Comments | qatar: Limits on freedom of speech: how much is too much?

qatar

Limits on freedom of speech: how much is too much?

Feb 02, 2010 18:08

"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Stalin and Hitler, for example, were dictators in favor of freedom of speech for views they liked only. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise."

-Noam Chomsky

Although ( Read more... )

favorites, rights

Comments 10

anonymous February 2 2010, 15:32:07 UTC

Truth is often insulting. -dpp

dachte February 2 2010, 16:04:27 UTC

I think seeing this as drawing a line between "free" and "not free" might not be the best way to consider the issue. Laws are always about drawing lines in the sand in order to make decisions between societal interests. The political philosophies of the American founding fathers were either not particularly sophisticated or propogandic - they used a language of absolutes that don't exist in and are inappropriate for philosophy, paving the way for most Americans to try to recreate those absolutes in their philosophy (we might even blame them for some absolutism throughout the entire course of American history, past present and future, for this ( ... )

shmuelisms February 3 2010, 00:24:27 UTC

I agree with this comment, although I'm probably more "conservative" (in the non-political literal meaning) than dachte. For example I think that various trends in Hollywood films and other Media are very harmful to society at large (mostly regarding violence, gore and "beauty"), and should be curtailed somewhat. The problem is HOW to do that, without the very slippery slope of "I don't like it" censorship.

Based on your description, I don't think Qatar really has "freedom of expression". Rather this is an almost perfect example of Newspeak / post-modernism as abused by "despots".

Regarding the USA, I'm curious - HOW does one advocate the violent overthrow of the US government, without making violent statements like "hey guys, let's go blow up the Capitol on Thursday." Or is this also just semi-legal double-talk purporting to show how "free" speech is, but not really.

qatar February 3 2010, 06:22:02 UTC

I don't think it's doubletalk at all.

In the specific example that went to the Supreme Court (Yates v. US), a group of people were accused of advocating the violent overthrow of the government because they joined the Communist Party (this was in the 1950s). The Supreme Court ruled that advocating this "as an abstract doctrine" is not the same as actively encouraging violence in a way that presents a clear and present danger.

In the 1960s the Supreme Court went further (in Brandenburg v. Ohio) and eliminated the "clear and present danger" test. Now the restriction is more stringent: to be actionable, your speech has to be both intended and likely to incite "IMMINENT lawless action."

This is true for speech that threatens violence against anybody, not just the government, BTW.

aristopheles February 2 2010, 23:20:36 UTC

There's a guy at one of the local cafes (a patron, not an employee) who always has his laptop open.
It has a big sticker on it saying "9/11 was an inside job."
For a whole bunch of reasons I find this highly objectionable. so I decided to apply a cognitive approach.
When I see this guy in my local cafe--and AFAICT he's always there--I remind myself that idiots like him protect everyone's right to free speech.
After all, if this guy can sit in public day after day, in a pretty-big city 50 miles from the nation's capital, with slanderous anti-American propoganda on his laptop, I will presumably not be arrested for asking why Obama's 2011 budget involves a $1.27 trillion deficit.

anonymous February 3 2010, 10:58:55 UTC

Marjorie,

I believe that the Ministry of Information is still in effect under a different jurisdiction and name. At least this is what I have been told by Qataris working in the media.

Salaam,
Lisa

qatar February 3 2010, 11:12:34 UTC

Yeah ( ... )

anonymous February 15 2010, 15:42:29 UTC

Hey Marjorie :)
Why are you soo interested in researching and analyzing the laws of freedom of speech in Qatar? Do you feel limited or censored from expressing your views?
I'm just curious..

qatar February 15 2010, 17:05:14 UTC

I've been writing about human rights since I got to Qatar six years ago, mostly about issues pertaining to foreign workers. I only started reading the laws of freedom of speech and press recently, though, after my friend Lisa was threatened by locals for saying something they found offensive. It was rather a shock to me to realize that the law is actually on their side; it IS illegal to say something that someone finds offensive ( ... )

anonymous February 17 2010, 16:05:18 UTC

I used to live in Qatar and now I don't. But after seeing what the speech laws actually are, it's just shocking. How was I not arrested when I was there?

O.D.B.

P.S. It'd be fucking cool to get kicked out of Qatar for violating speech laws. Like, not as cool as winning a Nobel Prize, but still damn cool.