Carl Cohen - Free Speech and Political Extremism- How Nasty Are We Free to Be

8/3/2019 Carl Cohen - Free Speech and Political Extremism- How Nasty Are We Free to Be

1/17

C A R L C O H E N

F R E E S P E E C H A N D P O L I T I C A L E X T R E M I S M :H O W N A S T Y A R E W E F R E E T O B E ? *

I w a n t t o d i s cu s s th e l i m i t s o f f r e e d o m i n s p e a k i n g a n d p u b l i s h i n g :w h a t t h e y ar e, a n d w h a t t h e y s h o u l d b e. I w a n t t o a sk y o u a n d m y s e l fa b o u t t h e f r o n ti e r s, t h e e x t r e m e s , t h e u s e s o f s p e e c h t h a t s e e m b a r e l yt o l e ra b l e , a b o u t u s e s o f f r e e d o m t h a t a r e, i n f ac t, i n t o l e r a b l e t o m a n y .

I a m n o t t h i n k i n g m e r e l y a b o u t c o n t r o v e rs i a l s p e ec h . T h a t ' s e as y. O ra g i t a ti n g s p ee c h . T h a t ' s n o t v e r y h a rd . I a m t h i n k i n g a b o u t s p e e c h t h a tis n as ty , v ic i o us , w r o n g h e a d e d , a n d d o w n r i g h t e v i l o r a t l e a st t h o u g h tt o b e so . I a m n o t s u re w h a t c o n t e n t o r m a n n e r m e e t s t h a t de s c ri p ti o n .W e a l l k n o w t h a t w h e n t w o p a r t i e s a r e i n b i t t e r , m o r t a l c o n f l i c t , e a c ho n e t h i n k s t h e o t h e r is ev il , n a s ty a n d m o r a l l y w r o n g .

A s a n e x a m p l e , c o n s i d e r th e w a r b e t w e e n I r a n a n d I ra q r e c e n t l y i np ro g re ss . E a c h p a r t y f i n d s t h e o t h e r u t t e r l y v i c io u s . B u t , y o u s a y , t h a t iswar! R i g h t . W e w a n t t o t h i n k a b o u t f r e e d o m w i t h i n a ci v il s o cie ty , as o c i e t y d i v i d e d , p e rh a p s , e v e n a n g ry a n d b i tt e r , b u t s ti ll c iv i l. H o w f a rm a y s p e e c h g o i n s u c h a s e tt in g ? W h a t is p er m i s s ib l e ?

C o n s i d e r a n o t h e r e x a m p l e , w i t h i n a c i v i l s o c i e t y , c l o s e r t o o u rt ar g et . I n M i a m i , o n B i s c a y n e B o u l e v a r d , i n M a r c h o f 1 98 6, t h e r e w a s ac o n f r o n t a t i o n b e t w e e n a g r o u p o f a n t i - C o n t r a d e m o n s t r a to r s , a n d ag r o u p o f p r o - C o n t r a d e m o n s t ra to r s - g r o up s w h o s e m e m b e r s d e te s ta n d r e v i l e o n e a n o t h e r , a s y o u k n o w . [ N o t e : T h e d o u b l e n e g a t i v e " a n t i -C o n t r a " s o u n d s s illy , b u t i n t h i s c as e i s n o t r e a d i l y a v o id a b l e ; I u s e i t f o rt h e s a k e o f ac cu ra cy .] O n e o f t h e p r o - C o n t r a f o lk s w a s w a v i n g a p l a c -

* T he papers in this sym posium were originally p resented at the f irst University o fMiami-Southeast Banking Co rporat ion Foun dation Symposium on Ethics andSocie ty in Janu ary 1988 direc ted by Professor Alan G oldm an o f the University o fM iami. W e are grateful fo r his assistance in arranging for the p ublicatio n o f thesepapers.

La w a nd Phi losophy 7 (1989) 263--279 . 1989 by K luw er Academ ic Publishers.


2/17

2 64 Carl Cohena r d a t o n e o f t h e a n t i - C o n t r a s p e ak e rs w h i c h r e a d: " [ S o - a n d - s o l is ab i g o t . . . " a n d t h e n a d d e d m o r e a b o u t N i c a r a g u a . I t w a s a n a s t y s i g n ,a n d t h e p o l i c e a s k e d h i m t o s t o p w a v i n g i t . H e r e p l i e d , a c c o r d i n g t ot h e l e n g t h y r e p o r t i n The M iami Herald, " O n t o p o f t h at , h e' s a n S O B "a n d t h e n h e a d d e d " T h e y say i n w a r a n d l o v e e v e r y t h in g is p e rm i t t e d .A n d t h i s i s w a r ! "

L e t ' s t h i n k a b o u t t h i s s i t u a t i o n b r i e f l y , t o l e a rn f ro m i t . W e m a ya c c e p t t h e p r e m i s e a b o u t w a r , a l t h o u g h i t m a y b e o v e r st at ed ; t h e r e a r el a w s a n d ru l e s g o v e r n i n g w a r f a re , t o o . I n w a r , l e t u s a s s u m e , n o h o l d sa r e b a r r e d . B u t , i n t h a t c o n f l i c t o f d e m o n s t r a t o r s , c o u l d n a s t i n e s s i ns p e e c h b e j u s t i f l e d b y a s t at e o f w a r ? S u r e ly n o t . W e w e r e t h e n , a n d w ea r e n o w , n o t a t w a r. I n w a r w e s h o o t a n d k il l. H e r e i n M i a m i w e a r e i na c i v i l s o c i e t y , s e e k i n g t o g o v e rn o u r s e l v e s , a l t h o u g h d i v i d e d , w i t ho rd e r a n d f a irn e ss , a n d a i m i n g t o l iv e d e c e n t l y .

N o t h i n g is to b e g a i n e d b y s ay in g : T h e r u le s a r e o ff l N o r ul es ! T h a ts i m p l y m a k e s b r u t e s o f u s a ll. I n t h a t w a y w e r e t u r n o u r s el v e s t o t h ea n i m a l w o r l d. I r e m e m b e r a s o rt o f c h a n t I le a rn e d , l o n g a go , f r o m m yS p a n i sh t e a c h e r a t M i a m i H i g h , i n w h i c h t h e f i n a l li n e ( if I re c a llc o r r e c t ly ) w a s a p e t i t i o n t o Sa n t a M a r ia , t o d e l i v e r u s a l l f r o m t h e r e i g no f t h e a n im a l s . T h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y i n t e r e s ti n g a n d p o l it ic a l ly i n t e r e s t-i n g q u e s t i o n is: W h a t s p e e c h is p e r m i t t e d w h e n t h e r u le s a r e on ?

N o w t h a t p r o - C o n t r a d e m o n s t r a t o r w a s w r o n g t o j u s ti f y h is n as tyw o r d s b y t h e c l a i m s o f w a r . B u t h e w a s n o t n e c e s s a ri ly w r o n g i nseek [ing to ju s t i fy h i s w or ds within t h e ru l es . I d o n o t a d d re s s th e m e r i t so f th e a r g u m e n t - w h i c h s id e is r ig h t, w h e t h e r a n y o n e i n th e c o n -t r o v e r s y i s o r w a s a b i g o t o r a n S O B . T h i s i s n o t m y c o n c e r n h e r e ,p la in ly . B u t s a y in g s u c h th i n g s o f a n o t h e r d e m o n s t r a t o r , o r o f t h e o t h e rg ro u p ( t h a t t h e y a re b ig o t s , e tc .) - i s t h a t p e rm i s s ib l e ? O r s h o u l d t h ep o l i c e h a v e t a k e n a w a y h i s s ig n ?

