I have just been looking at some notes from a discussion on press freedom recently. A theme that has come up a few times in the recent months, particularly in relation to this topic is that the problem with the media and society (in some countries in Southeast Asia, for example) is that there is too much freedom.
Can you have have too much freedom? Hell, no! Its a false argument. I think this is the result of an aggregate of unthinking beings and unyielding hypocricy (I learnt how to say hypocricy in Thai - phuut yang, tham yang or khit yang, tham yang). If there was too much freedom, don't you think we'll be better at defending minority rights, providing protection to those who need, and have safe drinkable water and breathable air? Access to homes, education, employment, thoughts, and opinions. Waving the Universal Declaration of Human Rights here! - No, there's never too much freedom.
What we have in excess is this: a society unable to criticise itself; where selective prosecution and application of freedoms dictate; elites own the meaning of rights and freedoms; and just unthinking, destructive individuals roaming the streets.
They hide behind the walls of cultural relativism and post-colonial insecurity to decide what is the norm. None that makes rational sense, to me. "Its not our culture to criticise the elders" or "our society is unique because we have a tradition of this and that" - but will you also claim responsibility that your unique culture is also violent and inhumane because of the murders and brutality that take place, either by individuals or organised groups? I am well aware my argument is a fallacy, but one cannot pick and chose arbitrarily when culture is a determining factor. To hold back freedoms because of cultural values, is, in my not so humble opinion, the greatest disasters of our time. Add religion to it, and the result is far worse. The argument is that its not the religion per se because religion teaches compassion and good values, its the people who spoil the religion. Well, to me, religion is nothing without the people, and the two are actually one. And this one is a major threat to fundamental freedoms, including the right to have a belief of your choice. As an atheist, I'm more secure than a believer of something in some countries.
I digress.
And as much as we try to make ourselves, our communities, unique, I think no one is unique. We are far more alike than we are different, but we invest so much time in picking out and parading the differences, which we then use to justify denial of others' freedoms and rights. I don't mean to say that because we are not unique, we don't have rights. On the contrary, we do. But that's because we are above the narrow unique distinctions. There is far greater purpose in serving humanity as a whole.
Back to my starting point.
I am looking forward to a time when we can be honest and call a spade a spade and accept that the failings of the media, for example, is because the people in it choose to be so and they have given up their rights to freedom and in respecting the freedoms of others. The cultural values have protected the elites and the powerful and their band of media. Understanding the media situation in this region is less complicated that what many of us make it out to be. Its base is simple: power, power, power. Except that the ones feeding into that machine of power, i.e the journalists, are, undoubtedly the ones with zero power. Their poor state is a result of their unthinking, yet willing give away of power. They do things to give the impression that they have lots of freedom and rights. Yet, they are only a pawn in the big scheme of things.
Ranting.
I have to analyse media freedom in the region. I do not appreciate cultural relativism. I want people to widen their horizons and see poverty, abuses, control, violations on the one hand, and joy, delight and happiness on the other, stretched beyond their own borders. It is not a problem of too much freedom anywhere. It is a problem of narrow vision.
Can you have have too much freedom? Hell, no! Its a false argument. I think this is the result of an aggregate of unthinking beings and unyielding hypocricy (I learnt how to say hypocricy in Thai - phuut yang, tham yang or khit yang, tham yang). If there was too much freedom, don't you think we'll be better at defending minority rights, providing protection to those who need, and have safe drinkable water and breathable air? Access to homes, education, employment, thoughts, and opinions. Waving the Universal Declaration of Human Rights here! - No, there's never too much freedom.
What we have in excess is this: a society unable to criticise itself; where selective prosecution and application of freedoms dictate; elites own the meaning of rights and freedoms; and just unthinking, destructive individuals roaming the streets.
They hide behind the walls of cultural relativism and post-colonial insecurity to decide what is the norm. None that makes rational sense, to me. "Its not our culture to criticise the elders" or "our society is unique because we have a tradition of this and that" - but will you also claim responsibility that your unique culture is also violent and inhumane because of the murders and brutality that take place, either by individuals or organised groups? I am well aware my argument is a fallacy, but one cannot pick and chose arbitrarily when culture is a determining factor. To hold back freedoms because of cultural values, is, in my not so humble opinion, the greatest disasters of our time. Add religion to it, and the result is far worse. The argument is that its not the religion per se because religion teaches compassion and good values, its the people who spoil the religion. Well, to me, religion is nothing without the people, and the two are actually one. And this one is a major threat to fundamental freedoms, including the right to have a belief of your choice. As an atheist, I'm more secure than a believer of something in some countries.
I digress.
And as much as we try to make ourselves, our communities, unique, I think no one is unique. We are far more alike than we are different, but we invest so much time in picking out and parading the differences, which we then use to justify denial of others' freedoms and rights. I don't mean to say that because we are not unique, we don't have rights. On the contrary, we do. But that's because we are above the narrow unique distinctions. There is far greater purpose in serving humanity as a whole.
Back to my starting point.
I am looking forward to a time when we can be honest and call a spade a spade and accept that the failings of the media, for example, is because the people in it choose to be so and they have given up their rights to freedom and in respecting the freedoms of others. The cultural values have protected the elites and the powerful and their band of media. Understanding the media situation in this region is less complicated that what many of us make it out to be. Its base is simple: power, power, power. Except that the ones feeding into that machine of power, i.e the journalists, are, undoubtedly the ones with zero power. Their poor state is a result of their unthinking, yet willing give away of power. They do things to give the impression that they have lots of freedom and rights. Yet, they are only a pawn in the big scheme of things.
Ranting.
I have to analyse media freedom in the region. I do not appreciate cultural relativism. I want people to widen their horizons and see poverty, abuses, control, violations on the one hand, and joy, delight and happiness on the other, stretched beyond their own borders. It is not a problem of too much freedom anywhere. It is a problem of narrow vision.
No comments:
Post a Comment