Daniel Barenboim | Explores… Freedom of Speech [subtitulado]


Je suis Daniel Barenboim et aujourd’hui, je voudrais faire quelques remarques sur un sujet
qui a toujours été important et qui l’est d’autant plus
à l’heure actuelle. Il s’agit de la liberté d’expression. ŒUVRE DE PAIX Inutile de défendre le bien-fondé
de la liberté d’expression. Il est évident que chaque être humain et chaque pays doit bénéficier
et donner à ses citoyens la possibilité de parler librement, s’exprimer et donner son opinion. Mais la liberté d’expression
n’est pas juste une question de droit, de légitimité. C’est aussi une question
de responsabilité. Je crois que dans le monde actuel, lorsqu’on exprime son opinion, on doit le faire
non pas parce que c’est un droit, mais en étant conscient
de la responsabilité qui nous incombe. Il est temps d’examiner le pour
et le contre des réseaux sociaux. Nous avons toujours tendance à blâmer la technologie qui s’est développée si rapidement, minimisant par là même
notre propre responsabilité personnelle. Je me souviens quand la télévision a fait son apparition fracassante
dans notre quotidien. Les parents disaient : “C’est terrible.
Les enfants ne font pas leurs devoirs. Ils passent leur temps devant la télé.” Comme s’il fallait blâmer la télévision. En réalité,
c’est une question de discipline. Les parents
doivent inculquer à leurs enfants à faire la différence
entre le temps qu’ils passent à travailler
et à apprendre leurs leçons, et le temps
dont ils disposent pour se distraire. Les réseaux sociaux, bien sûr,
vont encore plus loin. On retrouve le point de vue d’un expert en recherche médicale cité par quelqu’un
qui n’a aucune idée sur le sujet. Il est donc très important, je pense, lorsqu’on utilise les réseaux sociaux pour exprimer son opinion, de le faire pas seulement en se disant : “Je peux écrire ce que je veux.” La liberté de le faire. Mais avec un sens de la responsabilité. En sachant que ce sera lu
exactement de la même façon que l’opinion de quelqu’un
qui est spécialiste du sujet. De cette manière,
les réseaux sociaux peuvent devenir quelque chose d’extrêmement positif
dans notre vie. Cela vaut pour la médecine,
les recherches médicales, l’analyse critique, en musique, en art, en peinture,
dans tous les domaines. Je souhaite ardemment que ceux qui passent beaucoup de temps sur les réseaux sociaux… soient de plus en plus sensibilisés à la responsabilité qu’ils ont
lorsqu’ils s’expriment. Merci pour votre attention. Vous pouvez poser vos questions ou
laisser vos commentaires sur le sujet. Merci beaucoup.

57 thoughts on “Daniel Barenboim | Explores… Freedom of Speech [subtitulado]

  • Talking about freedom of speech and the responsability of doing so, what about musician taking position about subjects (for example, Itzhak Perlman about HB2, cancelling a concert http://www.classicfm.com/artists/itzhak-perlman/news/north-carolina-concert-bathroom-law/#fBgTSSCyFckeAKX0.97 ) ?
    Arn't workers supposed to do their job as worker and tell their opinion as themselves ? Shouldn't musician talk about music as a musician and only talk about their ideas as normal persons ? I feel like, in this example, Itzhak Perlman kind of mixed it.

  • Dear Maestro, thank you for the great clarity and sincerity of your thinking and your speach. It is a great pleasure and chance for all, musicians or not, to watch all these videos.

  • i`m  fun of you maestro..im from morocco north of Africa …we have in our country lot of talented un music …for exemple i conduct in front of miroir  8 hours in day ..but we can not joined a school or conservatory ..because  in morocco we have one international school of musique and its so  expensive .. I'm now studying medicine for being a doctor and have money for joined  this expensive school …im now  in depression because I feel my hands conduct in air without communication with an orchestra..and everything is expensive ..could you speak about this problem in one of your videos

  • Thank you for this. Freedom of speech where speech is suppressed is important. But it is equally, if not more, important to consider the sublime value of speech as its context and raison d'etre. As the great neuroscientist, Iain McGilchrist said: "It matters a lot where we start the process, where the first approximation to understanding begins. Because it is possible to exclude some aspects of the picture right at the outset by choosing a model or metaphor as the starting point that will never, from then on, allow certain aspects of reality to be revealed".

    I'd like to mention a kind of speech in which the attention to the starting point is of utmost importance; where speech becomes a mode and means of self-discovery, or self enquiry. Such a school of self-enquiry may provide training in conversation; learning how to listen deeply, how to follow the thread or break it if necessary. How to refrain from associative train of thoughts as well as trust the flow that is inherent in an insightful idea and allow it so speak itself, so to speak. One of the most important things for such a group of students is that while paying attention to the intention, there is complete permission to make errors, be it assumptions, presumptions or inaccuracies. The permission to make errors is essential in the transformational process. It is strange to me and sad that in this era of global communication this kind of contemplative training is not an elementary part of the academic curiculum .. it is so rare.

  • Totalmente de acuerdo con Usted maestro… inteligencia responsable y respetuosa al expresarse, nunca de manera invasiva o dogmática. Saludos desde la Ciudad de México

  • generally freedom carries in itself responsibility I think…))) to be free means to be responsible on your decisions, words, acts, desires etc… and on its results:))) and first of all before yourself… that's why true freedom is very hard to reach and after getting it, not to loose…))) it's most important part of human being… as creativity (in everything, not only in art…) and love….)))))) it's hard work thru all life but very interesting as life itself :))) thank you again maestro!!! all the best!

  • Amo estas series. Gracias Barenboim por compartir. Si pudiera agregar algo, pediría que en todos los videos agreguen en la descripción cuál fue la música utilizada para ese capítulo. Veo que la mayoría son muy populares, pero estoy segura de que sería de mucha utilidad.

  • Es un verdadero tema importante de nuestros tiempos lo que usted plantea. Muchas gracias por su mensaje y por la claridad al exponerlo.

  • Maestro Barenboim, you made a point in your Reith Lectures which has become a mantra for me, and which I think should be a mantra for all countries, troubled or not, and for all people, at peace or not. You quoted Martin Buber: "'There can be no peace between Jews and Arabs that is only a cessation of war. There can only be a peace of genuine co-operation.' End of quotation. Therefore peace requires dialogue, a dialogue which consists of sensitive talking and often painful listening."

    It seems to me, though, that this is a mantra that would fit well as the rule of the social web, too: sensitive talking and often painful listening.

    Thank you for weighing in on this very important debate.

    http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/radio4/transcripts/20060505_reith.pdf

  • The freedom of speech cannot be used always to the maximum, as the great Maestro is also telling here. In my opinion, freedom always (it doesnt matter what kind of freedom), has a natural border: the freedom of other persons. You can say what you want, but if you are forbidding a special group their freedom of e.g. speech, you misuse your own freedom. But if you would do it like Immanuel Kant said, to do always the thing you expect the majority to do to you, you are not allowed to restrict one group in their freedom. So with every freedom there is a border restricting yourself, which is also colliding with the meaning of freedom itself. This is a vicious circle, but I really can apply to your message, Maestro Barenboim, that taking responsibility and acting (which is my own opinion) like Kant told us, would be a great advance for civilisation and! culture, which should be in the interest of every human being.

  • Mr. Barenboim: I loved your editorial and would like to include it in my blog for next sunday 14, which you can visit at http://contraluzcoah.blogspot.com/ By coincidence an article I publish every sunday, will be talking this time about mexican haters in social networks, and the way they treated our sportsmen and women at the Olympics. Hope you don't mind being published in my blog. Thanks.

  • Daniel's summary about freedom of speech ought to ignite a debate – there is a permanent tension between freedom and responsibility.  Many want to curtail speech because it is irresponsible – but who is to be the censor?  Daniel appears to prefer this to be the individual (if that is so, I agree); but inevitably social mores and laws will limit speech, like they limit all freedoms.  And does it depend the type of speech? Reporting of observed or verifiable fact is different to expressing one's opinion or belief.  For me reporting of events must be as wide open as possible so that there is accountability.  Silly, uninformed or hateful opinions often self-censor as one sees happening in the American political debate raging now – as long as people can hear all sides we can trust them to make up their own minds.

  • Freedom ends in other's freedom, so I think we all must respect. And responsability comes when I must respect other's freedom.It's a question of not only rights but of an obligation. We love rights but we have also our duties. And the duty of respect is perhaps the most delicate and important one. Thank you sir Barenboim for presenting complex questions in a simple way.

  • Gracias maestro. Ahora puedo disfrutar de sus palabras, además de su música.
    He de decirle que algunos de los momentos más gozosos de mi vida los he pasado escuchándole en directo. Nunca olvidaré sus Variaciones Goldberg en el Palau de València ni la entrañable velada de la presentación de "Mi Buenos Aires querido" con la serie interminable de bises que nos regaló.
    Pero lo que más le agradezco es su constante lucha por la libertad y el entendimiento entre los pueblos.

  • "Danke! Vielen Dank, es freut mich sehr, dass Sie uns, nun über You Tube, ein wenig an Ihrem enormen Erfahrungsschatz und Wissen teilhaben lassen!"

