Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

AND Porn, Please">Hate Speech AND Porn, Please

This—a blog post on Legal Schnau­zer laud­ing Brett Kim­ber­lin for his law­fare against Aaron Worthing—is sim­ply stu­pid. Cheer­ing peo­ple for tak­ing advan­tage of an igno­rant (and pos­si­bly senile) judge to shut down the free expres­sion of peo­ple whose pol­i­tics you dis­agree with is nar­row­minded and short­sighted. Even if you think your adver­saries are more likely to engage in law­fare than peo­ple who agree with you? Espe­cially then. If they’re less fas­tid­i­ous to you, you hurt your­self by coun­te­nanc­ing the tactics.

(For my money, though, right-wing nutjobs and left-wing nutjobs are equally likely to resort to law­fare against those with whom they dis­agree. A nutjob is a nutjob is a nutjob.)

This—a blog post on The Daily Kos laud­ing Brett Kim­ber­lin for law­fare and SWATting—is a lit­tle more inter­est­ing. A bla­tant troll (“In 1994, after 13 years of unjust impris­on­ment, a wise Judge rec­og­nized Kim­ber­lin for his Activism and released him on parole”), the post has suck­ered the cred­u­lous—Don­ald Dou­glas of Amer­i­can Power and some of these folks—into tak­ing it seri­ously. Which just goes to show: we are capa­ble of believ­ing pre­pos­ter­ous stuff if it fits into the sto­ries we tell ourselves.

Dou­glas asks, “Will Peo­ple STFU About How Brett Kim­ber­lin Affair is ‘Non-Partisan’?” I can answer that: no, peo­ple will not shut the fuck up. The fight over free speech is and, more impor­tantly, should be non-partisan: a content-independent fight over tac­tics that we should all abjure.

Free speech may be a pro­gres­sive good and a con­ser­v­a­tive good, but it’s nei­ther a Con­ser­v­a­tive nor a Pro­gres­sive good. There are peo­ple on both left and right who claim fidelity to the First Amend­ment on prin­ci­pled grounds but define pro­tected speech to include only speech that isn’t immoral (“pornog­ra­phy,” for exam­ple, for some Con­ser­v­a­tives) or upset­ting (“hate speech,” for exam­ple, for some Progressives). 

A pox on both their houses. Most peo­ple strongly believe in the free­dom to do what they want to do. I believe that they should all have the free­dom to do what they want to do (as long as they don’t vio­late oth­ers’ rights).

If The Kim­ber­lin Affair is truly, as Dou­glas would have it, “an epic par­ti­san bat­tle over how ‘free speech’ will be defined,” may nei­ther side win.

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

One Response to “Hate Speech AND Porn, Please”

  1. shg says:

    One of the lessons to come out of this sor­did affair is the intractabil­ity of par­ti­san­ship, and its abuse of such well-intended and prin­ci­pled peo­ple as Ken (and you) to serve an agenda.

    The worst thing about it isn’t that it’s dis­gust­ing, but that it’s tir­ing. No mat­ter what is said, they just keep insist­ing on their agenda, whether it’s left or right. I’m with you, a pox on both their houses.

Leave a non-anonymous Reply