One of the most vital forms of speech that must be protected to ensure that a society is not authoritarian, nor is the government suppressing the free will of the people, is that of satire. Satire is a form of speech that takes on political topics and cultural issues with levity and direct challenge to the status quo. Without satire, propaganda has no balance in a society and navigating political discourse that generates critical thinking and ethical discernment of what is best for the individual, a community, and a society becomes nearly impossible. To that end Darling Mental Health stands firmly in the belief that the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States to protect freedom of speech, including speech that we disagree with, is a vital component of a healthy society.
Some speech is designated hate speech; such rhetoric should not be publicly endorsed and is speech the government should have surveillance over in order to identify terrorists and hate-groups that pose imminent threat to the safety and autonomy of minority groups. The Klu Klux Klan and other Neo-Nazi groups are such groups for which hate speech is a vital component of their language and projection of ideals that are intolerant of others and is therefore not tolerated within our field of ethical space. We welcome discourse with those who struggle with ideals aligned with White Supremacy, but we will not endorse any supremacy of any group over another. Failure to recognize our own boundaries with hate speech will be grounds for removal from our space if we deem that you or others you are attempting to bring into our space are people that categorically believe in White Supremacy or other hate against marginalized groups.
Furthermore, Darling Mental Health holds true to a belief that comedians are the first line of defense for a free society and censorship of any public figure through the use of governmental influence or control is unethical. Recent events in the United States and recent rhetoric of what Freedom of Speech means has triggered a need for the inventory of language that the Political Speech & Ideals page holds.
Specific topics related to Freedom of Speech may be harder for some to appreciate than others, but when we are looking at the political indications of censorship we must be mindful of where it ends and what it is protecting. If we allow censorship of science, research, and diverse narratives to limit a child’s understanding of what life can be like, we potentially leave children with the belief that their existence and identity are wrong. Banning books that have LGBTQIA representation and the artificial creation of a “white only” or “straight only” narrative of the world induces fear and suicidal thoughts for children who do not fit the narrative majority. Influences and motivations for censorship often come from concerned parents who want to curate a specific existence for their child, or at least a limited spectrum of options they feel is the most appropriate. Sometimes this motivation is pure and concerned with things like early exposure to sexual topics a child is not developmentally prepared for, but often such censorship efforts have an end goal of complete removal of things outside of a concerned parent’s worldview of what is acceptable. Application of any one parent or any one group’s perspective of what is morally couth has the unintended consequence of being intolerant of things that are silly, wholesome from a different perspective, or actively needed to challenge adults to critical think about the world we live in.
Satirists like South Park are vital resources and treasures to providing diverse opinions, often with offensive content, in order to trigger responses and discourse that highlights hypocrisy and issues for which critical thinking is necessary. Not all jokes or points that South Park has made are aligned with the ethos of what Darling Mental Health projects, but we stand by South Park’s right to use offensive language in order to provide talking points of discourse that should be processed in one’s family, personal circle, and other social spaces of interpersonal learning and discovery. South Park provides an authentic example of all elements of a satire that tows the line of “too offensive” with its 1999 major motion picture “South Park: bigger, longer, & uncut” for which an objectively offensive song and movie is censored and that censorship leads to a US war with Canada by the direction of a concerned parents group bullying the government lead by President Clinton. This is demonstratively hyperbolic of what would happen in the US but is a worthwhile view to understand how some activist’s groups not only project themselves but work to censor the “art” of others in order to protect their children from ideas they have not personally screened as couth. Such censorship in the film leads to a potential WWIII scenario that allows Satan and his abusive gay lover Saddam Hussein rise up out of Hell to take over the world because of a public execution justified through intolerance. The narrative plot allows for a wonderful quote that comments on the US values system as a whole:
“Horrific, deplorable violence is okay, as long as no one says any naughty words.”
Satire exists to help us understand how much any ideal taken too far is ridiculous and we must find ways to prevent unnecessary war, simply because we have been offended by something an artist has produced. Art is only good if it can elicit response, and responding to life is how we learn, grow, and become better humans to each other and ourselves.
Darling Mental Health therefore supports the open expression of all peer-reviewed research, the cross-examination of politically charged policies, and the inclusion of diverse narrative opinions to help cultivate a life that protects everyone and supports a philosophy that
all people are equal members of our one human family.
