Most people profess to be in favor of freedom of speech, expression, and the press. However, for many people—if not most—there are exceptions. This fact became abundantly clear with the recent “controversy” surrounding remarks from Ozzie Guillen, the provocative manager of Major League Baseball’s Miami Marlins.
What was Guillen’s outrageous offense? He said: “I love Fidel Castro….I respect Fidel Castro. You know why? A lot of people have wanted to kill Fidel Castro for the last 60 years, but that (expletive) is still there.”
Predictably, reactionary Cubans in the Miami area went nuts. Some of the older ones supported the Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista before Castro drove him from his reign of terror. After assuming power, Batista joined forces with Cuba’s richest land owners. Together, they exploited and oppressed the poor. Moreover, Batista joined forces with the U.S. Mafia and large, wealthy U.S. corporations. Like the Cuban exiles in Florida today—and like Castro himself—Batista resorted to censorship to stop threats to his power and influence. He tortured many of his political opponents and killed tens of thousands of Cubans.
Among reactionary Cubans in South Florida, no one may ever say anything at all positive about Castro. Though it is a matter of common knowledge that Castro brought about widespread literacy and health care for the masses, he may not be given credit. Though he has supported numerous African freedom struggles—such as the one against apartheid in South Africa when many in the U.S. sided with the oppressive White minority—he may not be given credit. Though he has sent physicians to heal the sick in Africa, and though he has supported the sending of Cuban aid to earthquake victims in Haiti, he is not to be given credit.
Guillen was suspended for five days for expressing an honest opinion, in which he made no bigoted comments. After his suspension, he said, “I’m here on my knees to apologize.” Still, many reactionary Cubans in South Florida were not appeased. They still wanted “his blood.” (Some of these people are the same fanatics that tried to keep Elian Gonzales from his father when he was rescued from a raft some years ago.)
Both Guillen and Castro have their faults. Guillen has made many provocative comments, including one in which he used a homophobic slur. Castro had been an oppressive dictator for decades. However, why should it be a major offense for someone to voice support for him? The U.S. has supported brutal dictators for years. It is simply outrageous and intellectually irresponsible to compare Castro to Hitler. Reactionary Cubans should not be allowed to intimidate those with whom they disagree. It is shameful that the mainstream media kowtowed to this kind of anti- democratic action.
Not surprisingly, the right-wingers that love to bemoan “political correctness” when leftists complain about racism, sexism and homophobia, are all for censorship in this case. However, they are not alone in their hypocrisy.
Conservative religionists talk about the importance of religious liberty, all the while trying to censor humanists. They believe that atheism is harmful to society. Many of them want to prevent the teaching of evolution in the public schools.
Reactionary Muslims promote the idea of religious liberty (for themselves, in Western nations). However, they support the oppression of Christians in such nations as Saudi Arabia, and will not tolerate anything deemed offensive against the Prophet Muhammad.
Some people embrace censorship to promote anti-sexist, anti-racist, and anti-homophobic agendas. While it is fine for an organization to punish its employees for making bigoted, divisive remarks that threaten its unity, image and profitability, it should not be illegal for bigots to express themselves. If one wants to make a misogynistic rap record, tell a sexist joke, or make a racist or homophobic statement, he or she should have the legal right to do so.
Obviously, some people are insecure and afraid that their beliefs will not stand up to critical examination. They are more concerned with advancing their own agendas by any means necessary, than they are with defending liberty for all.
One of the main problems with censorship is that it often comes back to victimize the censor. Yet, many censors do not care. They are willing to be censored as long as they can censor others. This is the height of absurdity, and such a mindset can never bode well for true democracy.
The price of democracy is legally permitting images and ideas we find offensive, sexist, racist, homophobic, harmful, etc. Ultimately, no idea or image is as dangerous as the practice of government censorship. Double standards and hypocrisy will only harm true democracy in the end.