Can Blogging Help?

Sometimes, I fail to understand why certain things could happen. I don't really buy the super-natural explanations like 'plan' and 'love' from above, I just don't think this should be allowed to happen, under the watch of law enforcement officials and whoever is 'above'.

But if those explanations could help one gets through the pain, to each his own.

However, as a blogger/blog commentator, I think we as a group are pretty much useless, especially in a situation like this. Can the power of the pen, free speech and ideas really make any difference in the world? In fact, I begin to hesitate the use of the word 'power' in that sentence. Well, at least it's not for ME to use. There might be others for whom the use of that word is fit.

Rest in peace, Nurin.

Hello... (Guestbook)

Welcome.
Just out of curiosity, what brought you here?
Feel free to leave some comments, at this post or others.

Maths Genius

there's been too many depressing news lately.

so, hope to lighten up a bit... :)

Free Speech - Are Malaysians Ready? (About this Blog)

"Because if the First Amendment [under the United States Constitution, safeguarding the freedom of speech, etc] will protect... A scumbag like me... then it'll protect all of you. 'Cause I'm the worst."

- Woody Harrelson as Larry Flynt, in The People vs Larry Flynt (1996).

[Larry Flynt was the publisher of Hustler Magazine, an obscenely and offensively lewd (by almost-universal standard, definitely by Malaysian (all races) standard), pornographic publication.]

Judging from the behaviours of our bloggers and commentators (including myself!), I don't think we are mature enough yet... Are we?



ABOUT THIS BLOG


FREQUENCY: I'll only post something when I feel that other bloggers have not raised it, or their space does not allow me to express my extended views (due to their censorship or space constraint).

I don't have time to blog on a 'regular basis', but I quite often post comments on other blogs.


COMPLICATIONS: When I feel that certain events have been over-simplified by others, I'll try to add my own perceptions and to show, to the best of my limited ability, that certain matters might not be as simple as they seem. You are welcome to add yours.


'HISTORY': I was driven away/suppressed/censored by Jeff Ooi (when I complained about Jeff's absurd censoring of perceived 'obscene' and 'defamatory' comments in August 2006) and Rocky's Bru (when I held a different view about the correct application of the concept of Plagiarism and accused him of hypocricy in criticising others of censorship).


MOTIVATIONS: I've obviously irked Jeff and Rocky with my fierce criticisms, which must be rude and obnoxious to them. They couldn't take it, so they censored me (justifiably to them, but not so according to me). I don't believe in censorship, not even of what you believe to be obscene or obnoxious or loud or simply irrelevant.

I think I'm NOT - and also NOBODY (except God) is - qualified or authorised, morally, to impose their standard of what's acceptable and what's not on any other person. Because more often than not, when we try to impose our standard, we are influenced by our SUBJECTIVE preferences AND shortcomings.

I might consider myself smart (well, 'smart' enough to spill ink here, I guess?) but I believe there are many, many out there who are smarter and wiser than I am. (Besides, whether we should use 'smart' and 'wise' as a pre-requisite of enjoying the right to free speech is debatable in itself, because it's elitist.)

Even what I believe to be 'unworthy' views today might not be so, after my wisdom has (hopefully) grown the next day. In other words, perhaps a view might be 'unworthy' to me now only because I'm not wise enough to appreciate its wisdom today? Besides, because this is intended to be a PUBLIC conversation, it's up to the readers and commentators to JUDGE what view is valid, and what is not.

Above all, I'm only asking questions here - those others might not have asked.

And if anyone is offended - I'm sorry, truth often hurts. And please don't come here if you don't want to get 'hurt'.

So, I'm a LIBERTARIAN when it comes to free speech, and that's how I try to 'maintain' this blog - by doing nothing about the comments. Therefore, it would be very MESSY (if the traffic is heavy), with lots of junk/spam perhaps? Some have tried to use the excuse of 'need to maintain 'standard' in my blog' to censor dissent. But that's the price of free speech, if you ask me.


CONVERSATIONS: Bloggers often take the firm attitude of "I'm right, my enemy is wrong" - often because they have an agenda to advance. This attitude defeats the whole purpose of conversations which, to me, is to educate, persuade and influence each other.

What if we are all right in our own ways? What if we are all wrong to a certain extent? I hope we are all open to that possibility, given our finite mind and uneven maturity.

What is sad is to see blogs like:

a) Rocky's Bru, where all the pages sounded like a parrot-sex orgy is going on - because all you hear is "yes, yes, yes... oh YES!! YES!!! YESSSS!!!!"
All dissents are blocked off in the name of 'avoid diversion' or 'to maintain blog standard';

and

b) Screehshots, where the pages all sounded like a scratched CD, because you see [DELETED] ..... [DELETED].... all over the place.

The sad way they 'moderate' the comments only exposes how petty and biased they are (while they still pretend to be able to tolerate dissent). To me, that is not how an open and frank debate should be, nor how free speech should be enjoyed.

Yes, they (as they like to boast) blog with their real identity, they are the so-called 'gentleman bloggers'. However, we all know the reasons why we don't blog with open identity in this country. At the very least, to blog with open identity might reduce the effectiveness of some bloggers/commentators.

But I firmly believe that the validity or forcefulness of a person's speech should not, and does not, depend on the person's identity or lack thereof (unless the identity is somehow relevant to the issue, such as one's double standard).

Indeed, to attack the identity of (or lack thereof) the messenger (often done when one runs out of ideas...) instead of focusing on the message only shows one's desperation. It's rather pathetic, actually.


GUARANTEE: NO CENSORSHIP, not even of spam and junk. Because God never gave me that authority to pronounce what is or is not worthy, valid or wise. (Well, I guess except when you post something that threatens national or world security, like posting the formula for making nuclear bombs?? That would be naughty...)

The only agenda I have here is free speech. Welcome.