I w i l l p u t m y c a r d s o n t h e t a bl e: I t h i n k t h a t t h a t p a r t ic u l a r s p e e c hw a s w i t h i n t h e r u l es . T h e r u le s p e r m i t it , t h e g o o d r u le s o f a g o o ds o c i e t y , t h e r u l e s t h a t p r o t e c t s p e e c h a n d t h e f r e e d o m t o s p e a k t o t h ef u r t h e s t l im i t in a d e m o c r a t i c c i vi l c o m m u n i t y .

I w i l l d e f e n d h e r e a n o l d , s o u n d , c o n s e r v a t i v e p r o p o s i t i o n : i n t h er e a l m o f p o l i t ic a l s p e ec h , n o c o n t e n t , n o n a s ti n e ss , n o s t u p i d i t y o r e v i l ,


3/17

Free Speech and Poli t ical Extremism 2 6 5m a y b e s i l en c ed . E v e n w h e n w e a re c o n v i n c e d , to t h e b o t t o m o f o u rs o ul s, th a t w h a t t h e y a r e s a y i n g is a w f u l a n d u g ly , w e m u s t p r o t e c t t h e i rs a y in g . T h a t is t h e g l o r y o f a fr e e s o c i et y.

T h e a r g u m e n t d e f e n d i n g th is c o n c l u s io n I a m g o i n g to p u r s u e w i t hy o u i n s o m e d e ta il . B u t I d o n ' t w a n t t o d o t h a t in t h e c o n t e x t o f th ep r o - C o n t r a / a n t i - C o n t r a c o n f li c t. T h a t ' s a l m o s t t o o ea sy , b e c a u s e w ea r e a ll w e l l a w a r e t h a t t h a t c o n f l ic t is a p o l i ti c a l o n e , a n d o n e o n w h i c ht h e r e r e a ll y a re t w o s id e s, b o t h v i g o r o u s l y a r g u e d . S o I w a n t t o t r a n s -p o s e t h e c a se in t o o n e t h a t is h a r d e r , a n d o n e i n w h i c h w e ( v e ry p r o b a -b l y ) a r e a l l o n t h e s a m e p o l i t i c a l s id e .

I n t h a t s a m e c o n f r o n t a t i o n ( a c c o r d i n g t o t h e M i a m i H e r a l d o f 2 3M a r c h 1 98 6) o n e o f t h e p r o - C o n t r a s u p p o r t e r s sa id : " I ' m J e w i s h , a n dw h a t t h e se p e o p l e a r e d o i n g is th e s a m e a s i f t h e N a z i s w e r e d e m o n -s t r a ti n g in M i a m i B e a ch " . A n d a n o t h e r p a r t ic i p a n t a ls o c o m p a r e d t h ea n t i - C o n t r a p r o t e s t t o a N a z i m a r c h i n a J e w i s h n e i g h b o r h o o d i nM i a m i B e a c h , o r t o a K u K l u x K l a n r al ly in a b la c k n e i g h b o r h o o d .

T h a t ' s a n e x t r e m e c o m p a r i s o n , p e r h a p s , b u t a u s e f u l o n e . L e t 's t h i n ki n t h o s e t e rm s . W e , y o u a n d I, w i l l h a v e n o d i s a g r e e m e n t a b o u t t h ee v il s o f N a z i s m , o r t h e n a s t in e s s o f r a c is m . S o , a s a n i n t e l l e c t u a l a d v e n -t u r e w i t h s o m e e l e c tr i ci ty , l et 's ask : W h a t l i m i t s a r e t h e r e o n t h e n a s t i -n e s s o f those n a s t y fo l k s? I n th i s m a t t e r I a m a s p r i v i l e g e d a s t h e p e r s o nq u o t e d i n t h e d e m o n s t r a t io n ; I 'm J e w i s h t oo .

W e A m e r i c a n s h a v e s o m e e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e s e m a t t e r s . T e n y ea r s a g o ,y o u w i l l r e ca ll , i n S k o k i e , I ll in o i s, - a ls o a v e r y J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y , an o r t h e r n s u b u r b o f C h i c a g o - t h e N a z i s p l a n n e d a m a r c h . T h e V i ll ag eg o v e r n m e n t t r i e d t o s to p t h e m . T h e b a t t le b e c a m e a ro y a l o n e , e v e nr e a c h i n g t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s S u p r e m e C o u r t . L e t ' s t h i n k a b o u t t h e e x -t r e m e s o f p o l i t ic a l s p e e c h i n t h a t c o n t e x t . I n y o u r m i n d s , p i c t u r e t h eA m e r i c a n N a z is , .je rk s, sq u a r e - h e a d s , w i t h u n i f o r m s a n d s w a st ik a s a n dp l a c a r d s , p l a n n i n g t o m a r c h d o w n C o l l i n s A v e n u e , o r W a s h i n g t o nA v e n u e , o n M i a m i B e a c h , a n d t h e n d o w n F i f th St. [ M y p a r e n ts , i n t h e i rl at e ye ars , l iv e d in a c o n d o m i n i u m a t t h e c o r n e r o f W a s h i n g t o n a n dF if th . I r e m e m b e r m y m o t h e r s a y in g th a t w h e n t h a t b u i ld i n g o p e n e d , an e w C h a p t e r o f H a d d a s s a h c a m e i n s ta n t ly in t o b e in g! ]

N o w , m a n y w o u l d sa y t h a t su c h a N a z i m a r c h s h o u l d n o t b e p e r -


4/17

266 ~ Carl Cohenmitted. They mi gh t say: "Look, we recognize the central impo rtance o ffree speach. Bu t free speech is like every oth er fre edo m in that it m usthave limits in a goo d society. Th e Nazis, saying wh at they say in theway the y say it, exceed reasonable limits. Associating them selves w iththe annih ilation of m illions of Jews, they seek to advance their views,abrasively, in a co mm un ity - M iami Beach - populated by man y ofthe same people wh o had been tortured by Nazis. Some o f these Jews,after narrow escape, actually sought refuge in this country, in Miami.We applaud th e vigorous defense o f free speech - but this is a case inwhich the constitutional protections of dissident opinions do notapply".Bu t that position is not sufficient as is stands. Certain ly it is true th atneither the Constitution, nor any sensible principle lying behind it,guarantees the rig ht to say anything, anywhere, anytime. Bu t if we aregoing to allow some speech to be restricted, those restrictions mu st b every narrowly drawn, and sustain a heavy burd en of justification. Sothe Nazi-blockers [not "anti-Nazis" because that n ame wo uld apply tomany who would also protect the right of the Nazis to demonstrate]face the task o f giving sound argu men t specifying the proper limits offree speech, limits that wo uld be exceed ed by the Nazis. I use th e caseo f the Nazis precisely because it is as ex trem e as any I can im agine, andthere fore the best test for th e principle s I shall pu t forward.

