Baron Bodissey has posted an update or five on the Mikko Ellilä case as it comes up before the long arm of the law...
The one thing to point out is that few, so far, actually like the sort of thing that Ellilä says -- it is silly, offensive, even racist. What this is about is a person's right to speak (or blog) his mind.
How do simple statements of belief suddenly morph into a threat to the public? There is no evidence that, in his blog -- anywhere -- Ellilä did anything more than say some things which many rational people would deem impolite. There seems to be no call to rise up in violence against others, there is no finger-pointing or crying "fire" in a crowded theater.
If the decision goes against people like Mikko Ellilä, when will they start globally tracking down and arresting those who truly do incite people to violence?
As a free, educated American, I do not understand the drive of a portion of any nation -- especially those whose histories are chock-full of liberties -- to limit freedoms. Do the people who press for speech codes, who press for "hate crimes" laws, who press for special treatment for certain categories of citizens not understand that, eventually, the legislation will backfire on them? Do they not understand these laws as genuinely hypocritical, as well as, over the long run, indefensible and unenforceable?
How does plain, ordinary, brutal violence become something "special" when it comes accompanied by a racial or sexist slur? How does one gauge whether a savage "spree" killer is worse because he was motivated by racial hatred or by a perceived social slight? Don't results count for anything, these days?
And where is it written that free people have the right to be protected, by law, from having their feelings hurt by some arrogant or spiteful nonsense? I guess we're approaching the day and age when, in the freest nations, sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will get you twenty years in Marion.
3 comments:
Imagine how many seconds Mikko would last in a comedy club, or on Westwood One.
The other side of the story.
This message in January 2002 was too much for Mikko Ellila.
Vapausfoorumi - Freedom Forum
Jan 7 2002
Now, when all cash-dispensers already give Euros, end when people almost without exception use Euros in shops, I have a "pleasure" to announce:
I have been able to stay the first week of January without seeing or keeping in my hands any Euro-bills. I have done this on purpose and because I usually dońt have much money. I have seen some new Euro-coins by a glimpse, but I have not touched them. I have not kept any Marks in my hands for a few days either, because I already used my last Marks when the year changed (a few Marks I have saved as a memory).
I dońt know, how long I will continue my "Euro-boycott". I have nothing against Euros, but as an individualist, I want to keep distance to mass-behavior.
J.M.
Jan 8 2002
I dońt believe a piece of that. This nick-name writer is only a troll. I suggest, that he would be banned from the forum. This particular message is not in any way against the "net-ethic", but the writing-history of this character gives us a reason to throw him to hell. I am bored to that kind of message-pollution.
Mikko Ellila
Jan 10 2002
Ellilás Poll.
Should we ban Petteri Nuuttimaa,/ Jari Maki/ Jalmari Maki/ Nemopat/ Xemo Xation/ or what ever his name in this week happens to be? This character writes continuously exceptionally stupid questions about libertarianism and absolutely irrelevant and unbelievable personal complaints about his poorness and about the bankruptcy of his family. And he also sent fake suicide-messages to the forum at the past just to make a joke and to gain attention. Why should we allow this kind of a character to disturb our conversation?
My explanation:
The only name which I had used in that forum for the last year was Jari Maki. At the first month, when I started writing to that forum, and when I did not know anything about it, I used my "writer-name" Petteri Nuuttimaa. The other names, Nemopat, Xemo Xation etc. are from my homepages and from my alternative e-mail addresses. I did not use those names, when I wrote to that forum.
I did not send any suicide-messages to the forum. When I ended to use my writer-name Nuuttimaa and started to use Jari Maki, I sent a personal email-message to one of the members of that forum. In this message I wrote, that Nuuttimaa made a final solution in writing, and for now on Jari Maki will continue. Using such words was a mistake, but I did not exactly write, that Nuuttimaa killed himself. And I did not mean to joke. My purpose was not to gain extra attention either. I later apologized for this e-mail message and explained that nobody has committed suicide. Since then my message was not mentioned again, and I continued writing. Then after a year and after many good conversations Ellila without any previous warning wrote the message in which suggested that I should be banned. Although the result of the vote was that I can stay, I left the forum voluntarily.
Many members of that forum understood, that I had told about the bankruptcy of my familýs industrial company and about losing my home as an example of what can happen in business-live. As far as I know, I was the only writer in that forum, who had experienced such things in real life. Most writers were young students who had not seen much “real live”. The reason why I had mentioned those things was not to complain. Things just happen.
Past is past. In this Puumalainen-Ellila dispute I am on Ellilás side. He should be allowed the freedom of speech although he has not always wanted to allow it to others.
My opinions about the human races and immigration are not exactly the same as Ellilás although I understand his point of view. The essential question this time is not the racism but the freedom of speech.
http://aapo.iki.fi/ellila/society_consists_of_people.html
Ellila´s page in english.
Post a Comment