero Serra where the pope had announced the canonization, the media reported the incident as vandalism.  There were uniform reports of the “crime” and perhaps some “embarrassment,” but no talks about one’s right to “freedom of speech.”  No talks of historical wrongs. No talks of the Catholics’ churches bloodied hands.  Preemptively, in the middle of the night, the police would wound up those vandalizes away, and there would be no further reports…

At the end of the day, the needs of the Church – to have shiny statutes – outweighs the need of the descendants of a murdered people to express their anger and thoughts.

In Hong Kong, when foreign-sponsored activists protest, we are of course talking about damages that are a lot higher than defaced statutes.  Yet, in the West, it’s consistently reported as a “freedom of speech” issue – not a criminal issue.

This is not per se double-talk (although it is, of course, in so many ways…): it is the essence of “Freedom of speech.”  You see, absolute freedom never exists because its premise doesn’t exists.  If speech were just “speech,” then of course it should be “free.”  No one would bother to restrict or regulate it.  If it were about action – inciting hatred, uprising, violent dissent, terrorism, extremism, radicalism, or imposing a threat to national security or social peace – well then it is action and not “speech” and thus can be restricted.

Ultimately, Speech is free when it is desirable or imposes little costs.  But when the costs becomes real, speech is never free.  The issue becomes of peace and security, not freedom.  Within the middle range where there is a “dispute” between “mainstream” political factions, then there are (muddled) talks of a “balance” between “freedom” and “security.”

When Western people talk down to China about lack of freedom of speech, we are thus rarely arguing about “freedom” per se, but “costs.”  But for so many of these Westerners, what are “costs” to China are actually “desirable” to them.  Alas it’s rude and counterproductive to say: hey, I don’t actually care if your society get brunt down the way I would care if it were my society.  It’s much better to spew out noble-minded talks of “freedom” instead….

Filed Under: Analysis, Opinion, politics Tagged With: "China and Democracy", democracy, Democracy Cult, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, hong kong, Umbrella Revolution

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Charles Liu says

    February 23, 2016 at 10:55 am

    The sponsors of last year’s Occupy Central protest should pay for the cost of illegal gathering, traffic violation, melee and damage, extra security need. I hope the HK authority will bill the sponsoring entities (Civic Passion, Scholarism, National Democratic Institute of USA):

    https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06HONGKONG1252_a.html

    In comparison, look happened to the Oregon Occupy movement in US. Just cause or not, they were cut off from water food electricity, charged 70,000 a day, and promptly arrested soon after. And this is the norm for suppressing all the occupy movement NED promoted overseas that made its way back in America:

    http://www.bing.com/search?q=occupy%20fined%20arrested

    This is the democratic America China should emulate!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • 大山的女兒–Daughter of the Mountain
  • No, the Chinese does not express glee over Shinzo Abe’s assassination and how western propaganda got it wrong about what Chinese thinks of Abe
  • The Overt Politicization of the Origins of Covid-19
  • The U.S. Loves Wars…
  • Paul Krugman reaches another low over Covid Vaccines

Recent Comments

  • Hompuso on Short Note on Media Disinformation: No, No, No… CIA is not Impersonating Others in Hacking Others … There is just not Proof!
  • Abraham on The Overt Politicization of the Origins of Covid-19
  • purislot on (Letter) Web search for Tiananmen not censored, but do people care?
  • hanhan on 且谈1989年的天安门事件
  • Twinkle Industries on Open Forum

Tag Cloud

america Beijing censorship China china-u.s. relations coronavirus corruption culture dalai lama defamation againt Chinese democracy earthquake economy education Environment featured freedom freedom of speech Google government history hong kong human rights humor india internet japan media media bias nationalism olympics politics propaganda racism reform riot rule of law sino-u.s. relations sixfour South China Seas taiwan tiananmen tibet U.S. China Relations xinjiang

Archives

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Blogroll

  • China Dialogue
  • China in Africa: The Real Story by Deborah Brautigam
  • Chinese Portal
  • ESWN (東南西北)
  • Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)
  • Fool's Mountain (sibling blog)
  • iLook China
  • Moon of Shanghai
  • Outcast Journalism
  • Professor Ann Lee
  • Sino Platonic
  • The Anti-Empire Report

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in