From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Dec 12 2003 - 02:28:52 GMT
Hi Mark:
Platt:
> In yesterdays Supreme Court decision we see intellect stepping in to
> muzzle free speech. Indeed, in communist and socialist countries, i.e.,
> countries supposedly "intellectually guided," free speech is usually
> curtailed, often completely. (Some socialist European countries have
> laws banning so-called "hate" speech.)
Mark:
> Hello Platt, This is indeed worrying. But i would be careful to blame
> intellect here? I think what we may have is political motivation in the
> guise of intellect? Yes, indeed. The US supreme court is deteriorating,
> and has been doing so for some time. In fact, as i understand the
> current state of play, if Bush can replace one more supreme court judge
> with one of his own cronies, we may see the US supreme court becoming
> religiously fundamental.
Well, no more religiously fundamental than some liberals I know. :-)
But, here's the thing. It was the supposedly liberal intellectuals on
the court who made the ruling while the "Neanderthal," nonintellectual
conservatives on the court like Scalia and Thomas dissented in favor of
preserving free speech.
> Mark: As i feel may be the case, the intellectual Quality of the US
> supreme court has been seriously eroded. This is not an irreversible
> situation, but at this moment in time, the US supreme court is not what
> it should be?
Then who should be on the US Supreme Court be in your opinion? Care to
nominate a few to replace those there now? Please, not Bill and
Hillary.
> Mark: Indians are very good at holding onto the cutting edge of the
> moment. Therefore, the Indian will speak freely and openly in response
> to Quality. The European lies through his/her back teeth in order to
> maintain social nicety.
>
> (Forked tongue.)
> (Digression: Squonk is basically an Indian at heart; he will open his
> gob before thinking about it!) So, maybe we could say that the US
> supreme court has become a bit more European of late, and is declaring
> open free speech a no-no?
Don't Europeans consider themselves more intellectual than Americans?.
> Platt:
> Ive long held a suspicion that Pirsigs attribution of democracy, free
> speech, trial by jury and freedom of the press to intellect was
> questionable, especially when he identified communist and socialist
> countries as "intellectually guided" and stated unequivocally that the
> "Metaphysics of Quality supports this dominance of intellect over
> society." (Lila, chp. 22) Seeing how this "dominance" suppresses free
> speech casts doubt on this part of Pirsigs thesis.
>
> Mark: It's a matter of fine balance - the sweet spot? In that coherence
> lies beauty and dynamic? Your country is a great country, but i urge you
> to think about how your leaders are letting the American people down
> atrociously, and it could get allot worse if the US supreme court
> becomes lickspittle to the political rulers. It cannot be allowed to
> happen.
Definitely agree with balance needed between freedom and order--the
sweet spot. But perhaps you'll expand on how our leaders are letting us
down when the majority approve of the present administration.
>Platt:
> When you have a court packed with so-called intellectuals deciding that
> the U.S. Constitution provides for unrestricted sodomy (about which the
> Constitution says nothing) but allows restrictions on political speech
> (which the Constitution expressly forbids), questioning intellects
> legitimacy in controlling society seems not only appropriate, but
> vitally necessary to anyone who cherishes individual liberty. Even the
> radical right Rush Limbaugh and the radical left American Civil
> Liberties Union agree on wrongness of the Courts scholarly attack on
> free speech rights.
>
> Mark: There you have it in a nutshell; the intellectual Quality of the
> US supreme court members may have been diluting over time to the point
> where alarm bells may be heard? I know the situation is concerning the
> British media, because the make-up of the US supreme court has been
> covered on the BBC's 'News night' programme - a high quality, unbiased
> reporting team in my view.
The BBC unbiased? Now that's really debatable. (I was going to say
laughable, but in the interests of politeness . . .)
> Platt:
> An aesthetic approach to the issue finds the rough and tumble of free
> political speech immensely satisfying in the same way that Pirsig loves
> the dynamics of New York City:
>
> "That, Phaedrus thought, is how the MOQ explains the incredible
> contrasts of the best and the worst one sees here. Both exist here in
> such terrific intensity because New Yorks never been committed to any
> preservation of its static patterns. Its always ready to change. Whether
> you are or not. This is what creates its horror and that is what creates
> its power. Its strength is its looseness. Its the freedom to be so awful
> that gives it the freedom to be so good." (Lila, chp.17)
>
> Would that all intellectuals understood that! But Im afraid when it
> comes to society, their instinct is to "control."
> Mark: I understand you find the Intellectual intervention in some
> socialist countries to be questionable Platt. But i would regard Mayor
> Julienne's Zero tolerance stance on NY crime to be an attempt to support
> the social cohesion of NY by suppressing the Biological disrupting
> element? That was an Intelligently implemented pattern of action which
> some would argue made NY less exciting? I can't think who would have NY
> return to it's Starsky and Hutch image? Maybe Starsky and Hutch fans? ;)
It's the proper role of a mayor of a society to fight biological crime.
That's what societies are for. Again, the balance--freedom and order.
It's intellect's passionate love of order in all things that concerns
me. History shows that intellectually controlled societies don't do too
well, and in some cases, are horrible human disasters.
Best regards,
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 02:27:39 GMT