M y enterprise, then, is to consider the limits and the argum ents theNazi-blockers put forward, and to see if we find th em sound. An d youwi ll o in m e in this task, I trust. I will do this in six sho rt "chapters".Chapter 1. DangerGrave danger is the basis of a kind of limit upo n speech tho ug ht rea-sonable by many. You know the famous passage written by JusticeHo lmes in 1919: "T he question in every case [he wrote] is whet her thewords used are used in such circumstances and are o f such a nature tocreate a clear and presen t danger tha t th ey will bring abou t substantiveevils that Congress has a rig ht to prevent" [Schenck v. United States, 249US 47 at 52]. N ow if the Nazis March o n Collins Avenue the dangersare patently clear, and arise im me dia tely as they march. So wo uld no tJustice Holmes's illustration apply? H e continued: "T he most stringent


5/17

Free Speech and Political Extremism 267protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shoutingfire in a theater, and causing a panic". Don't Nazis marching in MiamiBeach, in effect, shout fire in a theater? If their speech is irresponsible,why must we permit i t? Neither the shouter in the theater , nor theNazi on Collins Avenue (says the Nazi-blocker) is entitled to the con-stitutional protec tion of free speech.

But the analogy with the theater is in fact not good at all . Whoevershouts fire in a theater is certainly not entitled to protection ongrounds of free speech. But the circumstances of a Nazi demonstrationdiffer from those in a theater in three fu ndam enta l respects:a) The theater audience is captive, subjected against its will to theshout and the sequel. Not so any gathering for a Nazi parade. Thoseangered or offended are free to stay away, or to leave; they need havenothing to do with it . The panic in the theater traps and injures thosewho had come for reasons entirely unrelated to the shout. What is rea-sonably said in a theater depends, of course, upon what properly goeson there - an expectation reasonably impo sed upo n speech in theclassroom as well. The shouted false alarm is not essentially speech inthe thea ter at all; i t is a wa rnin g of danger fraudu lently given, no dif-ferent from the frau dulent r inging of a f ire alarm bell . But concerningthe audience any Nazi march may draw, al l of this s imply cannot besaid.b) A shouted warning, or false alarm, permits no discussion. It is notthe expression of opinion, but the signal for flight, giving no oppor-tunity for reasoned reply. The other day, in Ann Arbor, some criminalfool released a tear gas cannister in a theater! The audience was pre-sented with inescapable threat; it had no options. But we who find theNazis hateful do have options; the Nazi demonstration may be an-swered with a counter-demonstrat ion, as an anti-Contra demonstra-t ion may be answered with a pro-Contra demonstrat ion. What is evilmay be exposed, refuted, in print or by voice, then or later. Demon-strations by bigots, Nazis or others, cannot threaten immediate calam-ity at all com para ble to a false alarm in a cro wd ed theater.


6/17

268 Carl Cohenc) Th e shou ted a larm of fire is, by hypothesis, false. We w ou ld thi nkvery differently of an honest warning. No doubt Nazi views are alsofalse - but being right is not a conditio n on whic h permission todemonstrate may be premised. If i t were, wh o wil l decide who is r ighteno ugh to speak?

So true enough, there are words in some special circumstanceswhich, because of the grave danger they present, cannot claim freespeech pro tect ion - like the shou ting of"F ire!" falsely in a theater. Bu ta political demonstration, in a park or on a major avenue, is nothinglike that.Chapter 2. Incitement to R io t"But [the Nazi-blocker rejoins] you underestimate the seriousness ofthe threat this demo nstratio n wo uld im med iately create. If the Nazismarch with swastikas and brown shirts on Miami Beach they willalmost certainly provoke a riot. Incitement to riot is a crime. When itis deliberate as in the case we envisage, when its violent consequencesare highly probable and fully anticipated, such incitement cannot bedefended as mere speech. It is conduct designed to breach the publicpeace, using the First A m en dm en t as a shield. Citizens o f Mia mi Beachhave the right, even the duty, to protect themselves from that despi-cable design".

This argument is dangerous. It is often heard, but it seriously mis-apprehends the concept of "incitement to riot". That a message or asymbol excites an audience to furious antagonism gives no evidencewhatever of criminal inci tement. That crime consis ts in urging uponone's audience the commission of some unlawful act in a context inwhich it is probable that some in the audience will do what is beingurged. Even then the speaker wil l not normally be guil ty of criminalincitement unless persons in his audience do in fact engage in the un-lawful cond uct he urged upon them. No thin g l ike these condit ions arepresent in the case of a Nazi marc h in M iami Beach, or an a nti-Contrademonstration in Miami. In such demonstrations it is usual thatno specific acts are urged at all, and Nazis are very careful never tourge illegal acts. They say things like: "Jews Not Wanted Here!" or,"White Power!" or, "America for the White Man!" Some in their


7/17

Free Speech and Political Extrem ism 269a u d i e nc e m a y t h e n b r e a k t h e l a w b y a t ta c k in g n o t t h e J e w s b u t t h eN a z i s th e m s e lv e s - b u t t h o s e w h o s e s y m b o l s p r o v o k e d th e i r f u r yc a n n o t b e c r im in a l ly r e s p o n sib le f o r t h a t m i s c o n d u c t .

I n c i t e m e n t m u s t b e ( a n d i n t h e l a w i t i s ) v e r y n a r r o w ly d e l i n e a t e d .W h e n o v e rt u n l a w f u l d e e ds a r e c o m m i t te d a s a d i r e ct c o n se q u e n ce o fag i ta t ing speech , tha t speech becom es a pa r t o f the c r im e - a s thep l a n n in g o f a r o b b e r y b e c o m e s p a r t o f t h e r o b b e r y i ts e l6 a n d p e r s o n sw h o s e i n f l a m m a t o r y w o r d s l e a d t o t h e v e ry d is o r d e r t h e y p r o po s e m a ybe s im i la r ly cu lpab le a s pa r t o f the de l ibe ra te c rea to rs o f tha t d i so rde r.B u t N a z is , in M i a m i B e a c h, w h e r e n o o n e i n t h e a u d i e n c e w i l l b e i n -c l i n e d t o d o a n y th in g t h e y m a y u r g e , c o u ld n e v e r be g u i l t y o f i n c i t i n gto r io t .C h a p t e r 3 . Inciteme nt and the G eneral Intent to Breach the Peace" Y o u m a y b e t e c h n ic a l l y c o r r e c t [ t h e N a z i - b lo c k e r a ns w ers ] a b o u t t h er e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h a t c r im in a l c h a r g e , b u t y o u a r e b l i n d e d b y t e c h n i -c aliti es . Th e N a z i s d e l i g h t i n c r e a t i n g f r i g h t a n d h a v o c a m o n g Je w s . I nth i s coun t ry , in recen t yea rs , the i r demons t ra t ions have seve ra l t imesa c tu a l l y r e s u l t e d i n r i o t . N a z i s u n d e r s t a n d f u l l w e l l h o w m a d d e n in gthe i r sym bols a re to th e i r in ten de d v ic t ims ; they p lan tha t ab rasion . I t i sa g o o d p r in c ip l e i n l a w th a t o n e m a y r e a s o n a b ly b e h e ld t o i n t e n d t h ena tu ra l and an t ic ipa ted consequences o f one ' s ac t s . True , the r io t wi l ln o t b e c a u s e d b y a n a u d i e n c e t h a t c o m p l i es w i th t h e i r u r g in g s , s o t h e ym a y b e i n n o c e n t o f so m e t e c hn i c al c r im e o f in c i te m e n t . T h e y w i l ln e v e r th e l e ss b e g u i l t y o f e n g a g in g d e l i b e r a t e ly i n c o n d u c t d e s ig n e d t oin f u r i a t e , a n d c a l c u l a t e d t o r e s u l t i n a w h o le s a l e b r e a c h o f t h e p u b l i cp ea ce . I n c i t e m e n t i n t h a t m o r e g e n e r a l se ns e is w h a t w e h a v e th e r i g h tto protect ourselves against" .

