"FREEDOM OF SPEECH" - A FETISH THAT HAS COMPLETELY DISCREDITED ITSELF

Preface: Recently we wrote about a fire broke out in the office of the scandalous Inter TV channel in Kyiv just during the protest action near its walls. Recall, the  protesters had urged the authorities to ban broadcasting of the channel, which in fact is a propagandistic resource of the invader in a war time.

Two days later, on September 6, the activists reported that they have came to an agreement with the heads of the Inter, who have pledged to change the TV channel's informational policy and to dismiss Igor Shuvalov, the Deputy Director of Development for the National Information Systems (NIS) company, which producing news content for the scandalous TV channel.


However, few days ago the head of the NIS reported in the interview to one of TV channels that they are not going to fulfill the promises have been given to the activists. there can be no question of mr Shuvalov's dismissal. there can be no question of the dismissal of mr Shuvalov, who being a citizen of the Russian Federation is free to work in government positions.

As was expected, attempting to preserve the broadcast of the Kremlin's propagandistic megaphone throughout Ukraine its chairmen (and their curators from Moscow) are widely speculating on the topic of "freedom of speech" violation. On this matter we offer you an article by Igor Zagrebelny entitled "Freedom of speech - a fetish that has completely discredited itself"

"FREEDOM OF SPEECH" - A FETISH THAT HAS COMPLETELY DISCREDITED ITSELF

All this situation around the Inter clearly demonstrated the government's passivity on the issue of national security since informational policy has been conducted by the TV channel in last years is aimed at further cultural, mental and even political deukrainization and russification of our country. And this is ongoing in the terms of undeclared war with Russia.

But the situation doesn't exhausted at this point. The experience of past two years cast serious doubts regarding the fairness of exaltation of the "freedom of speech" concept to the level of a fetish or a fundamental idea. In the case if we recognize it as such, then that would mean for us to not fall into indignation everytime we hear or read anti-Ukrainian propaganda which is undermining our national security within the Moscow's aggression. But if it does triggers our indignation, if we want this evil to be defeated - we must reject the fetish itself, which the invader uses successfully against us.

The freedom of expression of opinions and   dissemination of information - it's a quite fair and positive thing as long as it doesn't goes beyond the scope of common sense. Moreover, the freedom of speech is useful, important and necessary component of a social life. However, there is a significant difference between the fair freedom of speech and the "freedom of speech" as a fetish. The first one is regulated by universal principles which value is above the right of an individual or an organization to distribute certain information (eg national security, defence of social moral values, etc.), while the second tries to be represented as a higher principle, which doesn't require regulation.

In other words, there is the freedom of speech as a legally enforceable right and an opportunity to disseminate information one the one hand, and the "freedom of speech" as an ideologeme on the other. Difference between the two concepts is fundamental. We have to distinguish clearly the human rights in the legal sense and the "human rights" as an ideological concept, which is often used against valid personal and public benefits; eg when the slogan of "human rights" is used for promotion and imposition of ideas and practices, that destroy society's moral values.

Many attempts have been done for last quarter century to accustom our society to all kind of extreme-liberal norms and fetishes. Many attempts have been done for last quarter century to accustom our society to all kind of extreme-liberal norms and fetishes. Nevertheless, most of them have been discredited in the terms of today and war experience has significantly contributed to this. Under these conditions, we should think either to continue repeating these almost meaningless mantras, or to focus at right reference points.

by Igor Zagrebelny