Responsibility

California beer belly pageant
cancelled because of
lack of proper permit.

I have never been a student of the constitution, the bill of rights, or any of our other important founding documents, merely, like most Americans, I think, just accepting they exist and are vitally important to the functioning of our government. Lately, however, I have been forced to reflect on them. I have come to the conclusion there is a serious absence of one important concept. It seems to me that in our overwhelming desire, even eagerness, to become free and independent, we may have gone too far in one direction and not far enough in another. I am speaking here of responsibility. That is, nowhere do I see any mention of responsibility. Whereas concepts like liberty, freedom, justice, equality, free speech, and others abound, the concepts of responsibility and accountability are remarkably absent. I find this to be problematic when it comes to trying to truly understand what our democracy is all about. For example, take a phrase like “liberty and justice for all,” found in our oath of allegiance. It seems to me that should be liberty, justice, and responsibility for all. You can’t just have liberty to do anything you want, and, indeed, we implicitly acknowledge that by passing laws and having culturally understood rules that restrict liberty. You cannot simply murder someone who stands in your way, or burn down your neighbor’s house, or steal his possessions. Liberty is not absolute, there have to be restraints.

Perhaps a better example has to do with free speech. Although we pride ourselves on having free speech we do recognize at least one responsibility that goes along with it. That is, you cannot yell “fire” in a crowded theater or crowded building when no fire exists. Unfortunately, this seems to be about the only restriction we have on freedom of speech, at least the way it seems to be widely used currently. We have, I believe, a whole host of people who in fact are making themselves rich by being totally irresponsible with their speech. Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Hannity, Coulter, O’Reilly, and others come easily to mind. When they say or repeat things that are demonstrably untrue is that not irresponsible in the extreme? When they say repeatedly that Obama is a Muslim (not true), or that he was born in Kenya (not true), or he is a socialist (not true), should that not be treated in the same way as unnecessarily yelling “fire?” These statements do nothing but spread hatred and false information and tend to divide the country. We allow them to continue their irresponsible, sometimes even borderline treasonous statements because we allow freedom of speech, but is not this carrying the right of free speech to an extreme? If these people occupy positions of power and influence, and can reach audiences of millions, should they not have to be responsible for what they are saying? I do not believe in censorship, generally speaking, but should there not be some way to curb the obvious excesses of these ranting lunatics who are in fact damaging our democracy rather than promoting it? Occasionally something happens that is viewed as so outrageous it gets fined or someone gets fired. Sometimes this is in itself somewhat outrageous or downright silly, like the terrible outcry over Janet Jackson’s little bitty titty exposure during the Super Bowl. Sometimes, when a newscaster makes a particularly egregious racial slur they get fired or at least reprimanded. To me, these occasional reprimands have to do with situations or violations that are nowhere near as important or as bad as what passes for commentary on right-wing radio and TV on a daily basis. It is true that recently some talking heads are beginning to hold some of the right-wingers more accountable, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Keith Olberman, Rachel Maddow, and others come to mind. But the outpourings of hate and misinformation are so overwhelmingly dominant it is impossible to keep up with on a daily basis. I do not think one should be allowed to become obscenely wealthy by spinning lies and hatred as an everyday profession. This is especially true, it seems to me, when they are obviously saying things they have to know are completely false. For example, they have to be aware that what they are saying about the Muslim Mosque in New York is utter nonsense, but they say it anyway, thus creating suspicion and hatred of Muslims. Why should they be allowed to do this when it is obviously not in our best interest to cultivate animosity between ourselves and the Muslims of the world? I also am not certain I think curbing such individuals should necessarily be the responsibility of the private sector, as it is the private sector that seems to be chiefly responsible for these violations of responsibility. Holding these violators responsible should be an ongoing process. I am not suggesting some rigid, all-powerful censoring organization such as the late Hays Office, but a way to insure there actually is truth and fairness in broadcasting. The public does have a right to know, to be sure, but should that not be the right to know the truth, something we are definitely not getting at the moment from the MSM?

In our quest for freedom it seems we have created a system that encourages, or at least allows, excess at the expense of restraint. For a culture to survive and remain viable the citizens have to be encouraged to want to do what they have to do. Our citizens, for the most part, do not want to do what they have to do, and even refuse to do what they have to do, there is little responsibility and not much accountability, precisely why the survival of our nation is seriously at risk.

LKBIQ:
To cherish what remains of the Earth and to foster its renewal is our only legitimate hope of survival.
Wendell Berry

TILT:
During the first 250 years of the Russian occupation of Siberia it is believed more than 45,000 mammoths were found and their ivory sold to Europe and China.