Why not just say - freedom of speech is bad, so it can be canceled?

The still world-famous director Alvis Hermanis published on social networks seven rules of ethical conduct for New Riga Theater (JRT) employees and viewers. It is not in vain that I specified in the previous sentence - still famous. Hermanis' seven theses stapled at the door of the theater are unforgivably heretical for today's inquisitors, so there is no doubt that he will sooner or later be subjected to the infamous "cancel culture".

I didn't have to wait long. In the morning Hermanis presented his theses to the city and the world, in the afternoon another director - not yet famous - Alise Zariņa in the best traditions of the Archbishop of Mainz, sent a message to the modern Rome and the KGB headquarter equivalent in one - social sites, where she published her counterthesis. First, she posted the concentrated version of her objections on Twitter but later posted a detailed explanation on Facebook.

I firmly believe that there is always only one reason, the others are just pretexts. In the present case, this means that the main thesis is one and the others are only derivatives. So the main thing Hermanis wanted to say is concentrated in the very first sentence: "Freedom of speech is allowed in our theater without any restrictions." Alise Zariņa answered it equally concisely on Twitter: "There is no hate speech, there are only sensitive people."

Then we will stick to this opposition.

One is in favor of unrestricted freedom of speech, while the other is in favor of these restrictions, or censorship, using the euphemism - hate speech.

I would like to point out at once that the issue is ambiguous, even from the point of view of ideal democracy and human rights, because freedom of expression, like medicine, can be either healthy or poisonous. It all depends on the dose. In addition, the desired dose can vary greatly from audience to audience. For example, there are some restrictions in children's programs, but quite different ones in theaters, literature and other creative platforms.

Problems arise when places that have been incubators of creative thought for centuries - theaters and universities - fall into the clutches of strict ideological censorship, which turns this flight of free thought into a kind of chicken flight - only up to the top of the backyard pole. But no higher. This is exactly what Hermanis is opposed to. He clearly indicates the place to which the specific rules apply - "in our theater". He does not call for pornography or retransmission of Solovyov's war propaganda on public television. We do not know what he might think about that, but he does not talk about it in his "rules". He only talks about JRT. As Aigars Freimanis comments: The first announced freedom of speech island in Latvia.

Zariņa does not see this specific space. She speaks in general. Neither on Twitter nor on Facebook does she talk specifically about the environment of the particular theater. She speaks as if Hermanis had set the conditions for the whole public space. "There is no hate speech, there are only sensitive people." In other words, hate speech must be banned everywhere and in all its manifestations. Let us ignore the question - what is "hate speech" and who will identify and forbid it.

Another question comes to the fore: why use this hypocritical euphemism of "hate speech", if it can be said clearly and unequivocally - that freedom of speech is bad and restrictive, because what will happen if everyone can say what they want? Then all sorts of backwards reprobates will dare to publish what does not correspond to the "general line". To prevent this, censorship must be introduced. Censorship based on both state structures (public media, project money distributors) and public oversight of moral purity, which will immediately sound the alarm if someone speaks publicly in the wrong way.

One may ask, where did these people come from, who believe that censorship, whatever they choose to call it, is a good and commendable thing, but that freedom of speech is, in its deepest essence, bad and requiring restriction? How has it happened that freedom of speech, which has been fought for by the brightest minds of mankind for hundreds of years, has suddenly become redundant and unnecessary for the "progressive" society? I assume that this is because the young opinion leaders have grown up in a situation where there has been no need to fight for freedom of expression; they have not suffered from its lack, and it has always been taken for granted. Consequently, as a matter of course, its value is known only when it suddenly disappears.

On Facebook Zariņa published an extensive counterarticle (later republished in Delfi), which has little to do with Hermanis' text. Hermanis begins: "Freedom of speech is allowed in our theater without any restrictions." To this well-defined condition, Zariņa explains to Hermanis, as a teacher to a first-grader, what freedom of speech is: “Freedom of speech does not mean that you cannot be criticized for your statements, and even less freedom of speech means that you can throw manure on others and hope that thus you will earn respect, admiration, flowers and tears of appreciation.”

Does Hermanis forbid Zariņa or anyone else to criticize him? Does he then hope to earn "respect, admiration, flowers and tears of appreciation" by "throwing manure on others"? What one hopes to earn is not even touched in this thesis of Hermanis. It follows from Zariņa's text that "flowers and tears of appreciation" is the main reason why people engage in art. Hermanis is talking about something else. He speaks of the desire to feel free and relaxed in the theater, but if someone is so sensitive that they cannot accept it, he recommends that such people avoid going to the theater (in the explanatory part of the third rule). Some of the most ideologically evolved people have already confirmed this recommendation of Hermanis.

Kristīne Pitkeviča, a doctor popular on Twitter (working in Germany): Ok, I won't have to stand in line for tickets. One less problem in life.

Nikolass Andre: I would like to see when "his" theater will glorify Stalin/repression, the Holocaust or 9/11 terrorists, etc. on the stage. And what will all those "defenders" of absolute freedom of speech say... I would like to see him run to defend those who will openly criticize hatred of others from the theater.

This tweet shows how the accents are shifted and the focus is changed. I will answer the question "what will all those "defenders" of absolute freedom of speech say..." quite simply: "if Hermanis will glorify Stalin/repression, the Holocaust or 9/11 terrorists, etc. on the stage", then people will say about him - yes, the once-famous director has finally gone off the deep end - and instead of standing in line for tickets to his theater, they will give them away for free.

Another method of demagoguery is used by Didzis Veinbergs, who repeats the method favored by Russian propagandists - yes, we are pieces of shit and we do not deny it, but everyone is like that. However, our opponents are no better: “I understand that the progressives cancel, silence and cut people down, that is clear and definitely has a grain of truth. Just don't start thinking that conservatives will be the ones that will ensure diversity of opinion. No, they will only provide their opinions, they are just as good at cutting people down for having different ones.”

The popular ideological "fights" that have gained popularity recently are characterized by the fact that facts and logic play almost no role in them, but the decisive factor is belonging to a certain ideological camp. From the point of view of each camp, something different is seen. Dace Dzērve: I read the Hermanis Manifesto. And again, just now. I still didn't understand where there was homophobia, racism, misogyny and all that Ms. Zariņa accuses him of. Maybe I'm just slow.

No, Ms. Dzērve! You're not slow, you just haven't reached the point where the ability to see the devilish Trotsky profile on the matchbox label suddenly appears. You must look carefully at how Ms. Zariņa, who is talented in this respect, does this. And report where appropriate.

*****

Be the first to read interesting news from Latvia and the world by joining our Telegram and Signal channels.