Banning words doesn’t solve societal problems – it limits free thought

It can be a tiresome experience being a free speech advocate. As an old school liberal I often find it extremely frustrating having to defend free expression from the same tired old clichés. One of the things I am often accused of is wanting to give a green light to racists and bigots. “Admit it, you just want to be free to say THAT word”, is the usual response. Depending on my mood I either pull out a John Stuart Mill quote or I say “we all find different things offensive. How far would civilisation progress if we banned everything people found offensive?”

Defending a person who uses racist and defamatory language can be difficult. It can be extremely frustrating having to explain that you’re not in fact David Duke in disguise. This is why I believe so many people think free speech is just a right-wing issue. This is a charge that has been levelled against our oldest and most treasured civil liberty since the dawn of time. In reality, civil liberties like free speech are a universal right. As such the right to speak freely must apply to everyone, no matter how prejudiced, vile or nasty those words might be. As long as you don’t incite violence you must be free to say whatever you like. 

Take slurs for example. Slurs are historically and geographically contingent. Something someone calls a slur in one country can differ in another. A famous cultural example is Martin in the Simpsons. When he used a bundle of sticks as a visual metaphor to show how a collective is stronger than the individual he used the word ‘faggot’ – the show gave an on screen warning to viewers about the words derivation.

With today’s social justice mob highly attuned to offence, context does not matter to them – intention is all that matters. Sometimes the offended party need only hear something that resembles a slur. Greg Patton was teaching a language class at the University of Southern California. He was giving a talk on filler words – these are ‘pause words’ also known as language utterances. An example being ‘err’ or ‘um’. Patton gave a famous example of a Chinese filler word called ‘ne ga, ne ga, ne ga’. Even though the business communications teacher gave a ‘trigger warning’ stating that this was not a slur, the perpetually offended students rallied to get the professor removed.

This is the 21st century version of politically correct social engineering. Today’s woke seek to legislate and eliminate all potentially offensive words from our vast and wonderful lexicon.

This is the utopian vision recently adopted by Scrabble. Mattel – which owns the worldwide rights (except in North America) – has drawn up a clandestine list of 400 no longer accepted words. The rationale for the ban, according to Ray Adler, the toy company’s Global Head of Games, is the Black Lives Matter movement and the need for the game to be “more culturally relevant”- so basically politically correct. 

Although Mattel will not release the list, some savvy logophiles have worked out that most of these are common slurs and racial epithets. Hogmanay will be interesting this year. Picture a family gathered round the fire for a wholesale game of Scrabble. Then someone innocently puts down a proscribed word. A hate-crime swat team might burst through the window and arrest the father.

One person who has been working on a definitive word list – not just the naughty words – is the author Darryl Francis. He argues succinctly that:

“Words listed in dictionaries and Scrabble lists are not slurs. They only become slurs when used with a derogatory purpose or intent, or used with a particular tone and in a particular context. Words in our familiar Scrabble word lists should not be removed because of a PR purpose disguised as promoting some kind of social betterment.”

Banning words limits free thought. When the virtuous attempt to arbitrarily shrink the lexicon, you will find yourself robbed of the ability to express yourself. This applies equally to the left and the right.

Language evolves organically. Words take on different meanings as time inexorably moves forward. Words are repurposed. In order to take the power back from bigots, words are often ‘reclaimed’ – think of the retort, “that’s Mr faggot to you”, that was daubed on walls in gay nightclubs or the infamous ‘slut-walks’ where pro-choice and #metoo feminists marched in unison with their brightly coloured ‘pussy hats’.

The examples I’ve given define our modern day reckless approach to language and history. Society does not magically improve when people or virtuous corporations attempt to legislate words out of existence. There is always a political rationale when you try to control what people can say. One who lived and suffered under the boot of soviet Russia was Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn:

“Woe to that nation whose literature is cut short by the intrusion of force. This is not merely interference with freedom of the press but the sealing up of a nation’s heart, the excision of its memory.”

Context matters. Whether you like them or not, slurs are still words. That’s all they are. You don’t have to use them. But to rob others of free expression is authoritarian. Whether you’re having a game of Scrabble or a debate, don’t censor yourself. It’s human nature to break the rules.