Freedom of Speech in China and in the US

This blog was born in the reaction to a long email that I sent to several dozen friends October 11, 2010.  Many of the recipients suggested that I try to get that note published on the op-ed pages of a major newspaper.  Those that are more familiar with the newspaper business suggested a blog.

The original note pointed out that in late 2008 a group of Chinese intellectuals and political activists signed and released Charter 08—a stirring but moderate call for political reform in China.  One of the principal authors of that charter is Liu Xiaobo who is now serving an 11 year sentence in a Chinese prison for role in the call for reform.  Three days earlier (8 Oct 2010), Liu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2010 for “his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.”

I noted that despite the renewed attention to suppression of freedom of speech in China, some of my Asian friends (including some who are US citizens) were asking tough questions such as:

•          No, China does not have free speech, but in the US much of the political talk is lies and the most popular media outlets are dedicated to the lie.  So what is the difference?
•          No, China does not have elections, but the government gets lots of good things done.  In the US a presidential candidate is elected with a mandate for change and his party controls both houses of Congress, yet hardly anything is accomplished.  Obscure Senate rules allow a minority of lawmakers whose party was repudiated in the last election to block legislation that voters favored.  So, which is the better system?  (Note that here I am reporting what others have said rather than what I believe.)

I commented that viewed from half a world away Americans’ abuse of their freedom of speech is shameful.  Brazen lies spew from politicians (of both parties), from media, from lobbyists and from mysterious special interest groups that are often bankrolled by billionaires and multinational corporations which hide their identity.  Of course, the lie has been a major tool of politicians and humans in general since we learned to speak.  But I cannot remember a time when public discourse in America has been so dominated by intentional falsehoods.

Americans need to understand that habitual disregard for the truth in public discourse undermines their freedom of speech as surely as incarceration of political reformers in China.  I expect Americans to listen and read skeptically and critically and, when they detect regular deceit and prejudice to call out the offenses and to revoke the “licenses” of those offenders to come into their homes by canceling subscriptions, changing the channel and/or switching their vote.

I also expect the citizenry to understand that their liberties are vulnerable not only from Big Government which can use it powers to coerce and confiscate, but also

•          from Big Business which spends hundreds of millions of dollars funding propaganda wars to protect its subsidies and tax loopholes, to defeat regulations enforcing safe workplaces and consumer rights and to discredit environmental measures to protect our air, water and climate, and
•          from Big Bigots who use modern media to extend their reach and disguise their agendas of prejudice behind disingenuous flag waving and constitution-hugging.

I expect ethical politicians (if any remain) to lead the campaign for probity not only by courageously speaking the whole truth to the public but also by publically condemning and shaming the enemies of freedom who chronically ignore the truth and pursue their political goals with lies.  This courage will likely mean ignoring advice of political consultants who advise caution and say that going on the attack for truth may cost votes.  So be it if that is the price of freedom.

____________________________________________________________________

The following day I received this reply from a graduate school classmate who asked:

Do you have any thoughts about how to change or influence the terribly dangerous and damaging situation in the U.S. you so accurately describe?

Here is what I replied:

I haven't figured out what should be done but here are some ideas:

• reinstate the McCain-Feingold rules that the Supreme Court gutted in January.  Do this in a way that prevents the court from meddling again.  I understand this can be accomplished by means short of constitutional amendment.
• enact transparency laws that require the disclosure of the ultimate source of funding for advocacy initiatives and policy research.
• change the work rules for the Congressional Budget Office so that they can comment more freely on the financial/economic repercussions of proposed legislation.  Currently they are restricted to commenting narrowly on these impacts and only within the time frame covered by the proposed laws.

Another friend suggested that I should have added that the CBO should use dynamic models rather than static ones.