Most bloggers are attracted to the medium because they enjoy venting their opinions in a free-wheeling marketplace of ideas. The clashes of viewpoints can be sharp and heated, but most bloggers understand the nature of the game and operate within its rules. That's why it's so outrageous that Matthew Barganier, of Antiwar.com, preferred an underhanded trick to actually debating our JG colleague Max Borders. Barganier pulled a quote from a spirited debate, using it to incite a phone and email spam campaign against Max's employer. This in the name of libertarian purity. A close reading of the post in question reveals that, while provocative and certainly not in the mainstream of libertarian thought, it falls far short of deserving the kind of mob bullying Barganier engineered. The inflammatory wording wasn't even introduced into the debate by Max - he was responding to a hypothetical raised by his opponent. In fact, the very next sentence of Max's post (often referred to as "context") makes it clear that a much more subtle argument was being made. Barganier did not include it. That would have been intellectually honest; instead Barganier chose to distort Max even more in his follow up posts. Barganier defends his petulant tactics as fair because (1) Max's comments were made in a public forum and (2) he, Barganier, welcomes people to contact Antiwar.com and demand that he be fired; therefore, it must be OK for him to do likewise to others. There are several errors here. First, as any good libertarian knows, just because something is allowed doesn't mean it is advisable, or praiseworthy, or honorable. Even if everyone acted within their property rights to read something in a public forum, to email someone about it, etc., it was still a foolish and dangerous precedent to set. Know any bloggers who work for a living? Whose opinions expressed out of work hours might not match 100% with those of their employers? The rules of the game - the gentlemen's agreement of blogging debate - would disintegrate if everyone rallied the mob the moment a harsh (as he interprets it) word was said. Hence the second flaw: whereas Matthew apparently works for Antiwar.com, making his blog opinions a direct work function, Jujitsui Generis isn't sponsored by or connected with any institution. Max wasn't, and never claimed to be, speaking for his employer. Yet Barganier took it upon himself to research and publicize Max's employment information in order to gain leverage against him. The saddest thing here, of course, is that we've lost an intelligent and provocative blogger. Max came at things from a rare perspective that he articulated well. You didn't have to agree with him to have your own thinking strengthened on a question. We can’t put it any better than Mill did in "On Liberty", and can’t resist quoting him at length on why the advocates of the mainstream position lose most by suppressing a dissenter: If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error...We have now recognized the necessity…[of] freedom of the expression of opinion, on four distinct grounds… First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility. Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied. Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the dogma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but encumbering the ground, and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction, from reason or personal experience. Exactly. So let’s keep intimidation tactics out of the equation here, shall we? Some of us are trying to have a discussion. Jujitsui Generis Chris Martin, Jason Turner, John Schrock
Right on!
Posted by: Tom | December 08, 2004 at 03:18 PM
Wow. Thanks for exposing this. I've heard of people getting fired for their blogs before. It's likely to be a precedent that catches on. The new censorship. Glenn Reynolds has warned that bloggers would have to fight for their right to blog. We're seeing the beginnings of it.
Here's to making the names of vicious informers like Matthew Barganier mud! Long live liberty! And many thanks for this expose!
Posted by: Lancelot Finn | December 08, 2004 at 04:19 PM
Lancelot (and other dear readers)...We would like to be clear. Max was NOT fired, nor was his position ever explicitly threatened. Without going into the details, it is enough to say that Bargainer made good on his threats and Max acted to protect the interests of an organization that he loves dearly. It was a difficult choice - forced by Bargainer - but was not made under any ultimatum. Max is continuing in his position at a very noble and decent institution where his work will continue to be appreciated.
Posted by: Jason Turner | December 08, 2004 at 05:58 PM
How pitiful is that... bullying away the free exchange of ideas? Using underhanded tactics instead of patience and persuasion. Inciting hatred. Sounds like the stuff he's supposed to be fighting.
As a anti-war person myself, I'd like to thank this chap for playing his small role in decreasing freedom in the world.
Max, if you want to use my name, you've got it. I'll say it was me. Tell Matthew Bargainer he can contact my employers at +353 1 8176342. We're five hours ahead of the east coast.
Posted by: Greg Baxter | December 09, 2004 at 04:54 PM