Remembering First To Listen

Jessica Suguitan

English 215

RD4

Remembering First To Listen

The first amendment of the Constitution ensures a person’s right to believe what they want, say what they want, print what they want, and peaceably organize a people however seen fit, and if a person disagrees with what their government is doing the first amendment ensures the right to use all of the previously stated first amendment rights to petition the government for a change.  [THESIS] I believe the founders of our nation knew that the ability, the freedom, and the methods to discuss beliefs with one another would be the backbone of creating a nation that could, would, and should be supported by the people.  Regardless of how strongly ignorant, hateful, or subversive a statement may be, a person should have the right to express it, because there the only way to have a functioning democracy is if the voices of the people can be heard in it. [THESIS}

We have all been there.  A friend, a coworker, a family member says something so completely against what you believe that it is difficult for you to take the statement seriously.  If you are a civilized human being you will hear them out and ask them questions to ensure that both of you understand what they are saying.  If you are an uncivilized person you start calling them names at the top of your lungs.

The very concept that a person’s ideas, reasons, and beliefs should be heard instead of ignored was born from the same movement that gave birth to America, the Enlightenment.  The Enlightenment’s major contribution to humanity was the philosophy that to find truth one must constantly ask what the truth is, testing their reality in experiments and observations, creating data to be logged and compared. In essence the Enlightenment focused on developing a record that could be pointed to when further explanation was deemed necessary.   America, with great respect for the importance and necessity for reason incorporated the beliefs of the Enlightenment into the very DNA of our nation, the Constitution. 

I currently live in New York City.  Politically, I am a very liberal person.  I support the Occupy Wall Street movement.  I feel strongly about it. I have participated in protests.  Though the movement claims to represent the 99%, a great majority of people, at least where the movement is based in New York City, do not support them.  I found myself recently getting into an argument with one of my coworkers about the movement’s right to protest.  Not only did the first amendment allow the 99% movement to happen, it allowed me to voice my opinion about the movement to my coworker and then in a more public way within the movement.  Participating in the protests allowed me to speak with people more heavily involved as well giving me first hand knowledge of how the movement behaved, in essence what it was really about.  I was able to share this experience with my coworker and by both listening to what he believed and sharing what I believed we were able to understand what the movement was about a little more.  This search for truth, understanding, and compromise (what I like to call reality) within our country is possible because of the first amendment. 

It is integral that we are allowed to speak and hear all the sides of the story, all of the opinions within the masses.  When as a nation and society are constantly calling into question the necessity of this right when we hear a belief that we find offensive.  It is upsetting to discover that a person or persons’ opinions are so far from your own and even more upsetting if that opinion becomes more popular than your own and begins to rule your world, which is the fear.  This is the case with Professor Ward Churchill who scandalously referred to the victims in the WTC 9/11 attacks as “Little Eichmanns” comparing those who worked in the financial trade end of America with Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi officer responsible for organizing much of the ghettoizing and death camp placing of those of Jewish ancestry during 1930’s and 1940s Europe (starting in Germany).  Churchill’s comparison is based on available knowledge that many of the largest corporations, who most stock traders and analysts work for, have their hands in war in some way or another.  All one need to do to discover this is type “war profiteering in America” in a search engine.    

My classmate Michael Siabatta claims that “we should be thankful and treat it with the profound respect that it so rightly deserves.” in regards to hate speech against deceased gay soldiers and the Ward Churchill.  But I firmly believe that a society’s search for what is true and right is a constant process of progress.  It cannot happen unless all voices are heard and addressed.  These people should not keep quiet and let their beliefs fester silently.  A person should be heard and spoken to. The protestors raise a point of view that is still held in America.  Though this point of view is hateful it is one that must be discussed to be understood and overcome.  Censorship will not get us to a place of understanding. Let us not forget that pro homosexual protesting was once considered hateful towards our country, in that it promoted a subversive lifestyle.  A belief will eventually die out if it is not helpful towards humanity. 

My classmate Max Babylon understands the reason behind free speech in the following statement he sums the need for the first amendment in regards to Ward Churchill: “If he can't say what he wants, then other prominent figures of today could not voice their opinions on other issues.”  It is quite simple, it is unfair to grant free speech to one individual and not another.  The first amendment ensures that this simple, yet profound rule is upheld in America’s judicial system. 