T h i s a r g u m e n t h a s m u c h a p p ea l - b u t I c o n t e n d t h a t i t is p r o -f o u n d l y m i s t a k e n . T h e c i t i z e n s o f M i a m i B e a c h , o r o f M i a m i o r o fSkok ie , m ay n o t s i lence in fu r ia t ing speakers because o f the re sponsee x p e c t ed t o t h e i r w o r d s . I f t h e y m a y s i l e n c e s pe ak er s o n t h a t g r o u n d ,n o t r u ly c o n t r o v e r s i a l p o s i t i o n o n a n i n c e n d ia r y t o p i c c o u ld b e f r e e lyp r e s e n t e d t h e r e . Fo r i n t h a t c a se , w h e n e v e r i t c o u ld b e s h o w n th a t t h ep r o b a b le r e a c t i o n w o u ld b e i n t e m p e r a t e o r d i s o rd e r ly , t h e a d v o c a c y o fa n u n p o p u l a r p o s i t io n w o u l d h a v e to b e f o rb i d d en . T h u s t y i n g t h e p e r -


8/17

2 7 0 Carl Cohenm i s s i b i li t y o f c o n t r o v e r s i a l s p e e c h t o i ts e x p e c t e d r e c e p t i o n e s ta b l is h e sw h a t h a s b e e n c a l l e d " t h e h e c k l e r ' s v e t o " . A d e c e n t s o c i e t y , o n e t h a th o n o r s f r e e d o m c o n c r e te l y , c a n n o t a u t h o r i z e t h a t v et o; it is t h o s e w h or e s p o n d i l le g a l ly a n d v i o l e n t l y w h o m u s t b e r e s tr a in e d .

V e r y u n p o p u l a r c a us es m a y b e as f r e e ly a d v o c a te d u n d e r o u r C o n -s t i t u t i o n a s t h o s e i n p o p u l a r f a v o r . P o l i t i c a l a d v o c a t e s a t t h e e x t r e m e s ,r a d ic a l o r r e a ct io n a ry , w i s e o r c r az y , w i l l c o m m o n l y m e e t w i t h a na n g r y a n d u n r u l y r e c e p t i o n . C o m m u n i s t s , p a c i f i s t s , N a z i s , h a w k s a n dd o v e s - t h o s e at th e e x t r e m e s - w i l l b e f o re v e r i n n e e d o f d e f e n se .T h e i r f r e e d o m is i n o u r i n te r e st n o t o n l y b e c a u s e o u r s id e m a y o n e d a yb e t h r e a t e n e d w i t h s i m i la r re s p on s e , b u t b e c a u s e ra t io n a l j u d g m e n tu p o n a n y p o s i t i o n r e q u i r e s t h a t t h a t p o s i t i o n b e h e a r d . S o m e l e s s o n sm u s t b e c o n t i n u a l l y r e le a r n e d , e v e n b y t h o s e w h o o n c e t a u g h t t h e m . I fN a z i s a r e n o t f re e t o d e m o n s t r a t e b e c a u s e t h e i r J e w i s h a u d i e n c e w i l l b eh o s ti le , th e J e w s w i l l n o t b e f re e t o d e m o n s t r a t e w h e n t h e ir A r a ba u d i e n c e [ an d i n D e t r o i t w e h a ve a v e ry la rg e A r a b - A m e r i c a n c o m m u -n i ty ] p r o m i s e s e q u a l ho s ti li ty . W h e n d e m o n s t r a t i o n s t o w h i c h s u f -f i c i e n t a n g e r m a y b e t h r e a t e n e d a r e n o t a l l o w e d , t h e h e c k l e r s h a v eb e e n g i v e n t h e v e t o - a n d t h e n t h e y m a y e x er c is e i t n o m a t t e r w h a tt h e c o n t e n t o f t h e ir v ie w s .

T h i s i s s u e w a s f u l l y t e s t e d , i n o u r c o u n t r y , i n a m o s t i n t e r e s t i n ga c t u a l c a se . I n C h i c a g o , i n 1 9 49 , a p a s s i o n a t e m e s s a g e o f ra c i a l h a t r e dw a s d e l i v e r e d ( b y a C a t h o l i c p r i e s t u n d e r s u s p e n s i o n ) t o a s i z a b l ea u d i e n c e i n a la r g e h a ll . O u t s i d e , a c o r d o n o f p o l ic e s t r u g g l e d t oc o n t r o l t h e i n f u r i a t e d c o u n t e r - d e m o n s t r a t o r s , w h i l e F a t h e r T e r m i n i e l l oc o m p l e t e d h is s p e e ch . H e w a s l a te r c o n v i c t e d o f c r e a ti n g a b r e a c h o ft h e p e a c e - a b r e a c h a c t u a l l y c r e a t e d n o t b y h i m o r h is fo l l o w e r s b u tb y p e r s o n s o u t s i d e t h e h a l l , s o m a d d e n e d b y h i s b i g o t r y a s t o t h r o wb o t t le s a n d b r ic k s a t t h e w i n d o w s a s h e s p o k e. Is T e r m i n i e l l o t o b ep u n i s h e d f o r s p e a k i n g so ? T h e j u d g e i n t h e t r ia l C o u rt h a d i n s t r u c t e dt h e j u r y t h a t t h e w o r d s " b r e a c h o f t h e p e a c e " in c l u d e s p e e c h t h a t " stirst h e p u b l i c t o a n g e r, in v i te s d i s p u t e, b r in g s a b o u t a c o n d i t i o n o f u n r e s t ,o r c r ea t es a d i s t u r b a n c e . . . " T h a t , s a id t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t o f t h e U n i t e dS ta te s, w a s g r a v e e rr o r. J u s t i c e D o u g l a s w r o t e t h e m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n . H es aid : " [ O n e ] f u n c t i o n o f fr e e s p e e c h u n d e r o u r s y s t e m o f g o v e r n m e n t ist o i n v i t e d i s p u t e . I t m a y i n d e e d b e s t s e r v e i t s h i g h p u r p o s e w h e n i t


9/17

Free Speech and Po litical Extrem ism 271indu ces a co nd i t io n o f unrest , creates dissatisfaction w i th co nd i t ions asthey are, or eve n s ti rs peo ple to anger . Speech is of ten provocat ive andchal lenging . I t may s t r ike a t pre judices and preconcept ions and havepro fou nd un set t l ing effects as i t presses for acceptance of an idea. T ha tis w hy f reed om o f speech , thou gh no t absolu te . . . is never the less pro -tec ted agains t censorsh ip or pun ishm ent , un less sho w n l ike ly to p ro-du ce a c lear and prese nt dan ger o f a ser ious substant ive evi l tha t r isesfa r above publ ic inconv enience , annoyance , o r u nres t " [Term iniello v.C i ty o f Chicago, 337 U S 1, at 4, 1949].I ronically, the r igh t of a racis t to speak thus d efe nd ed bec am e a bu l-w ark for th e f r ee do m o f those th ey revi led. Y ears later , c ivi l rightsactivists, con victed because of the tu m ultu ou s responses o f thei r ho st i leaudiences, ha d the ir convic t ions reversed a l so by the Supreme Cour t ,re ly ing on the prec ede nt se t in the T erm inie l lo decis ion .

