Publication information |
Source: Gunton’s Magazine Source type: magazine Document type: editorial Document title: “Suppression—to What Extent Feasible” Author(s): anonymous Date of publication: October 1901 Volume number: 21 Issue number: 4 Pagination: 304-05 |
Citation |
“Suppression—to What Extent Feasible.” Gunton’s Magazine Oct. 1901 v21n4: pp. 304-05. |
Transcription |
full text |
Keywords |
anarchism (laws against); freedom of speech (restrictions on); anarchism (dealing with). |
Named persons |
none. |
Notes |
Click here to view the “measure” discussed in the preceding editorial. |
Document |
Suppression—to What Extent Feasible
Another measure which ought to be adopted is the prompt suppression
both of publications and meetings in which government as such is assailed
and its destruction by violent methods or murder of its representatives advocated.
The classification is perfectly distinct, and there need be no danger of tyrannical
interference with freedom of speech, as would certainly be the case if power
were given to local authorities or the courts to suppress any publications or
meetings which in their judgment were dangerous to public welfare. So far as
the expression of views in regard to forms and methods or the modification of
government is concerned, there should be the largest freedom, but to attack
government per se and urge the assassination of public officials is an
entirely different thing. It is of the same essential nature as a declaration
of war by a foreign power, and the nation should put itself on a tentative war
basis, as it were, with reference to the anarchist propaganda. Because these
men, as a group, are not literally bearing arms is not a vital point; neither
are the executive officials of a government with whom we are at war. But that
government is the director and planner of the measures of force used by the
military, and in the same sense anarchist societies are the devisers and instigators
of the murderous assaults upon public officials or the plots laid for overthrowing
governments. If we do not go to the length of imprisoning them, we can at [304][305]
least deprive these voluntary outlaws of their power for evil, so far as that
power comes from tongue or pen.
This is no time for sentimental concern about
“liberty” for those who want only the liberty to destroy. A measure of suppression
of the sort advocated could not be used against any propaganda which did not
attack government as such and demand its overthrow; therefore, there need be
no alarm that it would interfere with the free expression of any opinions which
sought to modify or change the character of our policies or even institutions
by peaceful methods.