Discoursing on power differs fundamentally from being silenced by it
Evidence
Rushdie possessed not only the freedom to voice his convictions but also the power to make his voice heard. Most British Muslims, by contrast, were members of an underprivileged community, one that had below-average education and income levels, lacked political and social influence, and held to a religious worldview at odds with the dominant culture. Because they possessed neither the power nor the status of a Salman Rushdie, their voices often were ignored or otherwise went unheard, and this reality fueled their frustrations. — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 355 (
#complicates, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Endless theorizing of power can empty power of real meaning; Restricting access to literacy and discourse is a regime’s central control mechanism — , The Braided Reading EPUB: 5-Year…, 107; State power depends on borrowing the bodies of its subjects — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 695 (+14 more)
Related
- Free expression is meaningless without the social power to be heard (similarity 0.89)
- Free speech serves the powerless while censorship protects the powerful (similarity 0.78)
- Press freedom replaced citizens’ right to speak with a right to be informed (similarity 0.78)
Broader Connections
- Free expression is meaningless without the social power to be heard
#complicates(0.65) — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 355