Since I stood on the ground floor at the Chicago Donald Trump rally, I realized there was a movement of ignorance in America. The protesters tugged violently at the emotions of people who wanted to see him speak by chanting “We stopped Trump” repeatedly in a large group that took up nearly half the pavilion, and in turn resulted in a lot of friction between the two groups.
Although their intention was to stop hate speech, it did not prove to educate Trump supporters, nor did it change anyone’s mind. This protest led to many others that were more violent and detrimental to society. Protesters closed down highways in Arizona, and blood was shed at protests in California. The protesters believed that Trump’s words were hateful towards some groups; therefore he should not have an outlet to discuss his ideologies.
Hate speech is protected by the first amendment of the United States Bill of Rights. Although many would disagree, such as these protestors, the first amendment does not have an exemption for hate speech.
The first amendment is the most important and powerful tool in America. Once we start to make certain sectors of speech illegal, the free market of ideas in the U.S. will be strangled by censorship. Without exposure, malevolent ideologies will perpetuate.
The power of speech and censorship can be seen throughout history. A more recent example would be the British National Party’s (BNP) rise and fall in the United Kingdom parliament.
The BNP can be described as the racist party of modern Britain. They are white chauvinists that can be described perfectly through the first image seen on the party’s website; a picture of a white baby looking anxious with the caption to her left, “Rebecca will be an ethnic minority in her British ancestral homeland when she grows up unless you take action now.”
The party took over many local counsels from 2008-2009 in Britain, and secured two seats in the European Parliament. The party’s leader, Nick Griffin, thought that this was a huge breakthrough for their party, while the Labor and Conservative parties of Britain both denoted the BNP’s rise to power as a “sad moment.” Their uprising was believed to be caused by the increase in immigration during that period.
In 2009, the BBC had Griffin on their talk show Question Time, which is an hour interview where the guest would answer predetermined questions from the show’s audience based on political views and policies. After he fully presented his beliefs about white chauvinism, and how he wanted to protect the white majority in Britain, the aftermath was obvious.
The first reaction was anger. The citizens of the UK were angry at the BBC for giving Griffin an outlet to spread his ideas. The TV station received 243 complaints of bias against Griffin, and 116 complaints for allowing him to speak on air.
The secondary effect was the disappearance of the party’s place in the government. Once people realized this was a racist party, they stopped voting them into office. From 2010 to present day, the party has fallen off the map. The BNP currently holds only two seats out of the 20,565 in British local government.
Without allowing Griffin to have an outlet to test his principles on the free market of ideas, the party wouldn’t have been able to show its true colors to as wide an audience, and would have likely continued to spread and gain more power.
Now, let us apply this idea to Trump’s rally. If his ideas are hateful and bigoted, he should lose support. Unless your definition of hate speech and bigotry is wrong, and over 40 percent of U.S. citizens are right, he should be washed to the side like Griffin.
Let the world decide who’s right, because the spotlight is the most efficient disinfectant of warped ideologies.