T he pe nd ulu m swings for s trong and we ak alike . In Miami , in 1986,i t was the ant i -Contra demons t r a to r s who were i n fu r i a t i ng t o t hemajori ty , and high ly provocative. Bu t in Ca m bridge , Massachusetts, in1987, i t was the pr0-Cont ra speakers who were the objec t of a mad-de ne d a ttack . I have c l ipped a pho tograp h f ro m T h e N e w Y o rk T i me s o fa ha l l a t Harvard Univers i ty , in which a Cont ra l eader , AdolphoCalero , w as speaking; an an t i -C on t ra dem ons t ra tor , be l i ev ing h im adevil, i s a t tacking the speaker phys ica lly to s i lence h im [NY Tim es 4O ct 87] . Shall we s i lence Calero for a breac h o f the peace, or co l lar thatyou ng m an w ho does no t g ra sp t he po in t tha t d i s ag reemen t , evenw he n b i t te r , does n ot jus t i fy suppress ion? Pla in ly he m us t l earn , and w em ust never forge t, tha t even in the m os t hos t i l e t e r r itory the r ight topol i t ical agi ta t ion for a l l part ies ( in our coun try) has bee n and w il l besecured.

A nd t hose wh o w ou ld fo rb id a dem ons t r a t i on be fo re i t beg ins havea much weake r ca se even t han t hose who wou ld conv i c t Ca l e ro , o rTerm iniel lo . For in those cases , the attacks did take place; in the case oft he env i s i oned m arch o n M iami Beach , w e ca nno t be ce r ta in t ha t i n -c iv il ity and d i sorder wi l l ru le the day . You m ay reca ll tha t in thef amous Pen t agon Papers ca se , w he n t he U n i t ed S ta te s Go ve rnm en targued tha t the publ ica t ion of those papers in the N e w Y o r k T im e sw ou ld lead to loss o f l if e in Southeast As ia , the S uprem e C ou r t h e ld


10/17

272 Carl Cohent h a t s u c h a n a r g u m e n t (e ve n i f t h e p u b l ic a t io n w e r e u l t i m a t e l y f o u n dun l a w f u l ) m a y no t s er ve a s a g r oun d f o r t he s uppr e s s i on o f the pub l i c a -t ion in advance . I f tha t is t rue for s to len gov e rn m en t papers, i s i t no t a l lt he m or e t r ue i n de f e nse o f s pe ec h i n a pub l i c, po l i ti c a l de m ons t r a t i on?C h a p t e r 4 . Figh ting Words"W el l [says the N az i -b locke r ] i t sho uld b e grou nds for suppression, eveni f i t i sn ' t, i f t he s pe e c h i n q ue s t i on ha s a ve r y h i gh p r ob a b i l i t y o f p r o -v o k i n g v i o le n c e. O f c o u r se w e c a n ' t k n o w w i t h a b s o lu t e c e r t a in t y t h a ta r i o t w i l l e ns ue i f t he N a z i s m a r c h w i t h s w as ti ka s i n M i a m i B e a c h , bu tw e c a n b e p r e t t y c o n f i d e n t w h e n w e p r e d i c t i t . S o m e w o r d s a n ds ym bo l s , by t he i r p l a i n m e a n i n g i n k no w n c on t e x ts , ar e so p rovoc a t ivea s t o c a us e de c e n t a nd r e a s ona b l e pe op l e t o r e s pond by f i gh t i ng .Spe ec h l i ke t ha t ] t he y c onc l ude ] i s r i gh t l y fo r b i dde n .

"A nd i n t h i s [ t he y c on t i nue ] t h e Sup r e m e C ou r t i s on ou r s ide . Som ey e a rs ag o , i n N e w H a m p s h i r e , a J e h o v a h 's W i t n e s s n a m e d C h a p l i n s k yw a s c onv i c t e d , w he n s t oppe d f r om p r e a c h i n g i n t he s tr ee t, f o r s hou t i nga t a po l i c e m e n t hus : ' Y ou a r e a godda m ne d r a c ke t e e r [ a nd ] a da m ne df as cis t a nd t he w ho l e gov e r nm e n t o f R o c he s t e r [ N H ] a r e fa sc is ts o ragents of f a sc i s t s ' . He c la imed f reedom of speech a s h i s sh ie ld , bu t theS u p r e m e C o u r t h e l d t h a t s o m e u t t e r a n c e s a r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o n o r m a lp r o t e c t i on . T he y w r o t e : ' [I t] i s w e l l un de r s t ood t ha t t he r i gh t o f f r e es pe e c h is no t a bs o l u te a t a ll t i m e s a n d un de r a ll c i rc um s t a nc e s . T he r ea r e c e r t a i n w e l l - de f i ne d a nd na r r ow l y l i m i t e d c l a s s e s o f s pe e c h , t hep r e v e n t i o n a n d p u n i s h m e n t o f w h i c h h a v e n e v e r b e e n t h o u g h t t o ra isea ny c ons t i t u t i ona l p r ob l e m . T he s e i nc l ude t he l e w d a nd obs c e ne , t hep r o f a ne , the l ibe l ous , a nd t he i n s u l t i ng o r " f i gh t i ng w o r ds " - t hos ew h i c h b y t h e i r v e r y u t t e r a n c e i n f l i c t i n j u r y o r t e n d t o i n c i t e a n i m -m e d i a te b r e a c h o f t h e p e a c e ' " [Chapl insky v . Ne w Ham pshire , 315 US568, a t 572, 1942] .

So t he N a z i - b l oc ke r c onc l ude s: "N o t p r o t e c t i ng ' f igh t i ng w o r ds ' ast ho ug h t he y w e r e no r m a l po l it i c al c on t r ove r s y is p l a i n goo d s e nse . I n ac o m m u n i t y w h e r e l iv e t h o u s a n d s o f su r v iv o r s o f N a z i d e a t h c a m p s , a na ggr es sive N a z i d e m on s t r a t i on i s s u r e l y s pe e ch w h i c h , b y i t s ve r y u t t e r -a nce , i n fl ic t s i n j u r y a nd t e nds t o i nc i t e a n i m m e d i a t e b r e a c h o f t hepeace".


11/17

Free Speech an d Po l i ti ca l Ex t remism 2 73B u t t h is a r g u m e n t s i m p l y d o e s n o t a p p l y t o t h e c a s e o f t h e p o l it ic a l

d e m o n s t r a t i o n h e r e b e i n g d is cu s se d .F ir st, t h e d o c t r i n e , th a t w o r d s m a y b e t r e a t e d a s e q u i v a l e n t t o t h ef i r s t b l o w s i n a f i g h t i s h i g h l y s u s p e c t , a n d i t i s a v i e w n o w a l m o s tc o m p l e te l y a b a n d o n e d i n t h e co u rts . W h a t w o r d s u n d e r w h a t c i r c u m -s t a n c e s m a y b e t r e a t e d s o m u s t f o r e v e r b e u n c e r t a i n a n d d i s p u t a b l e .W o r d s t h a t i n f u ri a te y o u m a y m e r e l y a m u s e m e . W o r d s c a n h u r t,s u re ly , - b u t t h e r e i s a g r e a t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n v e r b a l h u r t s a n dp h y s ic a l b l ow s . T h a t is w h y , h o n o r i n g f r e e d o m g e n e ra l ly , w e p l a c ef r e e d o m o f sp e e c h in t h e m o s t p r o t e c t e d o f a re na s. I f w o r d s t h a t s o m e -t i m e s p r o v o k e a fi g h t a r e p u n i s h e d b e c a u s e o f t h a t d a n g e r , t h e u n -c e r t a i n t y a b o u t which w o r d s m a y h a v e t h a t c o n s e q u e n c e m u s t c h i ll alld e b a t e , h e d g e a ll r o b u s t s p e a k i n g i n a v i g o r o u s c o n t e st . W o r d s a r e n o tl it e ra l bl o w s ; t h e m e t a p h o r m u s t n o t b e a l lo w e d to c o n f u s e ; t h e t h e o r yt h a t , i n a c i v il s o ci et y , n a s t y wo r d s m a y j u s t i f y p h y s i c a l r e t a l i a t i o n iss i m p l y n o t t e n a b l e.

B u t , s e c o n d , e v e n i f th e " f ig h t in g w o r d s " d o c t r i n e h a d s o m e a p p r o -p r i a t e a p p l i c a t i o n i n s o m e c o n t e x t s , i t w o u l d h a v e t o b e s o n a r r o w l yr e s t r i c t e d t o s p e c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s a s t o h a v e n o b e a r i n g o n a p r o p o s e dd e m o n s t r a t i o n b y a p o l i t i c a l s e c t o r p a r t y . I t c o u l d , a t b e s t , b e a p p l i e do n l y t o u t t e r a n c e s b y a s p e c if ic p e r s o n t o t h e f a ce o f a n o t h e r , b e i n gd e f a m a t o r y i n t h e e x t re m e . D e m o n s t r a t io n s b e f o re a g e n e r a l p u b l ic -b y t h e K K K , o r t h e B l a c k P a n th e r s , o r t h e a n t i- C o n t r a s , o r t h e p r o -C o n tr a s - a re n o t o n e - t o - o n e c o n fr o n ta t io n s h o w e v e r m a d d e n i n g w em a y t h i n k t h e i r p o in t .

T h i r d , t h e d o c t r i n e c o u l d a p p ly , i f e ve r, o n l y a f t e r t h o s e p e r s o n a li n s u lt s h a d b e e n h u r l e d , a n d a r e ta l ia t o r y b l o w s t ru c k - n e v e r as t h eg r o u n d f o r f o r b id d i n g a d e m o n s t r a t i o n i n a d v an c e.

A n d f in a ll y , i f t h e d o c t r i n e w e r e e v e r a pp l ic a b le , i t w o u l d c e r t a in l ybe re s t r i c t e d t o cases o f g rave, pe rso na l o f fense ; i t has no app l i ca t i onw h e r e t h e c a u s e o f a g i t a ti o n , h o w e v e r b i tt e r , is p o l it ic a l . T h i s " f i g h t i n gw o r d s " g a m b i t c a n n o t s u cc e ed .C h a p t e r 5. Obscen i t yF i n a l l y , t h e n , t h e N a z i - b l o c k e r m u s t a d m i t t h a t i t i s n o t r e a l l y h a r mt o s o m e p e r s o n s t h a t m o t i v a t e s h i m , o r d a n g e r t o a l l , o r i n c i t e m e n t


12/17

2 7 4 Carl Cohent o r i o t , o r f i g h t i n g w o r d s , o r a n y s u c h c o n c e r n . I t i s t h e p l a i n e v i lo f t h o se N a z i v ie w s - t h e r ac i s m a n d a n t i - s e m i t i s m a n d g e n e r a l s t u -p i d i t y a n d b i g o t r y - t h a t h e th i n k s d e s e rv e s t o b e s i le n c e d . W h e n a llt h e o t h e r a r g u m e n t s h a v e f a i l e d h e c o m e s i n t h e e n d t o q u e s t i o n t h ep r i n c i p l e o f f r e e s p e e c h i ts e lf , as k in g , i n e f fe c t, w h e t h e r t h a t p r i n c i p l er e a l ly d oe s o b l i g e u s to p r o t e c t a l l c o n t e n t , h o w e v e r d a m n a b l e . T h i s ish is las t resor t .

" S o m e s p e e c h c o n t e n t [ h e a r g u e s a t l a s t ] - s p e e c h u t t e r ly w i t h o u tr e d e e m i n g s o ci al v a l u e - is n o t a n d o u g h t n o t b e p r o t e c t e d b y t h e F i rs tA m e n d m e n t . O b s c e n i ty , o f c ou r se , is n o r m a l l y a s s o c ia te d w i t h s e x ua ll ye x p l i c i t m a t t e r . B u t i ts e s s e n t i al , n o n s e x u a l c h a r a c t e r is t i c s a r e t w o : a ) i ti s i n t o l e r a b l y o f f e n s i v e i n s o m e s e t ti n g s ; a n d b ) i t is t o t a l l y w o r t h l e s s .W h a t e v e r m a y b e p e r m i t t e d b e h i n d c l o s e d d o o r s , t h e r e a r e s o m ef o r m s o f l a n g u a g e , a n d p i c t u r e s , a n d a c ts - p e r v e r t e d b e h a v i o rs , s e x u a li n t e r c o u r s e - t h a t a re n o t p e r m i t t e d i n p u b l i c p la c es . T h a t p r o h i b i t i o nis b a s e d o n t h e r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t t h r u s t i n g s p e c if ic c o n t e n t o f t h a t k i n du p o n a n u n w i l l i n g a u d i e n c e i n a p u b l i c p l a c e is 'a g ro s s i m p o s i t i o n , a n da c a u s e o f o f f e n s e a g a i n s t w h i c h t h a t a u d i e n c e , a n d a l l o f u s , h a v e ar i g h t t o b e p r o te c t e d . S u c h o b s c e n e m a t t e r d o e s n o t c o n t r i b u t e i n a n yw a y t o t h e p u b l i c f o r u m . I t is b a r r e n o f id e a s, a n d n o t a t a ll t h e k i n d o fs t u f f - o p i n io n , a r g u m e n t , i n f o rm a t i o n - t h a t t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t h a si ns is te d m u s t b e p r o t e c t e d b y o u r C o n s t i t u ti o n .