It is impossible to designate in a court of law a speech as illegal.  To do so would create a grievous slide toward censorship.  To avoid this we must become a civilized society and be willing to listen to one another, try to understand one another, and hopefully accept one another.  Though this acceptance is difficult to do when one party wishes hate and harm upon another, communication is still the only way to begin to overcome such a travesty of humanity. 

Bibliography

Babylon, Max. "Defend Ward Churchill." 23 11 2011. Laulima English 215. 27 11 2011 <https:/https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201210laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201210/page/70638c63-3d48-4275-828a-7e37acace01e>.

Brians, Paul. "The Enlightenment." 18 May 2000. The Enlightenment. 28 11 2011 <http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/enlightenment.html>.

Churchill, Ward. "[Globalization] "Some People Push Back" On the Justice of Roosting Chickens ." 11 09 2001. 28 11 2011 <http://www2.hawaii.edu/~jamess/freespee/w_church.htm>.

Founders of America. "CNN." 5 June 2003. CNN. 28 11 2011 <http://www2.hawaii.edu/~jamess/freespee/amend1ov.htm>.

Michael, Siabatta. "Attack Ward Churchill." 18 11 2011. Ward Churchill & Westboro Baptist Church: Pushing the Boundaries of Free Speech. 28 11 2011 <https://laulima.hawaii.edu/portal/site/KAP.XLSENG215js.201210>.

FD3 Freedom Requires Responsibility, Honesty

Jessica Suguitan
 FD3
11/14/11


I would like to congratulate you, the graduating class of 2011.  I am sure all of you have worked very hard to get here.  I hope that you all feel prepared to go out into the world and participate in our great country.  There is a lot of tension in today’s world.  There is a movement happening and it is calling for information to be exposed.  Many of you are familiar with the “Occupy Wall Street” movement; it has received a lot of support from not only other cities in America, but also other cities around the world.  Many question what the motive is behind this movement, if there is a unified demand.  There are many complaints being voiced.  Though there might not be a common demand, there is a common value it is one of honesty.  The demand for honesty connects the American revolutionaries alive today on Wall street with the American revolutionaries of the past, who lead the birth of our nation. [THESIS] I believe that the basis of a working democracy is an involved and educated populace, to which honesty from both public officials and its citizens is integral.[THESIS]

We are all familiar with the white lie, we have been taught that it is the socially acceptable thing since youth. (Zak)  It is better to lie than allow a person to feel insulted.  But what happens when a person does something that they know is insulting to a person or persons (like stealing) and then lies about it?  This is no longer socially acceptable.  It seems that a lie that is socially acceptable is one that excuses a person of doing something unsuitable (like buying a bad gift), where a socially unacceptable lie is where a person who has done the unsuitable (like stealing) thing is trying get away with it. I could see how a person of power, like a public figure, would feel like it is the best thing to lie to the public so that no one knows exactly how corrupt or unfair a system, such as the democratic system, really is

Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s founders, is quoted as having said, “Wherever the people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government. (Hart)”  Jefferson held that if four basic principles were followed a democracy would work; one of those principles states: “democracy cannot function without wise and honest officials.” (Jewett) We should expect our elected officials to be our eyes and ears in government.  But most Americans are so busy with work and family that they are unable to keep up with all of the details involved in civic matters.  We hope that our elected officials will make decisions that will benefit the majority, that is to say, that will benefit our working democracy.  A democracy is majority rule after all.  Unfortunately, our elected officials are forced into political games in order to gain/maintain power.  These games include catering to lobbyists (the spokesmen of large corporations), catering to their political party (so people in their party will support them back), and other forms of corruption varying from large (syphoning tax payer money to private funds) to small (accepting a free lunch).  We accept this as the business of politics. 

My classmates all seem to agree that honesty is an important code to practice: Simon Lee states, “The main reason why we should be honest is that it is a right thing to do.”  Michael Sabetta says, “Consistent honesty builds strong relationships, whereas deception does just the opposite.”  So how is it that we can feel so strongly about the value of honesty and yet we do nothing when it is an almost accepted fact that our own elected officials are dishonest?  It is extremely hypocritical and deeply damaging of us as a society to not hold our public officials accountable to our society’s value system. 

