The presumption of innocence is the chintinous integument of liberty.
Without it, anyone who finds themselves accused must wrestle free of the allegation, and in doing so - in order to defend themselves against it - must invariably act in such a way that affirms the claim.
Consider for a moment how this process becomes inimical to liberty. One can no longer act freely in accord with their own leisurely jurisprudence. The assumption of safety from maltreatment would attract the ire of those who do not possess the same sense of security. Resentful, they would then seek to inflict their condition upon the more free-spirited members of society, so that their misery is shared; an atrabilious kind of homogeny.
The prevailing question becomes, "if I'm not at liberty, why should anyone else be?"
The folly of such a parochial and myopic view is easily revealed through extension - as myopic views often are. It produces a culture of fear, for both the accusers and the accused.
A confluence of fear, and a cold, stifling circumspection come to pervade the populace under such conditions. Inaction ensues, inspired by the threat of ready persecution, inciting distrust and a generalized retreating inward. The freedom of speech deteriorates and becomes weaponized, held against the throats of those who would seek to restore a sense of understanding, of love and trust.
Ideas begin to be surveilled. Words become fuzzy shadows on a black & white convenience-store camera; mounting evidence. Murmurs transform into whispers and then silence. The voices of courage become mute with cowardice. Those innocent and in need of defense find themselves defenseless - impugned with impunity.
What have you to say for yourself?
What am I being accused of?
Well, I'm not at liberty to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment