I will say first that I am super-pro freedom of speech. I like cursing and I like debate, two things that are not possible otherwise.

Having said that, free speech, like anything else granted in the Constitution, has its limits. Some limitations benefit society and some do not. Consequently, I think it's important that we pay very close attention to each new restriction placed upon us. That does not mean, though, that I ascribe to the slippery slope argument. Even within the confines of the shitty-ass Bush administration, there were avenues available to us that allowed us to combat free speech infringement. Do we have more limitations on what we can say now than we did 8 years ago? No. And the restrictions we saw in television and radio since Janet Jackson's nipple have largely been removed. Largely because the mainstream media can no longer afford to ignore cable and the internets.

I guess it really comes down to who is placing the restriction and why? If either of those considerations is suspect, then you may see continued abuse. Otherwise you should be pretty safe.

I know you said this wasn't about that tribe, but IMO, any tribe which does not allow free expression (within reason) is not one worth spending your time in.

<For me, there's definitely a connection between these minor (and largely unimportant) kinds of petty oppression of others and the larger governmental suppression that's been increasing in "free" and "democratic" societies - if we do it ourselves or condone it in small ways, do you think we're opening the door for thinking it's okay in big ways? What do people think? (Not about the tribe thing so much but about allowing and accepting the small acts of oppression as a gateway to accepting or not even noticing larger ones?)>

I can see the connection between "these minor (and largely unimportant) kinds of petty oppression" and " larger governmental suppression".

For me this can be summed up in one word - culture.

Many people are working in an intellectual framework where this control is justified, particularly in relation in response to threats. Most obviously in the "War of Terror" (no, not a typo), where we are being told control and aggression is necessary to keep us safe and (ironically) to preserve "freedom". The words and actions of governments probably have a trickle down effect where people embrace control as a way of creating environments where they *feel* safe. How they achieve this has changed from understanding and mutual respect to control and destructive oppression (broad sweeping statement - indeed -but perhaps useful nontheless) The cultural frame work of how we deal with "others" has shifted for the worse. Many people have also leaned to live in fear, and what's worse - react to it via control and by intensifying that personal fear

While global threats cannot be dismissed, they are often over stated and misfocused on "minor" threats rather than actual. For me, born in 1972 and in the age of "nuclear disarmament" of the '80's and 90's, minor nuclear powers worry more than "terrorists" for they have a greater capacity to do harm. However, the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was born of emotion - fear, rather than thought..(and putting aside the issue of 'revenge' for the purpose of this conversation) Lots of the media and politicians and their enthusiastic audiences are driven by something which is almost quiet mass hysteria rather than intelligent consideration of true threats and cause and effect - both short and long term.

No longer "allowing and accepting the small acts of oppression as a gateway to accepting or not even noticing larger ones" is a great point.

Deny people the right of "small acts of oppression" makes them feel oppressed. Lack of a sense of self determination and a feeling of oppression leads to rebellion - possibly violent. So I think we play dangerous games in cultures who oppress and are oppressed. This threatens peace and happiness.

For me, it is interesting to consider these issues in the context of WW2, the largest conflict the world has known, where people, particularly civilians, were subject to rationing and censorship and direct physical threat - especially in the European and Asian Theaters. How does our behaviour and reaction compare in today's world with today's threats to the world of the 1940's ? Not well I think.

i am not eloquent, so ill just say YES, i think it does open up the way for larger oppression, give em an inch and thell take your right arm, firstborn child, left testicle and your dog and whatever else suits their fancy cuz you just showed em you're their bitch.