I'm sure some of have noticed a disturbing trend around our College campuses, or at least, you may regard it as disturbing by the end of this. There are dozens of "progressive" groups trying to shut down certain words or viewpoints. While I've never shared their mindset, I have to admit that very few of my Christian or Right-Wing friends can share their views without being labeled a racist or Luddite, and thus not worthy of listening to. It's even worse for my Muslim friends. Colleges, places where free-speech was once paramount, are becoming places of forced-conformity. This is extremely dangerous. Now I know many of you will respond with the claim that racist or misogynistic statements serve no purpose but to inflame, and thus we are losing nothing by banning them. You'll compare it to shouting "fire" without cause in a crowded movie theater. I agree with you. There are some probably saying "Hell yeah Silent; we should allow all free speech because it's in the Constitution AmericaGodExceptionalismFreedomBrettyGud." I don't agree with you. So why am I taking issue with this? Because the real issue, and the one that pundits don't throw back and forth (at least in a meaningful way), is who gets to decide what's racist or misogynistic? Who is the arbiter of "good taste?" Could it maybe, in some barely imaginable way, be possible that the person offering these classifications on any given topic has bad intentions? This is why the outright banning of words or viewpoints is dangerous. Not because "Muh Founding Fathers," not because it gives these groups the "outlaw" mystique (although that probably helps them somewhat), but because once you draw a line around unacceptable ideas, [i]other ideas[/i] can be pushed over that line. Propaganda tells you what to believe. Censorship tells you what to not even consider. But has this ever really been used? Am I just making a stink over some theoretical outcome? Consider the case of Israel. A day of research will make it pretty clear (if it isn't already) that Israel has done some pretty shitty things. It's oppressed the hell out of Palestinians, made the Middle East an even more dangerous place, and was founded by stealing land with the justification of a religious mandate. Not only that, but US citizens are forced to pay Israel $3,000,000,000 every year so that they can afford top of the line military equipment to use against kids throwing rocks. The state itself is a racist theocracy, and Muslims "lucky" enough to be on the right side of the border are second-class citizens who may lose their homes at any time if a Jewish citizen decides they want it. In addition, Israel is the only nation in the world allowed to maintain a stance of "ambiguity" about its nuclear weapon programs, which is an extremely irresponsible precedent to set. In addition, while the UN has tried to take actions against Israel for its human rights violations dozens of times, every attempt is blocked by Israel's benefactor; the US. [spoiler]The actual reasons for the US supporting Israel are long and complicated. The most convincing argument I've heard that I can present briefly is that Israel serves as a kind of "bait" for the US. Besides the obvious benefit of it being a country in the Middle East sympathetic to US interests in the region, if any nation attacks it, the US can justify invading that country. If you don't know why they'd do that, watch [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4]this.[/url][/spoiler] So you'd think that Israel would be on the top of Left-Wings chopping block right? A theocracy based on an Abrahamic religion that's oppressing poor people? Could there be an easier target? Nope. In fact it's one of the toughest. Because as soon as you suggest that what Israel is doing is wrong, as soon as you suggest that the US shouldn't be giving it billions while its own cities fail, you're an anti-Semite. Every argument you could possibly make, no matter how much you research it is now null and void. You're a [url=http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url], you're hitler, and you hate Jews. "Yeah well, antisemitism may be blown out of proportion, but that's all tied up in religious stuff anyways. Surely feminism could never be used for such purposes?" Look at the way Muslim women are presented in western media. Look especially at the videos from around 2001-2003. We are shown the veils they wear, and are told that this is a symbol of oppression, that we must save them from the evils of Islam. This is the same propaganda that Britain used to justify colonization during its reign, namely, "the white man needs to go save the brown woman from the brown man." Except this time, they actually got white women to chant along as well. Groups like FEMEN, completely ignorant of what the veil means to Islamic women (or that it changes between groups) condemn it as a sign of the patriarchy, and shame the women that wear them. Not to mention they conveniently ignore all the progress that Muslim feminists [url=http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/04/24/is-the-hijab-worth-fighting-over/the-arrogance-of-ignoring-muslim-feminism]have made[/url]. They instead focus on an article of clothing (that they ultimately wear for the same reason we wear what we wear; it's what we're culturally comfortable with), and in with an extremely ironic act submit themselves to the western male-dominated war machine. But if you bring this up, if you bring up that fact that many Muslim women continue to wear the veil even when they come to western society, if you bring up the possibility that they aren't all brainwashed and are capable of (and should be) choosing to wear what they want to wear, you're a misogynist. If you point out that feminists have been tricked into supporting wars of aggression, your viewpoint on anything isn't valid anymore. I've already gone on too long, but I wanted to make this point clear: you do more damage to yourself and make yourself easier to manipulate when you shut out an idea than when you consider it. A racist or misogynist statement will not hold up to scrutiny if that's really all it is. If you block it off, not only do you give a certain legitimacy to the idea, but you give others the opportunity to take advantage of this block. Thanks for reading this if you did.