home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!torn!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!UCCVMA.BITNET!SPGDAM
- Message-ID: <921223.072728.PDT.SPGDAM@UCCVMA>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 07:27:28 PDT
- Sender: Discussions on all forms of Music <ALLMUSIC@AUVM.BITNET>
- From: David Malbuff <SPGDAM@UCCVMA.BITNET>
- Subject: Re: piss metal
- In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 22 Dec 1992 17:01:20 EST
- Lines: 24
-
- On Tue, 22 Dec 1992 17:01:20 EST Tim said:
- >
- >David (it was david, wasn't it?) seemed to confuse this with
- >censorship. If I protest or picket or launch into a tirade
- >over Danzig, that isn't censorship. If I gather up the LPs
- >and burn them, that isn't censorship. If I ask the govt. to
- >do that, it is.
- >
-
- No, my mention of censorship (viz. Helms) was parenthetical. I shouldn't even
- have used the word. It had nothing to do with what I was talking about.
-
- What I meant to say (and obviously did a poor job of saying) was that it is
- hypocritical to stand up and piously invoke the First Amendment in defense
- of art that you like, but not to do the same for art that you dislike. And
- it was (and is) my contention that many of our most vocal public critics of
- Helms et. al. are selective in what they will defend. Ergo, they are
- hypocrites (excepting the ACLU, as Russ mentioned; they will defend
- almost anybody). It's not a question of "like" or "dislike"; it's the
- degree of self-righteousness inherent in many of those who set themselves
- up as defenders of "free speech".
-
-
- David
-