PRESS CONTROL &

THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY

by R. H CROWTHER

A subject for frequent comment in ONE's "Tangents" section, as well as a theme for countless news items in the general press of the nation during 1965, "obscenity" assumes exceptional news significance as the year draws to a close. This is primarily because of two obscenity convictions currently before the U. S. Supreme Court for final decision. One of them-perhaps familiar to the greater number of American readers—is "Fanny Hill: Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure," whose obscenity conviction in Massachusetts was appealed to the Supreme Court by Putnam's Sons. But the case which, in the opinion of many publishers, may make legal history, by leading the Court to overturn all U. S. obscenity statutes in the literary field, is that involving Ralph Ginzburg, and his 1960 obscenity conviction in Philadelphia, as publisher of EROS.

With broad and unprecedented changes thus imminent, and perhaps already accomplished by the time this goes to press, it is an opportune time for some general observations on current trends in this area, along with a brief review of some of the theoretical and practical problems involved, including the basic Constitutional issues.

Democracy as "the tyranny of the majority" vs. democracy as "liberty for minorities" defines an ideological battle which is being joined on many different fronts in modern times. As history unfolds, and as a result of our archaic and unrealistic sex laws, it is

6

entirely likely that sexual practices and mores within our society may become the focal point for the coming fullscale revaluation of our democratic institutions, and the means for breaking the back of present political authoritarianism in the field of sexual morals and in other areas. Through centuries of Anglo-American tradition, this authoritarianism has undermined, in varying degrees, the classic principles of democracy (not to mention the more modern principles of constitutional government) by attempting to coerce minorities into conformity with majority (and very often quasi-majority) standards of behavior in many categories. Pornography and obscenity also comprise a closely-related and very important testing-ground for democratic ideals and practices, since, as with sexual behavior itself, they involve important areas of conflict between individual liberty and group tyranny. It is chiefly for this reason that these subjects so frequently appear in the news, and as topics for general discussion in the pages of ONE Magazine, and elsewhere.

Because of the virtual impossibility of establishing legal definitions in subjective areas, such as those involved with pornography and obscenity, a pro tem remedy might indeed be one proposed by the American Civil Liberties Union, noted in the N. Y. TIMES for 10/18/65 in connection with a report on Ralph Ginzburg's U. S. Supreme Court appeal. The ACLU proposal is