Unveiling the Light

Freedom is not just an American ideal. Our founders declared that is was a God given right. They did not create the idea of freedom. They recognized the ideal of freedom that exists for all of God’s creatures and then created a nation to reflect that ideal, or at least to the best they understood it in their time. With this in mind, I am concerned with the increased intolerance of freedom by many organized groups in this country.

Political Correctness has always been a suspect value. It declares that only a certain line of thinking is acceptable and that those who do not follow that line of thinking are “out of line” with society and should be isolated or condemned. The latest politically correct fad is aimed not at individuals but at organizations that do not “tow the line” to certain liberal ideals. Move-On and other left leaning groups are now targeting Fox News. They declare that this organization lacks merit because the network declares itself to be fair and balanced but leans right, and because it does not accept the crisis of global warning.

It is easy to point out the lack of consistency with this thinking. One has only to watch CBS News or one of the other three major networks to see that they are very much left leaning, and who can really argue that newspapers such as the New York Times do not lean heavily towards liberal thinking. Also, as much as many would like to declare that, “The debate is over,” there is, in fact, quite a bit of argument against the claim of global warming alarmists and the scientific community is far from united on this subject.

These would be censors also fail to make a distinction between the Fox network’s news division and its many opinion based shows, some of which balance out a liberal versus a conservative and some of which are very conservative in nature. There is nothing that says an opinion program cannot be left or right leaning. If it was a problem, then 60 Minutes and others would have been censored long ago. The Fox station has a mixture of news and opinion shows. What really bothers these groups is that the conservatives on these stations are given a pulpit they are denied elsewhere and more and more people are choosing to watch the station because of this. It long ago passed CNN in popularity.

The reality is that these groups are simply trying to silence those who oppose their political agenda. This is both dangerous to our freedom and is against the will of God for human kind. There is plenty of room on the airwaves for those of all opinions and the will of the public, expressed by their choice of channels, is a good measure as to their merit. Too many of the elite feel that Americans are incapable of recognizing bias or will follow those of similar political bent without thinking. As always, the elite are fearful of the will of the people and seek to replace it with their own will.

What is really worrisome is that these elite political groups and leaders find themselves in their positions of power without regards to merit. Very often they neither are the best educated nor the most level headed. An example is the media mocking the intelligence of Bush in favor of Gore. This was based mostly on Gore agreeing to the liberal media’s own bias and a measurement of style at speaking over substance of ideas. While neither were great scholars, academic records later revealed that Bush actually had both better grades than Gore and more education. None the less, the bias that Bush is “dumb” and Gore “brilliant” continues in that media today.

Political Correctness is often simply a means of shutting down the opposition by declaring them to be somehow inferior or dangerous. That it is most often used against conservatives rather than the left simply reflects the true reality that most media is liberally biased. Move-On and others are not concerned with liberal bias because it matches their own. They only want to shut down those who disagree with them. Political Correctness then becomes a camouflage for censorship. It seeks to control the message so that opposition will be shut down.

We should recognize that the most oppressive regimes in modern times have been those who claim to be for the people and who then impose their will on the people’s behalf. China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia and Korea are the most glaring examples of regimes where the opposition has been muted and eliminated so that the “will” of the people would be heard. What resulted, of course, is the imposition of the will of an elite few on the masses, and a reduction of freedom, “for their own good.”

We should be careful when political groups try organizing boycotts and actions against those who disagree with them. The Fox News boycott is but one example. There is also a move to bring back a version of the so called “fairness doctrine.” This so called attempt to impose fairness will only result in the muting of conservative voices on the radio, the one area of media where they dominate. It does nothing versus TV and newspapers, many of whom are just as biased. These are simply means of limiting the debate and shutting down the opposition so that only one viewpoint, that of the self anointed “elite,” would be heard.

I believe that freedom is not only a God given right but that God has given us the ability to treat that right with respect. We are not sheep being led to slaughter. We are humans created in the image of God and fully capable of serious discernment and critical thinking towards serious issues. We should beware of those who seek to limit our access to information so that we “are not misled.” Very often it is they who seek to mislead us, or at least it is they who think that they know better, often an opinion wholly without merit.

It does not matter if we disagree or agree with the right or the left. Ideas should be given the chance of being heard. Our competitive media markets do a good job of weeding out those who do not reflect America’s concerns from those who do. We should allow these markets to work. As always, the free market which reflects the many individual decisions of all, will be far more efficient and representative than a controlled market which reflects the decision of a few self selected elites who usually excuse themselves from the controls they seek to impose on others. After all, they seek to control us, not join us.