Response Paper: No Such Thing as Free Speech
At the core, his argument is exactly what the title says. However, it is not just proving that the sacred cow of Free Speech is much messier than we admit. He has an entire idea behind it of what does and should structure our debates about what speech should and should not be acceptable. The 1990s campus free speech wars were sort of the rise of the use of politically correct as a pejorative term and handwringing about speech codes and the like.
To complete this response paper, read Fish and answer the following questions. It is a bit dense, so dont worry about fully understanding all of it, but lets focus on the key elements of free speech. Things are sometimes clunky, but there are lots of moments of clarity. After reading through the essay, write a response of around 750 words (over or a bit under is finethe word count is just a rough estimate of the space it will take on average to discharge the prompt) that answers the following key questions. Remember that stronger responses will integrate textual evidence and go beyond what can be gleaned from Wikipedia.
1) As best as you can tell, what does Fish mean when he says that Theres no such thing as free speech and that the label free speech is the one you want your favorites to wear.
2) When dealing with Fighting Words, Gitlow, and speech vs. action, what does Fish seem to be saying about Free Speech doctrinesuch as the cases weve engaged over the last months?
3) What, according to Fish, is the alternative to free speech the way its traditionally been discussed? In other words, if it isnt free speech, then what is there for deciding what can and cannot be said?
4) Fish seems to have no love lost about notions of Freedom of Speech, but what is his ultimate evaluation of First Amendment Principles? What purpose, if any, do they serve?
