Several prominent bloggers, some of them I considered as liberty vigilantes, are threading on a thin line between free speech and thought crime. From my point of view, they risk veering to the other side in their quest to extinguish racism. Read Jeff Ooi, Brand New Malaysian and Peter Tan for background.
I neither support racism nor do I believe in supremacist ideas. I do however have strong libertarian beliefs and subsequently, I hold that all individuals should have the liberty to do as they wish with themselves and their property as long as those actions do not infringe on the same liberty of others. This applies to racists and as such, it’s their right to have racist ideas and expresses their point of views.
This is an unfortunate consequence. I would be more than happy to see legal actions against all the racists in this world. However, if a racist’s right to express his or her thoughts is being suppressed, an infringement of civil liberty has occurred. After all, Mahathir escaped unscathed after his Jews rule the world by proxy speech. Why should we apply double standard when it concerns some unknown racist but coward stranger?
What I suggest is this. Blog owners’ should practice discrete censorship with clear rules if they have certain allergies toward certain kind of opinion, regardless whether it’s cut and paste or originally written. Blog owners definitely have the right to practice censorship since their blogs are their private properties.
The law might offer a course to convict racists via several avenues with so-called seditious act. But did it cross anybody’s mind that these set of laws itself infringes civil liberties?
Voltaire was misattributed of saying I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. That misattributed saying truly describes my general feeling against the hoo ha. Abuse of free speech has occurred, yes. Nonetheless, a right remains a right.
As for the bloggers that are lodging a police report against that racist stranger(s), I can say with clear conscience that I’ve eroded confidence for these bloggers – whom claim to carry the torch of freedom – because they are trampling on liberty.
Behind the infringement of right, perhaps there are silver linings. Perhaps, from this episode, Malaysians will learn the ethics of free speech that, quoting an overquoted line, great power comes with great responsibility. Perhaps, the end justifies the mean.
Perhaps.
nb – changed my mind about the police report after seeing similar trolling activities at ReCom.org done by a person. This person has trolled before and has been given countless warnings to stop posting hateful messages.
Thinking it over, blogs and forums are private properties in a sense that they are owned by somebody – owners pay for hosting sercives of those sites. Therefore, that racist person violates private property.
If the owner of the site or the moderator or anyone that serves similar function as an owner has warned a person not to post offensive message earlier but that person still do it again regardless, the owner might be able to take actions againt him/her.
However, I do prefer banning and censorship to real police action. Using such legal measures comes too close to sides of whom I’d rather not be with. Unless if that violator has a real thick skull and wouldn’t take a hint even after banning.
But I still contend that nobody has no right to censor a racist or any opinion in public space.
. It’s a modification of 
.