“Silence is Violence” leads, of course, to compelled speech
Jonathan Turley has this to say on the subject:
“Silence is violence” has everything that you want in a slogan: Alliteration. Brevity. Simplicity. It also can be chilling for some in the academic and free-speech communities.
On one level, it conveys a powerful message that people of good faith should not remain silent about great injustices. However, it can have a more menacing meaning to “prove the negative” – demanding that people prove they are not racist.
In a prior column, I warned of the thin line between speech codes and speech commands, as people move from compelling silence to compelling speech: “Once all the offending statues are down, and all the offending professors are culled, the appetite for collective suppression will become a demand for collective expression.”
The line between punishing speech and compelling speech is easily crossed when free speech itself is viewed as a threat…
The concern over speech codes becoming speech commands would have been viewed as utterly absurd just a few years ago. Now, even calls for civility in dialogue have been denounced as racist dog whistles. Trinity College professor Johnny Williams condemned those who call for civility as “uphold[ing] white supremacist heteropatriarchal capitalist power.”
The whole thing is worth reading. I have tremendous respect for Turley, who in recent years has shown not only intelligence but courage as well. However, there’s something I think he’s leaving out of his piece. Actually, a couple of things.
The first is that the phrase “Silence is violence” is an oxymoronic statement, emblematic of the toxic combination of illogic and anti-libertarianism that characterizes what passes for thought among the left these days, especially the academic left. And by “these days” I mean for many decades.
Silence is not violence and cannot be violence. It is not even speech. Nor is speech violence, although speech can contain a call to violence. This blurring of the line between speech and acts is not accidental nor is it trivial. The distinction between the two is one of the pillars of our legal system, and one of its great triumphs. Harmful speech is largely protected (except for defamation), but harmful actions are much more likely to be judged and penalized.
My second objection to Turley’s piece: when he writes that “the concern over speech codes becoming speech commands would have been viewed as utterly absurd just a few years ago,” I beg to differ. Yes, it would have been denied by the left a few years ago, to get the camel’s nose in the tent. And no doubt many naive people, unaware of how the left works, would think it an absurd possibility. But anyone familiar with the left would have to know that, as with Havel’s greengrocer parable, compelled speech would be on the agenda sooner or later.
Jordan Peterson recognized the problem years ago, and in fact it was the topic gained him fame in 2016 when he opposed a Canadian law that he said would compel the use of certain pronouns:
He zeroed in on Canadian human rights legislation that prohibits discrimination based on gender identity or expression.
Dr Peterson was especially frustrated with being asked to use alternative pronouns as requested by trans students or staff, like the singular ‘they’ or ‘ze’ and ‘zir’, used by some as alternatives to ‘she’ or ‘he’.
In his opposition, he set off a political and cultural firestorm that shows no signs of abating.
At a free speech rally mid-October, he was drowned out by a white noise machine. Pushing and shoving broke out in the crowd…
At the same time, the University of Toronto said it had received complaints of threats against trans people on campus.
His employers have warned that, while they support his right to academic freedom and free speech, he could run afoul of the Ontario Human Rights code and his faculty responsibilities should he refuse to use alternative pronouns when requested.
They also said they have received complaints from students and faculty that his comments are “unacceptable, emotionally disturbing and painful” and have urged him to stop repeating them.
And that was hardly the first sign. The slogan “silence is violence,” with its threatening implications, is not new in 2020. I found some sporadic uses of it earlier, for example in music lyrics as early as 2005, but more importantly in campus demonstrations (against alleged racism) such as this one from 2015.
As the Black Lives Matter movement picked up steam, so did the slogan “Silence is Violence.” BLM officially began after the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin shooting, in July of 2013, but the movement became more well-known and popular after the Michael Brown case in 2014 (both cases hyped, distorted, and lied about by a combination of leftist activists, lawyers such as Ben Crump, and an army of MSM journalists). After that, we see the increasing use of the slogan in demonstrations such as the one I already linked to, or articles such as this one or this. Clearly, the slogan was already in use in the context of racial grievance groups. It also has often been paired with the word “white” as in “white silence is violence.”
