Dear Friends,
It seems to me, censorship is a form of hypocrisy. If you think of it, all crimes are forms of hypocrisy. The censor doesn’t want to have his or her words censored. In fact, they censor so their words have more weight and are listened to by more people. The censor would never tolerate being censored. Just as the thief is enraged when stolen from and the killer has no intention of being killed. They’re all hypocrites. Back in the day, being known as a hypocrite was the worse, most discrediting, thing that could be known. Plutarch makes it clear in his Biographies that in that time, hypocrites were the lowest of the low. Today the hypocrisy of censorship is justified because they are stopping “misinformation.” Itself a word that applies equally to any viewpoint.
Criminal law is based on a human revulsion of hypocrisy. Any crime you can think of is a form of hypocrisy… except rent seeking regulations. They epitomize hypocrisy. Typical criminal law, theft, murder, assault, fraud, and such are example where someone does a thing to another that they would not want done to them. They are violating the Golden Rule. While not everyone agrees if prostitution should be legal, we all agree that forced prostitution should be. The one though tragic, is voluntary, the second is a violation of the golden rule by the pimp. He is a hypocrite. Even a dog has sense enough of justice to understand this, even if they can’t put it in words. We know injustice when we see it, because it is always an example of a hypocrite violating the Golden Rule.
The reason hypocrisy is so bad is because it violates the Golden Rule. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” All the really great philosophers and prophets understood the Golden Rule and all talked about it. Shortly after Confucius died, some Duke or other erected an obelisk upon which he had all the laws written down for all to see, know and to apply to all. Someone asked a disciple of Confucius what he though of that innovation. The disciples said it was a bad thing. Bewildered, the bystander asked why? Confucius disciple replied, “Because people will argue to the head of a pin those laws don’t apply to them.” He was saying that people are hypocrites and while most would like others to be held to those standards, they will try mightily to get out of having to follow the laws themselves.
Censorship is a particularly pernicious form of hypocrisy. It elevates the voice of someone unworthy of having their opinion exhibited, since they are hypocrites. Then it silences the voices of people with valid opinions, who are not hypocrites. Being the lowest of the low, the opinion of a hypocrite is irrelevant. While they shouldn’t be silenced, they should be given all the authority to which they are entitled… none. Why give credence to the words of someone who gives none to yours? Isn’t that like a one way street? Moreover, there is no one more dangerous than someone unwilling to listen to others. That’s how to be ignorant. They’re narrow minded. Plus, it takes a great deal of arrogance to think your opinion is the only one that matters. So what a censor is then, is an arrogant, ignorant, hypocrite.
So when you hear the unbiased media proclaim that censorship is now a good thing, hear what they are really saying… that they are the acme of hypocrites. The lowest of the low, they would elevate their hypocrisy above that of rational people. Scum of the Earth, dirtbags and malefactors, are too mild a term to describe the hypocrisy of anyone who would call for censorship. If a person from the classical era came to today and witnessed the open and notorious hypocrisy of our rulers, he would call us pathetic wimps unworthy of our freedom. To kowtow to such riffraff. Call those who proclaim that misinformation must be censored, hypocrites, to their faces. Call them what they are. Let them know we hold them and their opinions in the lowest of respect. Censors are unworthy to be listened to.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
