|
It often happens that radical right- wing groups "march" through cities and chant their slogans; only seldom this happens without riots. Although the proper authorities know about this fact, they allow theses demonstrations of violence and terror again and again - but why?
Because the right- wing extremists can refer to one of their fundamental rights - the freedom of speech!
However, it's not allowed to say everything you want in Germany because there are limits set through the law. The German constitution says that you aren't allowed to touch the personal dignity of other people and that the youth shouldn't be exposed.
In contrast to that limitation you are allowed to say everything you want in the USA. This right is also - as it is in Germany - established in their constitution. The First Amendment tells about the freedom of speech in the following way: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
According to that point all political parties, for example Nazis or sects like Scientology that is forbidden in Germany, are allowed in America and these people can say their opinion without a limitation.
Since there are so different opinions about the freedom of speech I ask myself what could happen if everybody had the chance of saying everything he or she wants to say ?
First I want to mention the fact that more people will discriminate against others if they have the right to say everything they want because they don't have to fear that they would be punished for that. But this state will be terrible because there will be more people who will feel misunderstood and alone in society because of this.
Further, the people who discriminate against others will hurt the civil rights and in conclusion they would offend against the constitution.
Besides, that also calls to use force, insults and murder threat would become legal. As a result of this more people who are week, don't have the strength to stand a bit pressure and are dependent on the opinion and the support of others, would feel overtaxed and maybe they need some help of psychologists or as another way they take refuge in an addiction like alcoholism, drugs or other ones.
So the danger of addiction would rise and therefore the standard of living would fall because addicted people can't live a "normal" life and so often they lose their jobs and their flats and also their social contacts, especially to friends.
Another point is that radical right- wing people or other terrorists could express their opinion on TV, in newspapers or other media.
Regarding that fact the influence of those people would increase, in particular their influence on the youth. As a consequence racism would spread more widely and also the propensity for violence would rise. The spreading of pornography could expand, too.
Out of this another question comes up to my mind: Would the media report objectively or would every reporter say his or her opinion if he or she talks about something that has happened in the world?
Wouldn't the media be abused by extremists or racists? I think in this problem there would be a great problem.
The last point I want to mention is that many people would be more fear in the world that for instance something like the Second World War could happen again. That means that also more people would have prejudices against others. This could lead to problems in communication between the people, but also to problems between different nations and so having peace on earth would be difficult to realize because everyone would fear and distrust the others.
Altogether I would say that a system of limitation like it exists in Germany is better than a "full" freedom of speech like in the USA. Of course you have the right to express your opinion but there are so many negative consequences if everyone can tell everything and many are a serious danger to the human rights!
Another difficult question is the relation between the arts and the freedom of speech. Is a "full" freedom of speech in the field of arts justifiable or not?
On the one hand side I believe that it must be allowed to say everything in the field of arts and that there shouldn't be limits because through the arts people express their emotions, feelings and thoughts but also criticism and most artists say that the idea for a piece of art comes up in their minds and they can't do anything about it and that they haven't got any influence on what they create. They work like in ecstasy and set their creativity free.
But on the other hand side in this way of creating arts and expression of opinions through the arts lies a great danger because the arts have a great influence on people, especially the lyrics of songs influence the young people in a strong way and so it might happen that the arts are misused because of its influence, because the people can say: "This is art and so you can't forbid it!"
All in all, it seems to me that it's better not to allow a "full" freedom of speech in the area of the arts because who wants to say what is art and what not and so racists could hide behind their "art" and through that they have the chance of spreading their opinion and increasing their influence on and their power over other people.
To sum up briefly: I personally believe that it's the best way to have a law with restrictions like in Germany and there shouldn't be a change in the law!
Words: 994
|
