Let the people judge...

I mentioned libel laws yesterday. What I didn't note was that Richard Tice, the chair of the Brexit Party, had issued a letter to SNP politician Alyn Smith, demanding that he retract a statement made suggesting the Brexit Party were involved in money laundering.

I actually watched Alyn Smith make these statements live on TV during the election coverage on Sunday night/Monday morning. I was quite taken aback by how blatant they were. It piqued me so much that I ended up leaving a comment on one of his Twitter posts. I didn't address any of the claims he made regarding the Brexit Party, but I did point out the senselessness of the SNP's position on Brexit.

I'm now crossing the border to make raids on the Scottish political landscape :)

The SNP position seems bizarre to me. I totally understand the will for Scottish independence, and though I personally believe we're better together, I'm happy to support Scotland in its efforts to achieve independence if that's what the majority of Scottish people want. What I don't understand is the desire to substitute one union for another. Substituting the Pound for the Euro is not gaining independence - you can't truly be independent if you don't control your own currency.

Also, the British Union is a union that is returning powers to its constituent parts, but the EU is a union that is taking more and more powers away. So I really don't get the enthusiasm the SNP have for the EU. Believing in Scottish independence, yet loathing British independence seems like a circle that can't be squared.

Anyway, returning to the libel issue I may as well state my case. For me the problem with having libel laws is that it puts the responsibility on the person making the claim, but removes any responsibility from the person buying into it. Or to put it better. It puts all responsibility on the writer, but none on the reader. If people reading newspapers used their own judgement and only believed what was written if a logical argument and good evidence was provided we wouldn't have a problem. Our collective ignorance and gullibility is the real problem that needs addressing.

If you've read something in a newspaper, automatically believed it, and are now angry that you've been lied to. The blame in part lies with you for being so willing to believe claims without being provided with sufficient evidence, or investigating things for yourself.

If you have a friend and an enemy, and your enemy tells your friend a made up story about you and the friend then automatically believes it. Then your friend shares a big part of the blame.

After all, they're not much of a friend if they believe the worst without at least asking for evidence, or for the other side of the story.

Another problem with libel law is that it gives all media the veneer of verified status. As people reading think "it must be true, otherwise they wouldn't be able to print it". Or "if it wasn't true the person would be suing the paper!" and so on and so forth. So getting rid of libel laws would remove that veneer.

The ability to sue also depends largely on money. Most people simply can't afford to challenge a larger organisation over a false statement. On top of this a very wealthy person or organisation can use libel law, or the threat of libel, to stop smaller publishers from making claims. Someone making a true claim or a fair comment may end up getting dragged through the courts simply because they've came up against people with the money and power to pressure their detractors.

There's also the time and effort factor. If someone made a horrible statement about me I think I'd probably just ignore it. I certainly wouldn't like to spend weeks and months in court just to get people to change their opinion of me. Yet many would then see my lack of legal action as an admission of guilt. So with libel law it's almost like the innocent have to prove their innocence in the court of public opinion. With the public dissolving themselves of any responsibility.

Returning to the Richard Tice/Alyn Smith case though, I must say that even though I don't believe in the use of libel law myself, this did bring a bit of a smile to my face. Putting my principles aside it was nice to see people on the Brexit side of the argument punching back in such a deliberate way. It was a nice tonic to the Boris Johnson Brexit bus court case.

None of these developments are good for democracy though in my opinion. Let the people be the judge of all these politicians and their statements.