I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, viz. that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered. ~Thomas Paine
A peddler wants to be allowed to stand in the village public square to sell his wares, to clang and bang, and to have his helpers help him clang and bang, to shout his invitation to the villagers to come to him; and on the strength of his promises, explicit and implied; to pay him large sums of money to risk having their bodies harmed.
But when a series of harms occurs, and the victims want to be accorded the same privilege as the peddler--the privilege to stand in the same public square to bang and clang their message--, because the peddler disapproves of their message, because their message is against him, he stops them.
The peddler hires lawyers to not only drive these people off the square, but to then conduct punitive raids on their homes and families, to loot as much they can; as if the harm the peddler has thus far done to these people and the money he has thus far taken from them isn't harm enough.
Then the peddler, multiplying his outrages, when the village press in the course of doing its job--for a newspaper is expected to report on curious persons who by their own loud actions and temperamental antics scream to be noticed, if not lampooned--sics his lawyers on the newspaper, too. (Whatever happened to E.K. Hornbeck's dictum that it is the duty of a newspaper to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable?) Pardon us for asking, Mr. Peddlerman, but who do you think you are?
If the public square is to be declared your exclusive domain, if your right to make your living in the occupation of your choosing is to supersede the villagers' right to share an important warning--a warning that could save them and their loved ones from unspeakable harm--then you'll have to excuse us, Mr. Peddlerman, because this is far too important an issue for us to take your word on it alone. We'll need to have a word or two about it from The U.S. Supreme Court. Tony Scalia will want his chance to shed a tear or two in sympathy with you.
The worldwide internet has made the world a village. The people of the village are watching you, Mr. Peddlerman, and a crowd has begun to gather.
With morbid fascination the crowd watches the spectacle. It watches your thuggery. It watches you push and shove the villagers around. It watches you terrorize, intimidate, and impede free speech and free expression. It waits with consternation to see whether the U.S. Constitution will be able to withstand yet another challenge to its First Amendment. The crowd wonders whether a peddler who screwed up his livelihood by screwing up his customers will be allowed to turn the concept of personal responsibility on its head, whether he will be allowed to blame the whole thing on those customers, as well as on those who would rightfully call attention to his conduct--to the shameless outrages and squalid maneuvers of a powerful, unscrupulous peddler who spares no expense in committing the ultimate betrayal--the betrayal of those who gave him their money, their bodies, and their highest trust.
When peddlers behave like feudal lords then the time has come--the time is overdue--to create legal distinctions to welcome them to the 21st century.
more