“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
― George Washington

Since my return to my hometown over seven years ago, I have noted the alarming practice in Whitehall that some take in squelching citizen/voter dissent when expressed over their elected officials. I’m talking about when I (as well others too) have spoken aloud against an elected official, with merit, logic and reason, I/we have been shouted down merely for having done so, as if we have no right. After the many objections I’ve lodged and arguments I’ve made, in detail may I add, rarely is the crux of the argument I’ve offered discussed, disseminated or argued in return or given the respect due it in the spirit of argument it was extended in the first place. Instead I am only taken to task for the outrageous audacity of having raised my voice against an elected official in the first place. This is disturbing and patently UN-American. In lieu of any verbal sparring or well-made counterpoints, these are some of the things I’ve heard, and I quote,

• ‘Leave the Mayor alone!!!’

• “PAINT YOUR HOUSE!”

• “You are someone who has had an unsuccessful life at acting like he can act”.

• “Take your stupid big words and go jump in a lake”.

• “BE GONE WITH YOU!”

(sighing) How are we ever to solve real problems and get to fully developed solutions if we never discuss them in the first place (or allow those not in power to participate in those discussions)?

The great Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis said, “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”

One may have their favorites within government but it mustn’t be to such a servile devotion as to shout down, in such an UN-American way, those with opposing views. If criticism is warranted in our shared government and is presented in an educated, detailed manner, then that criticism deserves adult responses (particularly in a country built on the free-flow of ideas) that are in-kind, not simple, baseless, juvenile taunting, or, demands for silence; those which debase the process and put down articulate, educated argument, that which is needed to move forward. It truly is anti-Whitehall; to suppress that or any thoughts, concerns or criticisms which may have an ability to help our community, merely done so because they don’t align with their own notions or serve-serving desires. It is shameful.

What I believe are the underlying motivations for these non-replies to mine and others concerns, is a harmful manipulation to marginalize opponents in the public’s eye, stifling criticism of those in power so the benefits their power bring them can go on without end. This tack has a subversive and deeply disturbing second benefit as well; sending a chilling effect to critics of Whitehall governance, thus, oppressing freedom of speech. The benefits those in the status quo hold onto with this method are; hiring friends over more competent outsiders (which keeps and strengthens their power), ignoring legislation as it benefits themselves (which includes ignoring, breaking or skirting the law itself), keeping an iron grip on the rudder of the ship of state to steer their ends to the light of day (over those of the citizens) and enabling themselves to work outside the parameters of fairness, ethics and decency without investigative critics like myself and others putting a possible stop to the gravy train power trip they enjoy. Its really that simple.

Another great Supreme Court Justice, William O. Douglas said, “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one UN-American act that could most easily defeat us.”

When anyone uses their voice to express concern or opinion, they express those feelings and, in terms of alarm or concern, have not only an obligation and a duty as an American citizen to do so but have an iron-clad right to, as it is enshrined in our Bill of Rights. So, when a viewpoint is given which may run counter to that of some or many in the community, they are likely to encounter resistance, that which they may expect. However, in an adult society, making legitimate remarks must be countered with a modicum of respect for that person’s right to make those remarks. One certainly has their counter-right, with their own opinions, to make their argument for or against the other’s case but, with respect to the processes of fairness and free speech, to do so without reverting to base, callous and juvenile remarks which both taint and debase the process. Healthy communication, public or private, warrants this and helps our society move forward in a positive and rewarding fashion. When one person communicates how they feel and is shouted down by 20 people with base, juvenile taunting and without respectful dialouge, it causes the person to flee their perspective out of peer pressure and end their communication. Discourse is now closed. Unfortunately too then, are the advancements and riches we all might’ve benefited from in seeing communication come to its rightful conclusions and understandings, those that respectful discourse would have revealed. In that, we have all lost. For in the search for what is best, particularly for the true health and vitality of our country and community’s well-being (which is our well being) we must be dedicated, with steadfast courage, to hear things out to the end and not squelch or supress that which might make us squirm. To never allow the free flow of ideas to be trumped by selfish personal gain. Those ideas which may have revealed a higher truth and good for our shared well being. Given this then, it is a disservice and an injustice to Whitehall to disallow the flow of the river of truth to go where it must. Truth is what leads us to the ultimate place we are supposed to be (however difficult that may be) as God wishes it to be, not, ourselves. In this, ‘right’ and truth are never subject to democratic or mob rule. If right is discovered and held aloft by only one man in a million, that does not make it any less right.

So, if we are to ever restore the flow of the truth to Whitehall, that which will actually see it to its better, healthy and rightful place, this subversive tact used by either friends of those in power or, with anonymity, by those actually in power, must end. That will be done with resistance by diligent citizens fighting back when they see this dangerous tool being wielded. One must not allow the shouting mob to rule, one must identify it and call out this treacherous manipulation when they witness its use in public discourse, wherever it may be. Dedication to truth is paramount. In that will be the ethical, honest salvation of Whitehall itself, lest we allow it to fall completely to the likes of these indecent, truly, anti-Whitehall sorts. That end must not stand.

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”- (Special Message to the Congress on the Internal Security of the United States, August 8, 1950) ― Harry S. Truman “