Dissent or Descent?

Discuss this on our boards!

Dissent or Descent?
by Robert Yoho, Columnist and Senior Editor

April 22, 2003

"Eye on Conservatism"

Columnist Robert Yoho If you’re anything like me, then you must be getting tired of entertainers who are whining about the public backlash over their anti-war, anti-Bush, and anti-American comments. These members of the elite Democratic guard are even going so far as accusing Americans of blacklisting and censorship.

"Censorship" used to be the one accusation that immediately brought the critics to their knees. The ideological opposition always cowed when the dreaded "C" word was introduced to the argument.

For much too long, these overpaid, pampered celebrities have been saying whatever they wanted—no matter how outrageous, petulant, or misinformed it might be. However, that all changed on 9/11. Americans suddenly realized that terrorism wasn’t merely the world’s problem and that evil had come to their front doorstep. The future of freedom and the security of our nation were clearly at stake. No longer could we afford the luxury of pulling the covers over our heads and pretending we were safe because two vast oceans bordered our shores. This realization required us to place a greater sobriety on life and to value those uniformed personnel who catch the criminals, rescue souls from burning buildings, and often stand between us and those who would destroy our way of life.

When Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon make their irresponsible comments in the press, then they should realize that their freedom of speech might not be entirely free of consequences. They certainly have the right to say whatever they want. But the American public also have the right to disapprove of those statements by boycotting them or by taking their entertainment dollars to those who do not ridicule their values. This is not a violation of the celebrities’ First Amendment rights; this is an affirmation of ours!

In much the same way that manufacturers market their products to the public, these entertainers are also selling a product to the consumer. In some cases, that product is an image. A product that suddenly becomes undesirable to the public will drive away the customer. Companies are fiercely protective of their corporate image and who they will permit to endorse their products. And anything that harms the image of their product may cause the consumers to buy elsewhere. These companies also take great pains to know their consumers. It should come as no secret that people instinctively patronize those companies that deliberately cater to their needs and interests. Marketing executives never insult the consumer and they constantly strive to present the product in an attractive way that will drive the consumer to want more.

Actor Tom Hanks is successful because people think they know him and they genuinely like the image he presents to the public. He endorses only those causes, such as the World War II Memorial, that the great majority of Americans enthusiastically support. But most of all, Hanks does nothing that will alienate himself to the public.

Just because these liberal, closet socialists, such as Robbins and Sarandon, do not believe in free markets, it does not mean they are not bound by the rules of market economics. Hollywood actors and actresses and musical performers are not isolated from the laws of supply and demand.

While performing in London, Natalie Maines, of the Dixie Chicks, recently learned this lesson, when she said: ``Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.''

The fallout from her statement sent more radio disk jockeys running for cover than Iraqis from the Marine Corps. Sales plummeted! Then it became obvious that the mindless blonde chick had lost sight of her consumer. And their lost revenue isn’t exactly chicken feed! Maines was reminded that she is singing country and western music. She is not a pop diva, whose fans will ignore her boorish and anti-American behavior. This is country and western—the country is America and the "western" in that phrase does not refer to Western Europe.

People definitely have the right to voice their opinions. The public also holds the right to either endorse or reject those opinions with the power of the pocketbook.

Political dissent is uniquely American! Our country was conceived in it. Freedom of speech is indeed sacred. However, the people are also free to voice their dissent of the dissenters. Perhaps the Constitutional scholars, Robbins and Sarandon, should re-read that great and time-honored document. ***

Photo of Robert Yoho courtesy of staff files