Why is anonymity so important?
Has David C Stachura taken it on himself in declaring the US Supreme Court wrong, and the First Amendment invalid? Of course he wouldn’t/couldn’t use those exact words. That is however the image he portrays with his devotion to my spine or lack there of simply based on my perceived anonymity. He has declared my message to be false simply because he and many others do not know me. Simply not knowing the author of a history book does not make it less true. Not knowing who wrote the dictionary doesn’t make its definitions false, or inaccurate.
People through anonymity can express themselves without fear of reprisal. In Schiller Park specifically there has always been a trend among the “Wrong Doers” (Description used based off of my point of view) to attack and harass those who speak up against them, they would metaphorically beat them into silence by attacking and harassing them, and their families. We saw it on a regular basis with the old, School Board leadership of David Stachura and Patricia Godziszewski. It has always been my opinion that in most cases they perpetrated those harassment campaigns through, and with the help of Roy F McCampbell. I do however feel that their once close group has been disrupted by parts of their group not being able to perform their assigned task, but it was the situation none the less. The smear campaign against the School District, its staff, and supporters became harassment on an epic scale. That is in fact why this blog was created in the first place. We wanted to give a voice to the majority of the community that could be safe from the onslaught of harassment intended to silence that voice. We wanted to have a voice that disarmed them of their only form of attack. You can not harass into silence that witch you can not identify.
The former group of troublemakers has for the most part devolved into one final voice spewing nothing but anger and hate. There is very little coherence left in what once was a consistent and unified all be it very negative voice, but that sole survivor seems hell bent on discrediting me simply based off of my perceived anonymity. In all actuality he does not even known for sure if his thoughts are true. I can only imagine the frustration caused by having someone tirelessly call you out on your lies, and not be able to specifically target their name with a smear campaign as has been their past practices, but none the less he continues with his school yard name calling.
Anonymity is the tool I chose to embrace to defend and protect my children and grand children. To protect my name I lessened my message, and by keeping the details of my identity secret I made more work for myself. This had a positive effect of forcing me to be more diligent in offering as much proof of my claims and opinions as possible. I feel for the most part I have succeeded. Of course I have my detractors, the people that obviously despise my very existence. They need no introduction but they hate none the less, and attempt to discredit my information as lies simply by declaring my secrets to be the key proof of my dishonesty. This is of course not true, and simply just another vain attempt at strengthening their position among the very harshly divided political portion of this community. For every hater there is at least one supporter, and if my hate mail to support mail ratio is an indicator, these is by far more for my information then against.
Anonymity has been a heated topic for far longer then any of us have been involved. It’s clear to me that anonymity is both good and bad. Anonymity has its place, and has always had a place in society. But the Internet is something new. Does anonymity have a right to exist as such on this new medium even if the risk is great? Twenty years ago, there was no Internet and we were doing fine with the issue of pre-Internet anonymity, so would technologically ending internet anonymity once and for all be a disaster? What changed that makes anonymity on the internet so important? And what would things be like if the internet had evolved to this day with anonymity being an impossibility? Ask yourself if we would be demanding anonymity on the Internet if we never had it in the first place.
Curiously, and in most cases with some exceptions like those I face with the aforementioned individual, those for and against anonymity seem to often have the same motivation—protecting democracy and freedom. The pro folks say that taking political debate to the highest level of discussion is not possible without some anonymity. Whistle blowers are a good example of why anonymity is necessary. Once they are discovered, they are fired and ruined. The anonymity folks will cite examples from law enforcement showing how attacking organized crime in particular and crime in general would be impossible without the use of anonymous sources. As I said before, I have chosen anonymity for my families freedom from persecution. Those honest individuals against anonymity would argue that in crime-fighting, anonymous sources are not reliable and can be abused, leading to the ruin of innocent people. Furthermore, anonymity is often used to illegally move secret information. People and corporations are often libeled by those who spread false information. In fact, a Schiller Park resident attempted to challenge my anonymity in court not to long ago, and did not succeed. This if nothing else was one of this blogs greatest success stories as it added validation to my message, and goals. It does not in any way prove what I have said as truth, that still remains in the hands of my readers, but it protected my freedom of speech by declaring I was not acting out of malice.
The United States Supreme Court has declared that protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical, minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.
I have included at the end of this post a small gallery of examples to my point. The individual mentioned above still resorts to personal attacks, of me and my family despite not even knowing who we are.