" S o m e p o l i ti c a l g a r b a g e - l i k e t h a t o f t h e N a z i s a n d t h e K K K ,a l t h o u g h n o t i n t h e s a m e w a y c a r n a l , is j u s t l i k e th a t . C i t iz e n s o f ad e c e n t c o m m u n i t y h a v e a r ig h t t o b e s h i e l d e d f r o m i t i n p r e c is e ly t h a ts p i ri t. I n d e e d , l a s c i v io u s a c ts o r p i c t u r e s a r e o f f e n s iv e , b u t n o t n e a r l y a so f f e n s i v e a s s o m e i r r a t i o n a l r a c i s m , o r a n t i - s e m i t i s m . S o w e c o n t e n d[ th e N a z i - b l o c k e r c o n t i n u e s ] t h a t i n a w i d e b u t a c c u r a t e s e n se o f t h et e r m , h a t e - m o n g e r i n g l ik e t h a t o f th e N a z i s is o b s c e n e . A s t h a t c a t e -g o r y is u s e d n o w i n t h e l aw , t h e t e r m m i g h t n o t a p p ly . B u t i t is st il l n o ta n u n r e a s o n a b l e s t r e t c h o f l a n g u a g e , o r o f c o n c e p t , t o p r o h i b i t N a z is p e e c h o n t h e s a m e f u n d a m e n t a l g r o u n d s " .

A n d t h a t i s w h a t i t c o m e s t o , t h a t i s w h a t a l l c e n s o r s h i p c o m e s t o , i nt h e e n d : s o m e c o n t e n t i s t h o u g h t s o v e r y b a d t h a t i t m u s t n o t b e h e a r do r s e e n . I c a ll th i s a r g u m e n t " t h e o u t r a g e o v e r ri d e " . W i t h t h is w e g e t t ot h e r o o t of" t h e c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n t h e b l o c k e r a n d t h e c i v il l i b e rt a r ia n .


13/17

Free Speech an d Po l i ti ca l Ex t remism 27 5T h e b l o c k e r b el ie v es in h i s h e a r t t h a t s o m e t h in g s m a y b e s u p p r e ss e db e c a u s e t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e v i e w s e x p r e s s ed a r e s i m p l y i n t o l e r a b le ," b e y o n d t h e p a l e " . T h e l i b e r t a r i a n b e l i e v e s i n h i s h e a r t t h a t g i v i n g t oa n y t h e p o w e r t o s il e n ce w h a t t h e y d o n o t t h i n k i t w o r t h y t o h e a r ism o r e i n t o l e r a b l e s till. T h a t i s w h y N a z i s a n d o t h e r r a ci st s p r o v i d e ag o o d i ll u s tr a ti v e c as e. T h e i r v i e w s a r e t h o u g h t m a n i f e s t l y w o r t h l e s s ,a n d t h a t i s n o t i n d is p u t e - b u t t h e y a re la d e n w i t h i de a s. O f c o u r s es o m e o f t h o s e i d e as a r e d e s p ic a b l e , b u t s o m e t i m e s .j us t f o r t h a t r e a s o nt h e y a r e m e a n i n g f u l . N o s e g m e n t o f s o ci et y , I a r g u e , is e n t i tl e d t od e c i d e f o r t h e r e s t o f u s t h a t s o m e i d e as a re s o la c k i n g i n w o r t h y c o n -t e n t t h a t w e w i l l h a v e n o o p p o r t u n i t y t o e v a lu a t e t h e m f o r o u rs e lv e s.

E v e n w h e r e t h e m a t t e r i n q u e s t io n h a s n o p o l it ic a l c o n t e n t , a n d iss e x u a l ly e x p l ic i t, a n d is k n o w n t o g i v e o f f e n s e to s o m e , w e p r o t e c t t h ef r e e d o m o f o th e r s t o s ee o r h e a r i t b y o b l i g i n g th o s e w h o a r e o f f e n d e dt o s h i e l d t h e m s e l v e s b y t u r n i n g i t o ff , o r t u r n i n g a w a y , o r w a l k i n ga w a y. T h a t w a s t h e v e r y i ss u e fa c e d b y t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t o f t h eU n i t e d S t a te s i n a n o t h e r c a s e - a F l o r i d a c as e, i n f a c t [Erznozn ick v .C i t y o f acksonv il Ie , 4 2 2 U S 2 0 5 a t 20 7 , 1 97 5]. T h e o b j e c t i o n a b l e m a t t e ri n q u e s t i o n a p p e a r e d o n a d r i v e - i n m o v i e s c r e e n , s h o w i n g X - r a t e df il m s , a n d v i e w a b l e f r o m a ro a d i n t h e d i s ta n c e . B u t w h e n i t is p o s s ib l ef o r a v i e w e r o r h e a r e r t o t u r n a w a y , s a id t h e C o u r t , h i s b e i n g o f f e n d e dw h e n h e d o e s n o t d o s o w i l l n o t s er ve to c a n c e l th e r i g h t s o f o t h e rs t os p e a k , o r t o l i s t e n o r t o w a t c h .

J u s t ic e P o w e l l, r e c e n t l y r e t ir e d f r o m t h e C o u r t , w r o t e t h e m a j o r i t yo p i n i o n i n Erznozn ick , s a yi ng , in p a rt:. " W h e n t h e g o v e r n m e n t , a c t i n ga s c e n s o r , u n d e r t a k e s s e l ec t iv e l y t o s h i e l d t h e p u b l i c f r o m s o m e k i n d so f s p ee c h o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t t h e y a r e m o r e o f fe n s iv e t h a n o t he r s, t h eF i r s t A m e n d m e n t s t r i c t l y l i m i t s i t s p o w e r . . . . [ R ] e s t r i c t i o n s h a v e b e e nu p h e l d o n l y w h e n t h e s p e ak e r in t ru d e s u p o n t h e p r i v ac y o f t h eh o m e . .. o r t h e d e g r e e o f c a p ti v it y [ o f t h e a u d i e n c e ] m a k e s i t i m -p r a c t ic a l f o r t h e u n w i l l i n g v i e w e r o r a u d i t o r t o a v o id e x p o s u r e "(p. 209).

A n d s o m e t i m e s t h e g a r b a g e i s i n e x t r i c a b l y m i x e d w i t h o t h e r s t u f ft h a t d e s e r ve s a h e a r i n g . I n y e t a n o t h e r c a se , i n w h i c h a y o u n g m a n i n ac o u r t h o u s e w e a r i n g a j a c k e t w i t h w o r d s o n i t [ "F u c k t h e d r af t" ] t h a t If i n d u n c o m f o r t a b l e t o r e p e a t i n p u b l i c , b u t w o r d s h a v i n g a p o l i t i c a l


14/17

276 Carl Cohenmessage too, was ar res ted for obscene display, the Supreme Cour tv indica ted h im in the end:Th e ability o f Government, consonant with the Constitution, to shut of f discoursesolely to protect others from hearing it is... dependent upon a showing that sub-stantial privacy interests are being invaded in an essentially intolerable manner. An ybroader view of this authority would effectively emp ower a majority to silence dis-sidents simply as a matter of personal predilections [Cohenv. California403 US 15,at 21; 1971].