By now “Silence is Violence” is mainstream, regarded as almost banal – although there is nothing banal about it. You can buy your “silence is violence” products on Etsy: T-shirts and COVID masks, for example, many of them with the added word “white” for emphasis (over 2 1/2 thousand results, here). Maybe some day the insignia will become a required national uniform.
Yes, this has been a problem for quite some time, but recently it has become a great deal more troubling (perhaps even worse than “silence is violence” T-shirts are those emblazoned with the words “We Shoot Racists” for sale on Amazon, available for both men and women). Two new books are attempting to address this madness from an academic perspective, Cynical Theories by Helen Pluckrose and The Parasitic Mind by Gad Saad.
Hello darkness my old friend
I’ve come to talk to you again
….about the sound of violence
….Fool said I you do not know
violence like a cancer grows …..
The left loves violence, nihilistic sociopaths in pursuit of power.
I believe Prof. Turley is incorrect when he characterizes “Silence is violence” as alliteration, which is the repetition of *consonental* sounds. “Silence is violence” is just a rhyme.
Johann:
Good catch. It’s not alliteration. It’s a rhyme.
You no longer even have the right To remain silent, welcome to biden’ america, which is a counterfeit copy of mao’s china, finally it is us stealing china’s trade secrets instead of the other way around like always.
Highly recommended:
https://www.heritage.org/civil-society/report/hate-speech-and-the-new-tyranny-over-the-mind
Covers this topic well. We are on a knife’s edge
Neo:
Being a Man for All Seasons Fan you may recall that the linchpin of More’s defence was that his (albeit deafening) silence on the topic of the King’s marriage to Anne Boleyn could not be construed in Law as being a voiced objection (hence Treason) to it. And because of this Rich had to perjure himself in order to obtain the conviction.
It’s no accident that Hilary Mantel’s suspiciously anachronistically progressive portrayal of that first master of Lawfare, Thomas Cromwell has made her into the literary darling of UK BBC / Guardian / Independent / New Class types.
“Silence is Violence” works well as a mob chant.
The rhyme will go down well too with the illiterate / marginally literate Black Underclass (i.e most of them) for whom the Spoken Word has a power and talismanic sense we’ll never understand at more than an intellectual level.
It’s not quite up there with “When Adam delved and Eve span / Who was then the Gentleman?”, but you can get yourself a pretty decent insurrection going with a rhyme or three.
More lies from the Left.
Also happening- a “source / person that won’t give its name”, said that, on a trip, President trump was insulting + disrespectful of the military + some veterans.
Baloney.
There’s a saying from the 1980s:
Mr.A-
” It happened! I can find you 10 people that will say that this happened.”
Mr. B-
“And I can find you 10 MORE LIARS just as FAST!”
If it’s okay to shoot racists, then it seems the same logic makes it appropriate to shoot those who slander others as racists. It’s a simple matter of self defense.
@Stan:
I predict that we’re going to enter a new golden age of rational debate and gentility — History being repeat with examples of Action / Reaction.
Before we reach these sunny uplands, discourse will be conducted according to the tag Ultima Ratio Regum, with Every Man a King. The tools of discourse will require regular cleaning and oiling.
But when it’s done, we’ll be able to look back and say with Pride™ …
“We wuz Kangs!”
Well, perhaps that’s over-egging the pudding 😀
(The Prussians engraved “The Final Argument of Kings” on their field guns. You’ll see it on captured WWI Artillery pieces in museums and at small town war memorials.)
