Related Articles


  1. 1


    Bashed! Bashed and sniped! Continuingly! Without degrees! And loving it! Je suis compulsory obscene anti-Muslim cartoons. Je suis Moerdyk. Je suis toujours jejune.

  2. 2


    Moerdyk presents a strong case for unfettered freedom of expression. That will call for a thicker skin from the victims of unrestricted vitriol. It could work and the victims would certainly ultimately benefit with a more heightened emotional maturity. It would however take more time and patience. The cost is high. And the currency? In SA there would be a lot of “vloek-moer-skop-en-donder”, looting-and-sloganeering, then wailing sirens, fire engines and speeding police vans (and ambulances?) before we reached a steady-state. How about practising our freedom to think before we speak? Especially when we lead?

  3. 4

    Martin Hesse

    I agree wholeheartedly in the principle of freedom of speech, but some speakers carry more weight than others – the more influential the speaker, the more weight his/her message carries. The president and other leaders have a duty in this regard to be judicious in their utterings, and should certainly avoid saying anything that exacerbates racial tensions. To extend Chris’s analogy, a child at school can ignore a bully in the playground, but not a headmaster who is a bully.

  4. 5

    Horri Hassan

    None of us is hypothetically free to demean, humiliate and hassle others in the name of “Free Speech”. That is the logic. Unless we are deliberately inciting others in which we have to be geared up to pay for the consequences.
    “The Free Hate Speech” is a Western onset of freedom that acquires for granted that the individual to be genuine while the society is considered to be artifice.

    As Clifford Geertz has so famously put it, “there is no such thing as human nature independent of culture”; people without culture would be “unworkable monstrosities with very few useful instincts, fewer recognizable sentiments, and no intellect: mental basket cases.”
    Here, I, meticulously, discuss that issue in a piece of Op-Ed titled Free Speech to Invite Evil.

  5. 6


    “Implicit in the conception of thinkers like Russell and Forster, that all social relations are restraints on spontaneous liberty, is the assumption that the animal is the only completely free creature. No one constrains the solitary carnivore to do anything. This is of course an ancient fallacy. Rousseau is the famous exponent. Man is born free but is everywhere in chains. Always in the bourgeois mind is this legend of the golden age, of a perfectly good man corrupted by institutions. Unfortunately not only is man not good without institutions, he is not evil either. He is no man at all; he is neither good nor evil; he is an unconscious brute.” [Christopher Caudwell, 1907-1937] Caudwell, a writer, died in action while fighting as a member of the International Brigade in defence of the Spanish Republic against the fascists.

  6. 7


    Couldn’t agree more. Let your own voice (to which you have an infinite right) be your doing, or undoing.

    A little off the topic, but digging deeper, one may discover that the result desired of the Hebdo attack is exactly what was achieved.

  7. 8


    If it is ok for the President to White bash, then it is perfectly ok for me to Black bash, the only real difference is that I will be branded a racist. Therefor the President should be hauled over the coals as a racist bigot along with all the other White, Black, Indian and Coloured bashers.

Comments are closed.

Copyright © 2015 - 2019 The Media Online. All rights reserved. Part of Arena Holdings (Pty) Ltd.