[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Sonist

I am not sure I understand you, at all.

Do you believe, that Tin-Tin constitutes "hateful and thoughtlessly vile material?"

I put it in the "thoughtlessly vile" category. Not deliberately hateful, but full of bigotry that was so accepted at the time it was written that it was not only not objectionable, but funny. Except, of course, to the victims, whose opinions weren't considered relevant.

Or do you believe, that "free speech" is great, as long as you engage in it, or approve of it, and those who engage in what you view as "hateful and thoughtlessly vile" speech, such as Tin-Tin aficionados, should crawl under a rock, and self-sensor?

Free speech is great. The right to immense amounts of free speech, which we enjoy in the US, comes with some responsibilities, including learning which communications are hurtful, and reacting to that knowledge.

Overall, I'd like a little less focus on the "right to free speech" (especially since so many people think it means "I have the right to say whatever I want, whenever I want") and more focus on the purpose of that right--"to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity," and so on.

Speech that doesn't do those things is of questionable merit. Not forbidden, not "should be banned"--but decent folks should be willing to look at it and say, "um, so why are you interested in that?"

I support free speech, and the right of people to be annoying, rude, hateful jerks if they wish. I just don't think I'm obligated to praise them for that choice. Nor to support them having easy access to literature that reinforces those choices.

A little common sense goes a long way. Most people who can read, are reasonable enough, to understand, that books of the past reflect the mores and prejudices of that past, and not of the present (we don't go looking for Amorites to kill, even though God apparently commanded so in the Bible.)

Plenty of people kill homosexuals because they believe God commanded so in the Bible. A number of Christians believe all Jews should be killed because of the way they treated Jesus. (We will ignore the fact that Jesus was a Jew; they certainly do.)

These are very old cartoons, right? Perhaps in the public domain? In that case, they could be placed online as scans, and anyone could have access to them.

Since there's a movie coming out soon, it's likely people will seek out the originals... and a lot of people are prone to thinking, "if the movie was good, and not racist, then of course any racism in the originals is minor/unimportant/nonexistant, and anyone who says otherwise is looking for trouble." I can understand removing easy access to the source material.

I don't think that "right to free speech" and a desire for information to exist in accessible formats means that all of it should be easy, quick, instantly available on a whim. Some knowledge should be worked for; it doesn't sink in otherwise.

(And I'm probably getting very far out into my own philosophies here, for which I apologize. They don't translate well into this forum's normal communication style.)