I read in today’s The Advocate that a group of white supremacists, the Nationalist Movement, has applied to march and demonstrate in Jena, Louisiana on Martin Luther King Day; but the group has, so far, been unable to reach a settlement with the town, one, because Jena wants to impose a $10,000 bond, change the parade route by one block, and require a “hold-harmless” clause exempting the town from liability” before Jena will allow the group either to march or demonstrate (Advocate, 5B).

And that brings back memories of when the National Socialist Party of America (NSPA) planned to march through Skokie, Illinois in the late 1970’s. The NSPA, a neo-nazi organization, had originally proposed to march in Marquette Park on Chicago’s south side, but when the Park District demanded a huge bond against anticipated violence and counter-demonstrations, the neo-Nazis then threatened to march in Skokie instead. Subsequently, when they were still denied the original application, the neo-nazis applied for and were denied the right to march in Skokie as well. Why the denial? Well, the problem was that Skokie was predominately Jewish and many of its residents survivors of the Holocaust, and the last thing they wanted or needed to see was a troop of neo-nazis goosestepping down their city streets.

That case went to the Illinois Supreme Court, which refused to overrule the county, after which it went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which, in the summer of 1977, ordered Illinois to hold a hearing and reevaluate its decision against the Nazis.  The Court did so, deciding that even though it sympathized with the people of Skokie, the county court had violated the First Amendment by denying the NSPA the right to march and demonstrate. As a result, the neo-nazis, wearing swastikas on their sleeves, were allowed to goosestep through the streets of a Jewish community.

How does that relate to events in Jena, Louisiana? It relates because both situations demand that we examine the right to freedom of expression and ask ourselves just how strongly we support that right. In other words, do we support it as long as those expressing their opinions and beliefs echo our own sentiments? Are we against freedom of expression in other situations? Well, in my opinion, for what it’s worth, if we only believe in freedom of expression as long as we do not find offensive the opinions and beliefs being expressed, we do not believe in freedom of expression at all. We simply believe in our own freedom to express our viewpoints. As Justice Holmes said after the Court’s ruling against Skokie, “The First Amendment makes possible a ‘marketplace of ideas’ where all views can be expressed whether they are popular or not” (Wikipedia, 2007).

The reality is that freedom of expression has always been a double-edged sword. After all, we cannot grant freedom of expression to a nation and then impose limits that restrict what can and cannot be said or by whom. As Voltaire once said, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Voltaire’s statement succinctly summarizes what it means to have freedom of expression. Freedom of expression grants each of us the right to say what we think and to do so without fear of censure, punishment, and/or imprisonment; but it also grants the same right to those who have opinions in direct opposition to our own. It gives the Ku Klux Klan the right to march and hold rallies, but it also gives that same right to the NAACP, gay rights organizations, Christian coalitions, feminist groups, the ACLU, and, yes, the National Socialist Party of America. In other words, the laws governing freedom of expression are totally unbiased when it comes to who can and cannot express themselves; and that, my friends, is as it should be. After all, would you really want to live in a nation that dictated who could and could not express themselves? Yes, granted, we may sometimes disagree with other people’s opinions. We may even find them disgusting, but we cannot—we must not—deny the freedom of expression to anyone, regardless of how disgusting we may find their opinions; for if we do, then the next time around, we could be the ones denied the right to freedom of expression because someone else finds our opinions disgusting. And that, my friends, is when we will finally realize that freedom of expression has ceased to exist for us all.

So, with that in mind, I can but hope the City of Jena does not deny the Nationalist Movement the right to hold its demonstration on Martin Luther King Day. For if it does, who knows which one of us will be the next to have our voice silenced. It could be me, but it could also be you.

 The Advocate (2008) Associate Press Article. January 8, 2008. p. 5B.

Wikepdia (2008) National Socialist Party v. Village of Skokie. Retrieved from http://www.wikipedia.com