Anti-War Speech Suppression
Today, mainstream news tends to not cover anti-war politics or opinions even though the United States is entangled in wars and intervening in international issues across the globe. Since the marketplace of ideas theory is valued in law and ethics, one would assume that anti-war ideas would be voiced and disseminated throughout the marketplace. To determine truth, a battle or competition must occur between competing ideas to reveal what is best. Thats how its supposed to work in law, isn't it?
Unfortunately, websites such as antiwar.com and theamericanconservative.com highlight strong viewpoints for anti-war opinions. Voices that express anti-war ideas are often tucked away, hidden from the public eye and mainstream news. Common viewpoints include that the U.S. meant to be a expansive empire that indulges in all international affairs and wars. Many recent stories highlight the need to avoid war in Syria, the Middle East and in Kenya in favor of peace.
Anti-war movements slow as the government pursues political agenda; its is said that both the conservative and liberal parties support war, so where do anti-war voices go to be heard... the ballot or perhaps the streets might be more effective? In 2003 and the invasion of Iraq, we began to see the decline of anti-war voices speaking out. Since 2008, Obama, who invaded more countries than Bush after promising to remove troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, anti-war leaders have identified the need to challenge "progressives" through protests and not rely on a president, congress or any other political entity to stand up for their cause.
Why are these news stories and opinions being hidden from the public eye? Organized dissent from pro-war views are not voiced in mainstream media as they do not align with the political agendas of those in power. The government also has been regulating social media taking down posts in the name of censorship. Recently, Trump has had a tight grip on media coverage of international affairs. There has been a long silence of anti-war voices since 2003, and it is about time that anti-war voices are not hindered by prior restraint.
Unfortunately, the press, including media framing, has its own agenda. They aren't the watchdogs on government--we should be because they don’t cover everything going on in the world! There is a lot of censorship right now between people and private companies, but not with the government. Strange, right? Personally, I believe that we need to be activists for what we believe in, especially those that don't want to see nations being invaded or bombed overseas causing more trouble for the country. Who is making these decisions anyway?
Sources
https://www.antiwar.com
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/web-categories/realism-restraint/
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/michael-kazin-why-no-antiwar-movement-iraq
Photo: https://depts.washington.edu/antiwar/pnwhistory_vietnam.shtml
Comments
Post a Comment