The economic crises these past few years, which culminated in a bailout for many of the major banks with taxpayer money, as well as Obama’s health care plan being edited and rewritten to accommodate insurance and pharmaceutical companies (Kirkpatrick), has brought attention to the fact that the democratic-republic we live in is not working quite the way it should.  It is expected that a politician or anyone else with power (such as CEOs of large corporations) omit truth, lie, or cover up important facts.  This dishonesty is expected from politicians and that expectation is exactly why we allow it. 

To be fair politicians are not the only ones at fault.  Media constantly commits lies via omission.  Huge corporations run most media, these corporations are involved with many questionable practices.  It is very common for the media to leave out certain parts of a story, or an entire story all together, if it reflects poorly on their owners.  This practice of lying by omission is understandable, but in the end extremely damaging to democracy.  I recently saw an episode of The Rachel Maddow Show where she discusses the lack of income tax paid by some of the wealthiest corporations, she named a half a dozen companies and could have easily left out her show’s owners, GM, but she did not.  The integrity of this act is outstanding.  Ms. Maddow’s audience is correctly educated on the topic and is able to create appropriate opinions and potential solutions because of it. 

It is important for honesty to work both ways.  A populous must educate themselves from all sources available; I am inclined to think of chosen ignorance as a form of lying (in that it prevents one from being honest about a situation, because they do not have all of the facts).  With honesty comes a sense of responsibility.  Both politicians and people must have a way to communicate with one another; availability to hear the truth and to speak the truth is necessary for honesty to happen.  No one needs to tell the truth if there is no place to tell it.  This is why our judicial system is so important.  The courts are a place where honesty is the law.  A person is allowed to remain silent, by taking the fifth, but this is after they are asked directly about something and so omitted piece of information to which it regards is identified and recorded.  I am beginning to see how much more we as a democracy must demand from our public figures.  Perhaps our elected officials should be put before the courts and questioned by the public so we may find out the truth to their dealings.  This way if there was a lie it would be considered perjury, something punishable by law.

Class of 2011, we no longer have time to grasp in the darkness of dishonesty.  Our country is falling apart and honesty in communication is integral if we wish to mend the pieces back together to make our country stronger than ever.   

If we want our society to work we must follow the guidance of its founders, I ask you the graduating class to demand more honesty from yourself and from your public figures.

Works Cited

Hart, Gary. Restoration of the republic: the Jeffersonian ideal in 21st-century America . NY: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Jewett, Professor Thomas. Jefferson, Education and Franchise. 2011. 01 November 2011 <http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/winter96/jefferson.html>.

Kirkpatrick, David. Lobbyists Fight Last Big Plans To Cut Health Care Costs. 10 October 2009. 1 November 2011 <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/health/policy/11cost.html?scp=9&sq=obama,%20health%20care,%20lobbyists,%20insurance,%20pharmaceutical&st=cse>.

Zak, Dan. "The Truth About Lying." 25 November 2007. Washington Post. 2011 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/21/AR2007112102164.html>.

RD3 Freedom Requires Responsibility, Honesty

I would like to congratulate you, the graduating class of 2010.  I am sure all of you have worked very hard to get here.  I hope that you all feel prepared to go out into the world and participate in our great country.  There is a lot of tension in today’s world.  There is a movement happening and it is calling for information to be exposed.  Many of you are familiar with the “Occupy Wall Street” movement; it has received a lot of support from not only other cities in America, but also other cities around the world.  Many question what the motive is behind this movement, if there is a unified demand.  There are many complaints being voiced.  But I think I see a thread that links them together and also connects the movement with something demanded by America’s founders, a demand for honesty.  [THESIS] I believe that the basis of a working democracy is an involved and educated populace to which honesty from both public officials and its citizens is integral.[THESIS]

We are all familiar with the white lie, we have been taught that it is the socially acceptable thing since youth. (Zak)  It is better to lie than allow a person to feel insulted.  But what happens when a person does something that they know is insulting to a person or persons (like stealing) and then lies about it.  This is no longer socially acceptable.  It seems that a lie that is socially acceptable is one that excuses a person of doing something unsuitable (like buying a bad gift), where a socially unacceptable lie is where a person who has done the unsuitable (like stealing) thing is trying get away with it. I could see how a person of power, like a public figure, would feel like it is the best thing to lie to the public so that no one knows exactly how corrupt or unfair a system, such as the democratic system, really is

Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s founders, is quoted as having said, “Wherever the people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government. (Hart)”  Jefferson held that if four basic principles were followed a democracy would work; one of those principles states: “democracy cannot function without wise and honest officials.” (Jewett) We should expect our elected officials to be our eyes and ears in government.  But most Americans are so busy with work and family that they are unable to keep up with all of the details involved in civic matters.  We hope that our elected officials will make decisions that will benefit the majority, that is to say, that will benefit our working democracy.  A democracy is majority rule after all.  Unfortunately, our elected officials are forced into political games in order to gain/maintain power.  These games include catering to lobbyists (the spokesmen of large corporations), catering to their political party (so people in their party will support them back), and other forms of corruption.  We accept this as the business of politics. 

My classmates all seem to agree that honesty is an important code to practice: Simon Lee states, “The main reason why we should be honest is that it is a right thing to do.”  Michael Sabetta says, “Consistent honesty builds strong relationships, whereas deception does just the opposite.”  So how is it that we can feel so strongly about the value of honesty and yet we do nothing when it is an almost accepted fact that our own elected officials are dishonest?  It is extremely hypocritical and deeply damaging of us as a society to not hold our public officials accountable to our society’s value system. 

The economic crises these past few years, which culminated in a bailout for many of the major banks with taxpayer money, as well as Obama’s health care plan being edited and rewritten to accommodate insurance and pharmaceutical companies (Kirkpatrick), has brought attention to the fact that the democratic-republic we live in is not working quite the way it should.  It is expected that a politician or anyone else with power (such as CEOs of large corporations) omit truth, lie, or cover up important facts.  This dishonesty is expected from politicians and that expectation is exactly why we allow it. 

To be fair politicians are not the only ones at fault.  Media constantly commits lies via omission.  Huge corporations run most media, these corporations are involved with many questionable practices.  It is very common for the media to leave out certain parts of a story, or an entire story all together, if it reflects poorly on their owners.  This practice of lying by omission is understandable, but in the end extremely dishonest.  I recently saw an episode of The Rachel Maddow Show where she discusses the lack of income tax paid by some of the wealthiest corporations, she named a half a dozen companies and could have easily left out her show’s owners, GM, but she did not.  The integrity of this act is outstanding. 

It is important for honesty to work both ways.  A populous must educate themselves from all sources available; I am inclined to think of chosen ignorance as a form of lying (in that it prevents one from being honest about a situation, because they do not have all of the facts).  With honesty comes a sense of responsibility.  Both politicians and people must have a way to communicate with one another; availability to hear the truth and to speak the truth is necessary for honesty to happen.  No one needs to tell the truth if there is no place to tell it.  This is why our judicial system is so important.  The courts are a place where honesty is the law.  A person is allowed to remain silent, by taking the fifth, but this is after they are asked directly about something and so omitted piece of information to which it regards is identified and recorded.  I am beginning to see how much more we as a democracy must demand from our public figures.  Perhaps our elected officials should be put before the courts and questioned by the public so we may find out the truth to their dealings.  This way if there was a lie it would be considered perjury, something punishable by law. If we want our society to work we must follow the guidance of its founders, I ask you the graduating class to demand more honesty from yourself and from your public figures. 

Works Cited

Hart, Gary. Restoration of the republic: the Jeffersonian ideal in 21st-century America . NY: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Jewett, Professor Thomas. Jefferson, Education and Franchise. 2011. 01 November 2011 <http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/winter96/jefferson.html>.

Kirkpatrick, David. Lobbyists Fight Last Big Plans To Cut Health Care Costs. 10 October 2009. 1 November 2011 <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/health/policy/11cost.html?scp=9&sq=obama,%20health%20care,%20lobbyists,%20insurance,%20pharmaceutical&st=cse>.

Zak, Dan. "The Truth About Lying." 25 November 2007. Washington Post. 2011 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/21/AR2007112102164.html>.