Re: inappropriate racist and other offensive material
On Thursday 14 March 2002 10:16 pm, user list wrote:
[snip]
> Let's just say that this is a free-speech issue. The point is that
> free-speech does not reach into institutions. If a racist statement were
> part of a program that communicated with other programs, it would not be
> allowed on any US government machines. It would not be allowed on many
> corporate machines. This is because these institutions hold that the sense
> of security of its members is more important than the First Ammendment.
> Just as you cannot claim First ammendment rights in yelling fire in a
> theater, you also cannot claim those rights if you use racist or offensive
> language to intimidate others. So, if Debian knowingly kept a piece of
> software that were racist, it would be relegating itself to a very minor
> role in desk-top and work station compu- tation. As I said in my first
> post, I would remove it from all of my machines. It would be a very easy
> decision. I think it would be a real shame if this happened because Debian
> is a real accomplishment.
>
> Principle:
>
> This email is an example of excercise of free speech. It is clear who is
> addressing you. This is really my speech. The case of a program that
> ends its run with a statement, any statement, is not free speech. To the
> contrary, it is constraining me to issue a statement that I don't
> necessarily agree with. The free speech of the maintainer would masquerade
> as my speech. This hypothetical situation would be, to my mind a devious
> and cowardly way for a maintainer to promulgate his or her views.
>
> I suppose one could say that I could peruse every line of source code that
> is downloaded onto my machine to assure that I catch every one of these
> instances, but, of course I won't. I rely on the social contract of the
> Distribution to take care of this.
>
> Proposed Policy:
>
> If Debian wants a place in the standard workplaces (Corporate Offices,
> Govern- ment Laboratories, etc.) then I think they should have a stated
> policy that the distribution will not contain any known instances of racist
> or offensive language. Note that the word known is very important because I
> don't think that anyone wold expect a gate keeper. It simply would not be
> practical. However, if a known bug is found then it should be dealt with.
> One would hope that it would be dealt with in the way it was here. It would
> be an inadvertent mistake and it would be corrected rapidly. If the
> maintainer were truly racist, then it should be a policy that that package
> be dropped until the offending language is removed or until a new
> maintainer can be found.
you can't possibly be serious. i know that you live in the u.s., but i'm
wondering what kind of medication you've been kept on to think that there is
any modicum of credibility in statements like
"If a racist statement were part of a program that communicated with other
programs, it would not be allowed on any US government machines."
where does that put the welfare reform program that clinton instituted and
that bush and his necessary helpers are all too happy to perfect? have you
looked at any of the homeless people that you've been walking past over the
last eight years? have you really not considered the discrepancy between
racial/ethnic statistics of prison population compared to non-prison
demographics? removing single words whose power derives from the willingness
of their audience to be offended doesn't negate the possibility of racism,
sexism, ethnocentrism, or any other -ism you can come up with. the adage that
you can't cure assholes comes to mind. who gives a rat's ass about the racist
inclinations that allow actual demographic minorities to have to bear the
major part of the unfair humiliation that occurs in this country? answer: not
many, and definitely too few. the real racism that people suffer by has
nothing to do with words. the real racism has to do with economic privilege,
with banks that refuse to locate, much less offer loans, in minority
locations. the real racism has to do with people listening for the wrong word
and missing all the right words. the real racism that disrupts lives and
causes pain has to do with the lack of proper education, proper training, and
proper employment. there's no injustice that a decent wage for a decent job
can't cure.
as far as debian relegating itself to any position, maybe you're just not
ready to deal with the idea that debian isn't fighting for any rating as far
as corporate morality is concerned. if the corporation, government, or any
other entity finds it useful, that's fine. if not, that's fine, too. maybe
you need to get out more, like visit another country, or maybe you should
visit more of this one. where i live, it just wouldn't do me any good to
swing into saviour action every time i hear words i know i don't ever want my
kids to say. the only recourse that i find useful is to keep on with the same
attitude i started with, to allow everyone i meet to hold on to those beliefs
that remain true.
as far as the functionality of debian is concerned, i don't particularly care
if hitler himself wrote the code. the point is the use to which i put it. the
only area on which i would ever, do ever, challenge anybody is on the logical
merit of their argument. frankly, i'm surprised that this ever got reported
as a bug. it's not that hard to track down the author, or, at least, track
down the particular iteration of the program that elicits the problem. in any
case, i'm not totally convinced that what was presented on this list as
evidence of racism actually is evidence of racism. i don't see the
distinction that, apparently, justifies your ire. the only lines i draw are
between those of us who share a capacity for speech and language--you, me,
and all those others that each of us knows to have that capacity--and those
of us who don't--birds, bugs, dogs, cats, etc. i know for sure that my dog
isn't ever going to learn to be cautious with an allowance--which is part of
the reason why i don't give my dog an allowance--whereas i know that it's a
part of my obligation as a parent to impart to my kids whatever instruction i
can get them to hear about spending money wisely.
i'm trying hard not to think that you're just a nut, so anything constructive
that you can offer to that end, i'd be welcome to evaluate. that said, i
think that the list is probably wishing that this thread would just fade
away, so, in the interest of accommodating everyone, feel free to reply to me
privately.
ben
Reply to: