From: michael@marcel.bu.edu (Michael Chaplin)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Using killfiles is a form of censorship
Date: 29 Jul 92 21:00:04 GMT
	<1992Jul28.031807.26821@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
	<1992Jul29.130052.5110@Princeton.EDU>
Followup-To: misc.legal
Organization: Boston University
In-reply-to: egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU's message of 29 Jul 92 13:00:52 GMT



 In a past posting, Mr. Nilges (Please for give me if I've misspelled
the name) likened information to money, in the sense that too much
may be worthless. This was in oposition to the likening of information
to food, nourishing no matter what the amount.
 I would suggest a more appropriate simile, e.g. information as a
commodity, and perhaps making an analogy between free speech and a
free market.
 Let us use this to examine the proposal that the enforcement/protection
of the right of free expression necessitates that one MUST listen to
the protected expression. It seems as if Mr. Nilges is proposing
(analogously) that, if a merchant is allowed under a free market
to produce and sell his goods, then consumers are _obliged_ to
purchase them, or, at the very least, examine the goods. As we can
see, though, this is not the case. Just because there exists a
supermarket two blocks away from me does not mean I MUST shop
there. I am under NO obligation to do so. I may buy my victuals
at the convenience store around the corner. There, too, I am not
obliged to buy. Yet I may, whenever I choose (store hours pending,
of course). I do NOT owe any merchant his living, even though he
has decided to earn it this way. How then does he do it? The quality,
price, appearance, etc. of his goods must appeal to me in some way.
And if he needs to sell something that people don't "need", he may
try to create a need, perhaps induce me into considering the product,
at least, by means of advertising, etc. Again. NO obligation. And if
I *should* buy a product, I do not have to buy it again. This is NOT
thwarting the free market- this is exactly what happens in one.
(In terms of shopping, politeness, and economics, however, it does
make sense to shop at my local market.)
 Now, let us look at the freedom of expression. Others before me have
used the phrase "The Marketplace of Ideas", when describing how
opinions gain currency, yet it still bears relevancy. An idea is free
to be put forth, thanks to 1st amendment. Yet must it be accepted,
only because it has been put forth? No, Mr. Nilges, if you have
followed what has been posited above, the existence of an idea does
not oblige that it must be listened to, just as the existence of a
commodity does not oblige that it must be bought. It is not the
thwarting of free expression, but rather part of its dynamics.
Censorship, in this case, would be analogous to regulating what a
merchant could and could not produce or sell, what a consumer could
or could not buy. Indeed, censorship is telling others what they
can or cannot say, what they can or cannot listen to. And that I will
not stand for. Politeness, though it counts for nothing in these two
freedoms, DOES ask that we listen. Politeness, like morality, though,
is not the domain of legislation, or the Constitution.
 As it has been said already, there is a line between
judgement and censorship. I hope that perhaps this is clearer now.

chaplin.

P.S. As for the _metaphor_ of the kill-file;
     this PROVES something?? Freud was pre-scientific
     in his descriptions of psycho-dynamics, but a
     sublimated urge is the _Healthy_ re-working of an urge.
     I'd rather meet someone who's placed me in a kill-file
     than someone who _can't_ handle adult emotions.
     In any case, I'd like to know how it is that a metaphor
     designed by ONE person is supposed to reflect a
     sublimated urge within millions who did NOT create
     said metaphor. *I* didn't make it up; so now I'm a
     social misfit? I don't think so.

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
                                 -Attr. to S. Freud.
--
===============================================================================
Michael Chaplin                    Language is a virus from outer space.
michael@albert.bu.edu                     - William S. Burroughs

The Einstein Papers Project        The opinions contained herein reflect
Boston University                      neither those of the project, 
Boston, Massachusetts, USA             nor those of Albert Einstein.
Xref: sparky misc.legal:14971 alt.censorship:6364 talk.politics.misc:36251