Tuesday, February 01, 2005
The purpose of the First Amendment
The UNPOPULIST linked to this article, which reported that a sample of ignorant typical high school students thought that the free speech and press clauses of the First Amendment may be a little over the top:
This is disturbing to Hodding Carter, who is an acclaimed southern journalist, the Carter Administration's State Department spokesman, and a friend and classmate of the TigerHawk Dad.
Maybe, but I doubt it.
First, high school kids have a lot to learn. That as a group their constitutional jurisprudence is as yet unformed should not come as a surprise.
Second, one can only wonder what the results of such a survey would have been at any other time in the history of our nation. With the possible exception of the cohort in school in the 1970s, it would amaze me if it had not always been the case that a third of American high school students thought that free speech was a crock.
Finally, the First Amendment has always been unpopular. It is inherent in the very idea. The First Amendment is there to protect people who say unpopular things. The only people who need the protections of the free speech and press clauses are those say or write things that most people detest. Since the only visible beneficiaries of the First Amendment are people who are by definition unpopular, it is not surprising that any given cohort of ignorant people think that free speech goes "too far." It will always be the case, unless and until people stop using the First Amendment for its intended purpose.
Yet, when told of the exact text of the First Amendment, more than one in three high school students said it goes "too far" in the rights it guarantees. Only half of the students said newspapers should be allowed to publish freely without government approval of stories.
This is disturbing to Hodding Carter, who is an acclaimed southern journalist, the Carter Administration's State Department spokesman, and a friend and classmate of the TigerHawk Dad.
"These results are not only disturbing; they are dangerous," said Hodding Carter III, president of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, which sponsored the $1 million study. "Ignorance about the basics of this free society is a danger to our nation's future."
Maybe, but I doubt it.
First, high school kids have a lot to learn. That as a group their constitutional jurisprudence is as yet unformed should not come as a surprise.
Second, one can only wonder what the results of such a survey would have been at any other time in the history of our nation. With the possible exception of the cohort in school in the 1970s, it would amaze me if it had not always been the case that a third of American high school students thought that free speech was a crock.
Finally, the First Amendment has always been unpopular. It is inherent in the very idea. The First Amendment is there to protect people who say unpopular things. The only people who need the protections of the free speech and press clauses are those say or write things that most people detest. Since the only visible beneficiaries of the First Amendment are people who are by definition unpopular, it is not surprising that any given cohort of ignorant people think that free speech goes "too far." It will always be the case, unless and until people stop using the First Amendment for its intended purpose.
1 Comments:
By 
Sluggo, at
Tue Feb 01, 11:25:00 AM:
I think you've nailed it. There's no one dumber than a 16-year old. Including 10-year olds. But their confusion is the inevitable product of beginning to grasp adult issues. Also, they're used to restrictions on their rights. Why should anybody else get a break?
