Deglorification

According to D’Souza in The Enemy at Home, America’s treasured values of “autonomy” and “self-fulfillment” have in effect allowed for a downward spiral of “moral depravity” and self-indulgence in popular culture that traditional societies, both at home and abroad, find repulsive (166). The “moral depravity” in media is self-evident, obnoxious, and in fact, unavoidable. Sensationalist journalism, trashy drama, and women-objectifying images bombard televisions, billboards, and the Internet.

D’Souza illuminates the dangers of rampant sex and violence in the media. Our distasteful obsession impedes our progress in persuading Iraq to adopt democracy and grant their people basic rights. Because of its effect on our image to the Muslim world, “moral depravity” poses a problem that the next president should address.

D’Souza states, “When traditional Muslims see how freedom is used in America, they become increasingly convinced that the Islamic world is better off without this kind of freedom" (278). In order to promote the basic right of “freedom of speech” that we as Americans hold dear in Iraq, we must show that such a freedom doesn’t necessarily bring immorality with it. Many, including D’Souza, question the United State’s government failure to limit sex and violence in the media. This presents a policy conundrum. What defines appropriate censorship? What is the line between freedom of expression and obscenity?

The founding fathers protected, but did not define “freedom of speech” in the Bill of Rights. In the First Amendment, they stated:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This intentionally ambiguous wording allows for the interpretation of “freedom of speech” to shift with time. The definition depends on the decisions of the current Supreme Court justices. And since the current Court obviously doesn’t mind the rampant sex and violence in the media today, they hand over the power of presentation to the media giants, namely Hollywood and conglomerates such as MSNBC. But sex and violence as mere themes or events in the media do not reflect moral depravity, their presentation does.

Thus, the real culprit and cause of our “moral depravity” is glorification of sex and violence, not their presence. Sexual promiscuity looks beautiful when Paris Hilton does it. Drug use looks glamorous when popular music artists do it.


Jim Morrison of the Doors is regarded by many as one of the "sexiest men who ever lived" . He is still glorified after having died of a drug overdose and behaving indulgently with women, as countless pop icons have.[1]

But rarely do the media conglomerates portray such activity in a negative light. This is why Candidate D’s policy of “limited censorship of sex and violence” would most effectively protect “freedom of speech” while upholding moral standards that the Muslim world could agree with. For America’s safety and the success of the war, we need “limited censorship of sex and violence” to minimize immorality, or what D’Souza calls the “…distinguishing feature—and leading export—of American civilization" (278).


Larry McMurtry’s The Last Picture Show provides an excellent example of deglorification of immoral behavior. McMurtry debases lusty teenage sex, portraying an ugly, primitive side of premarital sex that rarely receives coverage in media today.

This scene from the movie production of The Last Picture Show portrays the ugly side of perverse sexual relationships when Sonny's tryst goes sour.[2]

This model of limited censorship defines a middle ground of censorship that D’Souza loosely defines in his address to liberal democrats to, “…recog[nize] that there are higher and lower forms of autonomy” (272). This compromise between eliminating all sex and violence and no censorship at all at once allows artistic freedom and satisfies the demands of traditional cultures. WIley makes a strong point when he says, "But I also believe firmly that limiting freedoms inhibits both the growth of individuals and society and their potentials for manifesting greater happiness." As Americans, we value our rights highly because they provide the means to realizing our potential as human beings and finding fulfillment in life. Enlightened happiness, the happiness that comes with the freedom to grow and to learn how to express one's self, furthers the development of society by spawning enthusiastic, passionate leaders.

[1] "Jim Morrison," GrooveShark, 11 Feb. 2008 http://www.grooveshark.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/morrison.jpg.
[2] "The Last Picture Show--the end," Youtube, 11 Feb. 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__T3WJVmBY8.