Police should have simply called George Floyd a white suprematist then putting a knee on his neck for 8 minutes would have been justified for the left regardless whether there were other reasons Responsible for his death or not. Worry that it would be hard to prove that he was? Don’t worry, accusation is all it takes to prove guilt for the left. Have they ever presented any evidence to prove any of the conservatives and white cops they accused of being racist were actually racist, exactly
A refusal to speak out in support of leftist dogma, is a sure identifier of the “deplorables”… those in need of “reeducation” and among whom are sure to be the “irredeemables”… those fit only for the gulags and killing fields.
which means of course that decrying violence will get fewer and fewer listeners because they won’t believe it’s violence
Or just show the wearer of the slogan what actual violence is. They are confused wimps.
It was Huey Long in the early 1930s who popularized the slogan “Every man a king but no man wears a crown,” in his speeches, in the Senate, and on his nationwide radio show until he was assassinated in September 1935. He was on the road to challenge Franklin Delano Roosevelt for the Democratic nomination for president in 1936. He might well have won had he not been killed.
I also rejected the comment from Bill Cosby some years back: “if you are not part of the solution [to the race issue] then you are part of the problem.”
The only way to end racism is to stop focusing on race as a meaningful criterion for anything [outside of medical issues? probably still for alleged perpetrator identity?? Darn, harder than I thought!].
But as you all know the Left still has plenty of other “isms” to employ.
While reading Andrew McCarthy’s 9/5/20 article at NRO: https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/its-a-straight-line-from-biden-to-blm/ it occurred to me that maybe we should appropriate the acronym BLM for Blastocyst Lives Matter.
Silence is violence? As any Buddhist can tell you Silence is the gateway to the Deathless. And as Shakespeare put it in Hamlet”…the rest is silence…” There is more to silence than is dreamt of in your philosophy…er… dear comrades.
I prefer the slogan – SILENCE IS GOLDEN.
@Dennis
If so, you’ve come to the wrong place 😛
Two items to flesh out where dishonest speech leads to violence. Somewhere, I read someone reports on asking two local Militia groups what they will do if Civil War comes: then they will attack the sources destroying American culture.
What this means is not definite. But I believe every that media outlet and college and university campuses will be sacked and burned.
Anyone else got a better clue?
Second, CommieCrats are laying the ground work to fight a Ttump victory by ensuring a protracted election vote counting process. Presumably, this will go on while urban rioting spreads.
Specifically, Raheem Kassan reports on a document issued by the Transition Integrity Project — an Owellian doublespeak name, no doubt. The sponsors names include Soros, one of Bill Gates funded outlets, and. CCP funded “Institute” that I’ve never heard of before.
Kassan briefly reviews the co-posted nine page Executive Summary. The document concludes:
“They want the mobs as Joe Biden’s base.”
https://thenationalpulse.com/news/soros-coup-playbook-street-fight/
Is this organising legal actions concerning the election? Or activism for the street? Or both?
I don’t think that it pretends to not take sides.
First, they proclaim that they are not taking sides in the election outcome. Then comes this admission and supported by no evidence whatever: “However, because the primary threat to the integrity of the election and transition appears to come from the Trump Administration,” our recommendations apply to countering Trump and his supporters.
I guess all the recent riots, still ongoing, mean not her
Got that? Excuse me while I wretch at the Deep State coup plotters revealing themselves, having learned nothing factual over 0.5 years.
When der fuehrer says we is de master race
We heil heil right in der fueher’s face
Not to love der fuehrer is a great disgrace
So we heil heil right in der fuehrer’s face
When Herr Goebbels says we own the world and space
We heil heil right in Herr Goebbels’ face
When Herr Goring says they’ll never bomb this place
We heil heil right in Herr Goring’s face
Are we not he supermen Aryan pure supermen
Ja we are the supermen (super duper supermen)
Is this Nazi land so good
Would you leave it if you could
Ja this Nazi land is good
We would leave it if we could
We bring the world to order
Heil Hitler’s world to order
Everyone of foreign race
Will love der fuehrer’s face
When we bring to the world this order
When der fuehrer says we is de master race
We heil heil right in der fueher’s face
Not to love der fuehrer is a great disgrace
So we heil heil right in der fuehrer’s face
When der fuehrer says we is de master race
We heil heil right in der fueher’s face
Not to love der fuehrer is a great disgrace
So we heil heil right in der fuehrer’s face
–Spike Jones and His City Slickers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWF8iRCan7I
Bonus (anti-communist) Music:
Songs of Forest brothers(Estonia,Latvia,Lithuania)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9VJr-6fpnA
Some history if you dont know
Forest Brothers – Fight for the Baltics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5rQFp7FF9c
Like Anne Frank people mostly think wrongly about the history for both her, and forest peoples.
[and refuse to learn the whole history – much to their detriment as things progress]
Death of the Bear
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpWvx_btKZ8
Kremlin uni [Finnish Patriotic Song] [English and Finnish lyrics]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq1N0Sb8aH4
This “hate speech is criminal” was entirely foreseeable when the first hate crime laws were introduced and passed. A crime is a crime, and, except for murder, thinking (premeditation) has nothing to do with any criminal charge.
But it is a “hate crime” for two straights to murder a homosexual; that is a special, hateful kind of murder! Wonder what happens to gays who murder straights…are they charged with committing a hate crime? We all know they are not.
The USA is being turned upside down. The black female Democrat lawyer and mayor of Washington revels in painting Black Lives Matter on public streets. Silence is violence unless one is violently and noisily a riot participant.
Well Portland has created a hot new dance to celebrate the 100th night of peaceful protest,
The “Wheeler” https://twitter.com/i/status/1302476966801539073
I’m not sure if Neo will have any critique of the form or artistic expression. it’s a dance best done wearing nomex or other FR clothing.
Oh, it’s a lot easier than that:
“Hate speech is what I say it is….”
(With apologies, of course, to Humpty Dumpty.)
And organizations like the UN or the OAS or the EU or [your university of choice] can (and will) doctor the language so that it sounds a lot more sophisticated and high brow.
(…though there is something to say for the original.)
And we have a winner!
“Confirmation” for the MSCM now means “unproven allegation that is repeated by more than one (preferably anonymous)’source'”.
(Orrr, the same—anonymous—‘source’ more than one time?…)
https://twitter.com/SharylAttkisson/status/1302336096563613699
Yes, these guys are really, really on their game!!
Related:
https://theintercept.com/2020/09/05/journalisms-new-propaganda-tool-using-confirmed-to-mean-its-opposite/
“Make Orwell Fiction Again.”
Please.
“No matter how many sources make the same allegations to different reporters, the allegations and story aren’t “confirmed” simply because the people told you, too. They’re still allegations. You’re simply alleging the same claims.” – Attkisson
Puts me in mind of the sourcing in some scholarly publications, where the author cites 10 publications asserting some claim, and when you run them down, 9 of them were themselves citing the one original source (which may or may not have been correct).
It’s also like the old joke about the personnel interviewer asking the applicant if he really has 10 years experience in the field, or just 1 year repeated 10 times.
Mollie said the same thing.
No names, no sources.
If you are going to be a whistleblower, you have to blow the whistle in public.
https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1301980171306754049
Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept talked about the news media that “confirmed” CNN’s false story about Wikileaks giving info to Trump before publication (they misread the email date – at 4 different outlets?) – and Mollie’s commenter points out another example.
“Corroboration…”
Ah, yes. Who could possibly forget the Great Avenatti?
The (con)fabulous Christopher Steele?
Actually, I think the Left understand “corrobation” very, very well: You float a whole litany of lies out there—a whole network, an entire web—and you keep telling them (you reinforce them; you “corroborate” them) so that they become irrefutable.
So that reality becomes entirely perverted.
(Society eventually collapses because of the immense weight of those lies, but the operation is a huge success, it’s planners deserving of a well-earned pat on the back along with the adulation of the faithful, of the persuaded…. Until disaster strikes, that is….)