A white supremacist, a preacher who protested at funerals of AIDS victims, terrorist sympathizers, and…. Michael Savage?!?!?! Apparently those in charge of our beloved motherland have decided that a conservative radio host from the Bronx fits into the same class as a child murdering terrorist and Russian gang leader who slaughtered 37 people. Or at least they see enough of a resemblance to stick them with the same penalty for their crimes, lifelong banishment from the shores of America’s closest ally. That’s right, friends! Everyone who values their taken-for-granted freedom of speech had better bottle it up, lock it up tight and bury it 30 feet below the earth because the powers at be are coming for it.
Last Tuesday was just a typical day for Michael Savage. That is, until he opened the newspaper to see that he had been blacklisted from one of the most powerful nations on earth. Nothing like a little top of the morning pick-me-up from the S.F. Chronicle, eh? (That “eh” was for all of my Canadian friends, by the way.)
More so than being banned from an entire country, imagine the feeling of having your name listed among murderers and terrorists. The “Home Secretary” of Britain says that Savage (a.k.a. Michael Weiner) is “Considered to be engaging in unacceptable behaviour by seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred which might lead to inter-community violence.”
And for what exactly, Madame Secretary? Is it for openly speaking against illegal immigration into the United States, which more than 80% of Americans oppose? Last time I checked, illegal immigration is, well….. illegal! How dare that radical Michael Savage support enforcing 250-year-old laws? Or is it possibly for openly opposing same-sex marriage, which the majority of Americans also oppose? Obviously, I’m a bit confused. (Maybe it’s the culture gap. I happen to not care for soccer either.)
Since Britain claims to be a fellow nation of free speech, they restrict only rhetoric that incites violence (not unlike the U.S.), or otherwise aims to. That is how they justified the banishment of Savage. They say that his words have led to hatred and violence in America, and they don’t want that in their country. I would be curious to hear which violent criminals in San Quinton cite Michael Savage as their inspiration. I would like to know what murders were committed over information provided in a Savage broadcast, or what terrorist acts were justified in a Savage book. Really, I would. If the British government could please provide me with that information, I would be eternally grateful. If they oblige, and prove me wrong, I will apologize for what I am about to say.
Michael Savage was nothing more than a lab rat for the British government, an experimental specimen, of sorts. They wanted to see just how far they could strangle free speech without being called to the carpet. And what a cowardly move on their part, I might add. Anyone who has ever tuned into a Savage radio show knows that he is blunt, honest, and unafraid to say what needs to be said. He is a conservative, but not a mouthpiece of the Republican Party, being that he is not a Republican at all. This makes him poison to other conservative media figures. He doesn’t respect their scripted rhetoric and they don’t acknowledge his existence. In laymen’s terms, he has no allies to speak of. For this reason, he may has well have had a big red target on his back when the British began their social science project.
Instead of looking to toy with societal norms for lazy afternoon entertainment, the British “Home Secretary” would be better served focusing her attention on something other than American talk radio. The G20 protesters who terrorized her largest city just last month might be a good place to start. I don’t have a college degree yet, but I’m pretty sure throwing bricks at police officers and through windows of private businesses constitutes actual violence. Or maybe she thinks that was Savage’s fault, too.
In terms of this “radical behaviour” they speak of, Michael Savage is far from it. Sure, his Brooklyn accent and his New York attitude may come off intense at times. Yes, he’s a tad eccentric. But, at the end of the day, he is an entertainer. He is paid to attract listeners. And he does so while conveying a message he believes in. His unconventionally delivered, yet refreshingly sensible, words are a stark contrast to any anarchist rebel. Savage is undoubtedly on the right-wing side of the political spectrum, but none of his opinions are far from what most Americans believe. How British leaders view him as a threat is inconceivable to me.
Even Jon Leibowitz (a.k.a. Jon Stewart), no ally of Savage, mocked the ridiculous decision by Great Britain. He pointed out the imperialist history of Britain and the bloody, but acceptable, violence at each and every soccer game. Yet, somehow, Michael Savage is a threat to their “civil society.”
All satire aside, this egregious intrusion upon a basic human right is a terrifying proposition for all freedom-loving inhabitants of planet earth. It shows the willingness of Western, democratic nations to test the boundaries of their power. And don’t think Americans are somehow exempt. Barack Obama has repeatedly expressed his fondness for European policies and Nancy Pelosi is in openly pushing for government control over the content of media. Ever hear of the Fairness Doctrine? If not, you should go take a look. It’s a terrific horror novel. We can only hope it stays fiction.
And this is not just a problem for “Radical Right-Wingers.” In fact, this is not a conservative issue, or even an American issue. It is a human rights issue. Those in power are ALWAYS looking for ways to expand their power. Any voice of opposition is another voice they desire to silence, conservative, liberal, or in between. Anyone who values their right to speak their opinion should be watchful and cautious of moves like these, for each infringement of freedom is a step toward tyranny.
A Note to Great Britain:
I believe your nation once attempted to limit human rights in this region. If I recall correctly, that didn’t exactly work out well for you. I would hope that you wouldn’t make the same mistake twice.