So we have to ask: is the extreme poli t ical speech in question (say,the N azi garbage) an invas ion of the pr ivacy of the ci t izens? General lyi t is not. A Nazi ma rch d ow n Col l ins Aven ue - or one by the anti -Con tras o n Biscayne Blvd. - wo uld surely no t be. St reets and parks arethe common and proper p laces for for pol i t i ca l as sembly . To somedegree we cannot avoid encounter ing what happens in such p laces -but w e do not have to s tay, and we cann ot exp ect to be insula ted b y l awfrom al l that we f ind intensely object ionable.

Jus t ice Powel l [ in Erznoznick] cont inues :The plain, if at time disquieting truth is that in our pluralistic society, constandyproliferating new and ingenious forms of expression, "we are inescapably captiveaudiences for many purposes." ... Much that we encoun ter offends our aesthetic, ifnot our political and moral sensibilities. Nevertheless, the Constitution does notpermit government to decide which types of otherwise protected speech are suf-ficiently offensive to require protection for the unwilling listener or viewer. Rather,absent the narrow circumstances described above [in which exposure is entirely im-possible to avoid] the b urde n normally falls upon the viewer to 'avoid furth erbombardment o f his sensibilities simply by averting his eyes' [422 US 210.] .... Thelimited privacy interests o f persons on the public streets cannot jus tify .., censorshipof otherwise protected speech on the basis of its content."Wel l , [comes the las t t ry f rom the Nazi-blocker] i s this Nazigarbage 'o therwise pro tec ted speech '? Have we not agreed tha t i t i sut ter ly wor thless , and offens ive, and is i t therefore not l ike hard-coreobsceni ty, une nt i t le d to protect ion? I f so, we are jus t i f ied in pro hibi t -ing it".

Bu t i t is not , no t at all . Th e r ight o f the publ ic to see and hear Nazis ,or Communis t s , or Cont ras , or an t i -Cont ras , or any pol i t i ca l v iew,however ext reme, i s at leas t as compel l ing as the r ight to read r isque


15/17

Free Speech and Political Extremism 277literature o r look at bare breasts an d buttocks on the screen. Even withrespect to pornography , sim ply because some materials lack redeem ingsocial value - wh atev er that is - does no t .justify proh ibition . Formaterial having any political content whatever, that argument couldno t possibly apply, and cou ld n ot possibly be applied fairly.Chapter 6. ConclusionWhat then shall we conclude about poli t ical extremism and freespeech? Are th ere any restrictions, of any kind, that ma y be applied tosuch speaking? Of course there are! The speaking that is bridled withcriminal acts does become part of those later deeds. And, apart fromcriminality, there are reasonable restrictions that may be enforcedupon the manner of speaking, and the place of it, and the time of it. W emay permit rallies in the parks, and yet reserve some quiet arboretumas a place where no political demonstrations may be held. We mayrespect political demon strations o n dow nt ow n streets - and yet holdthat, during the rush hours, political demonstrations will create moreinconvenience than is tolerable. Or we may, as a community, protectresidential streets from noisy demonstrations. The places may berestricted, the times may be restricted - and the man ne r too, elim inat-ing, say, all electronic mega phon es and super-noisy amplification. Wemay, wi th in the rules, imp ose such regulations - but, and this is thekey, we may not do so selectively. The restr ic tion of ma nne r o r place thatapplies to one v iew applies to all. It may b e unla wfu l to post stickers onpub lic walls - bu t t hat applies to all stickers, not just those of the un -favored minority. And what we permit for the politics in wide favor -say, a marc h o n Main Street -- we mu st p erm it for the nastiest of theunfavored. By content we must, in a free society, make no exceptions.Fr ee do m is no t m ere ly for those we c an tolerate; it is for all.

Finally, then, please note: Robust, wide open political debate, un-inh ibite d political debate, in parks and streets and lect ure halls, is goingto rouse anger, and give offense. Some public offensiveness, and someprivate distress, will be an inevitable cost of freedom. T hat is wh at afree, democratic society requires. It is not simply the kooks whom weprotect, but ourselves. Citizens wh o wo uld g overn themselves - we -


16/17

278 Carl Cohenhave the righ t to hear every op ini on on ou r public business. Th e Nazisma y be crazy, or vicious, bu t that does no t cancel our ne ed to passjud gm ent upo n them; therefore the oppor tunity to hear them must beprotected, partly in the ir interest, bu t m ain ly in ours.

And we cannot make exceptions for the specially nasty bits. Somesay: "OK then, let the m speak - but not wi th their infernal Swastika!"But if the Swastika is too offensive for some to tolerate today, the Starof David will be claimed equally intolerable by others tom orrow.

So, I say, the Nazis have the same rig ht to sing the "H ort WesselLied~, that others have to sing the "Internationale", and still othe rs ~WeShall Overcom e". To the claim th at som e stuff is jus t too nasty toperm it, I answer: n o deg ree of nastiness can justify silencing speech in afree society.

Even on Miami Beach for the Nazis? And even in Miami for theanti-Contras? Yes, the effectiveness of political protest often dependscritically upo n the symbolic use of location. W h e n the Nazis plannedto demonstrate in Skokie ten years ago, whatever we may think ofthem , tha t location, being hea vily Jewish, was p art of thei r point. Civilrights demonstrators, as part of their point often carried their moralconv ictions, very offensive to the segregationist ma jority, to t he h ear tof Ji m Cr ow cou ntry -- to Selma, Alabama, and P hiladelphia, Missis-sippi. Blacks who demonstrate for fair housing opportunities often doso in the heart of middle-class suburban com munities that would ex-clude them. T he Nazis carry signs reading "W hit e Power". If we do notpermit the m to do that in black neighborhoods, how can we justifyBlack Panthers carrying signs saying "Black Power" in w hite ne igh bor -hoods?But the civil rights marchers carried a message of human equalityand decency; the swastika is the symbo l of unsp eakable indecency. Yes.But that jud gm en t of contents cannot be m ade antecedently, and canhave no bearing u pon the right to speak publicly. O ur best hop e thatsound ju dg m en t will be passed up on nasty political views lies in thefreedo m of all to hear th em, and the free dom o f all to speak and writein reply.

I conclude: We learn from the extreme case. Th e Nazis, by present-ing a case about as extreme as any we can conjure up, p rovide us wit h


17/17

Free Speech an d Pol i tical Ex tremism 2 7 9a n i n s t ru c t i v e t es t o f o u r o w n p r i n c ip l e s. T h e s e a r e p o w e r f u l p r in c i p le s ,a n d s o u n d o n e s ; t h e y a r e a t r i b u t e t o o u r o w n c i v il it y, a n d - i f I m a yb e p e r m i t t e d t o e n d o n a s l i g h t ly c o r n y n o t e - o n e o f t h e m o s t d e e p l ys a t is fy in g m a r k s o f o u r o w n n a t io n a l c u l tu r e , o f w h i c h I a m v e r yp r o u d .Dept . o f Philosophy,Univers ity o f M ichigan,An n Arbor , M I 48109,U.S.A.

Carl Cohen - Free Speech and Political Extremism- How Nasty Are We Free to Be

Documents

Transcript of Carl Cohen - Free Speech and Political Extremism- How Nasty Are We Free to Be