  • Maestro, ojalá y pronto haga un video en el que recomiende sus libros favoritos y nos cuente cuáles le recomendó el Rey Arthur Rubinstein. Abrazo desde México.

  • Hallo Maestro,
    ich möchte Ihnen herzlich danken für Ihren Youtube-Kanal, der ein wunderbares Beispiel abgibt, wie Ethik und Ästhetik zueinander kommen können.
    Paul Kroker

  • Dear Mr. Barenboim,
    I was so happy to find your You Tube Channel.
    Your comments of Freedom of Speach combining it with music was new to me. However I learned a lot to research more on this subject.
    As a student in Music Science it is so usefull to me to watch and listen your channel.
    Please continue.

  • i suggest more……. every morning a hallo and some piano beautiful playing….Bach Mozart and Bach to listen to. …

  • Hello Mr. Daniel Barenboim, I'm a composer and a pianist from New York, and I'm also an Israeli and Jewish. There is no argument about the fact that you are an immensely talented musician and artist, my question has nothing to do with that aspect but it has to do with your political stance with regards to Israel.

    There is a recorded history, and then there is an invented history. I would argue that the contentions and conclusions you raise are not based on facts but rather convenience.
    Every living soul on this planet, knows that Israel was the land where Jews had mighty and world encompassing civilizations with great traditions and great religious practices, such as the famous Temples of Jerusalem. They also know that in Israel, the Jewish people had Great Kings, such as King David and King Solomon. These facts are recorded in the Jewish Scriptures, the Tenach, the Christian Bible and also the Koran. In fact the latter 2 religions have directly sprung out of Judaism, and no one is arguing about this.

    So from a religious and historical perspective the land of Israel belongs to the Jewish People legally. As you know, some 2000 years ago the Romans have persecuted the Jews and exiled them, while leaving Israel, the Land of Jews in ruins. Since that time, until 1948, various nations and governments have occupied it, but never settled their people there. After Rome was destroyed, The Christians and Muslims have waged bloody battles each trying to take the land and occupy it, and no one really succeeded. So the land continued to be a region just like the Sahara of Africa, where no country really owned it.

    But lo and behold, after the long exile of 2000 years the Biblical prophecy of Jews returning back from the exiles and reclaiming their God given land has become a reality in front of our very eyes. This chunk of land ‘Palestine’ so erroneously and vituperatively renamed by one of the Roman generals from Israel to Palestine, to inflict salt to injury on the jews, in the way of its not enough we have defeated you, we now are going to humiliate you by renaming your country after your bitter enemies the Philistines. Thus the seeds of confusion and lunacy and revisionist history had been laid by that infamous roman general, and the Jewish People are suffering from that renaming to this very day.

    You also have to be aware of another vital fact. Nowhere in history prior to the creation of the modern state of Israel, did the arabs who lived in Israel identified themselves as the ‘Palestinians’. In fact just the opposite is true, there was the The Palestinian Symphony Orchestra composed of Jews only, not one Arab was a member of that Orchestra, so Jews also had called themselves ‘Palestinians’ because they lived in a region that the world had decided to call ‘Palestine’, but that doesn’t mean that Jews are in some way ethnically associated with the destroyed and instinct ancient Philistines, that would be ridiculous thing to suggest. I wonder then in that token, why the claim of the muslim arabs after the creation of the modern state of Israel that they some how are the descendants of the erased and departed Philistine tribe is not considered in your eyes as an absurd proposition?

    Surely there is absolutely no connection between the arabs of today and the ancient Philistines, so on what grounds they are claiming that they have any rights to this land?

    So the Jewish people can trace their roots to the land in three ways as we have demonstrated above. Religion, History, and common sense.

    But even though the arabs have absolutely nothing to do with this land, they were given the lion's share when the British had cut Palestine apart and had created a new country called Jordan, yes today’s Jordan was created from lands that were called ‘Palestine’, this is common knowledge, please google it.

    Not satisfied with the lion's share, enters the UN in 1947 and cuts whatever was left of Palestine yet again and gives it again to the Arabs, and only a tiny portion of greater Palestine was given to the Jews, miraculously the Jews agreed, but the Arabs said no. Israel at day one of its independence was attacked by 5 Arab countries, and their aim was openly declared, to murder every Jew in Israel. But before they went along with their proposed genocide they instructed their ‘brothers’ who lived in those territories to flee so that they wouldn’t be caught up in the fighting and that it wouldn’t disturb their plan of totally destroying Israel and everyone in it.

    With God’s help the Jewish people were victorious and they won all these wars. So why would you, a Jew would come to the aid of those who openly called for the murder of your people? openly want to murder all Jews in the world, read the Hamas charter? and why wouldn’t you stand by your people? why would you stand with those who want to do us harm, if indeed you consider yourself a proud Jew?

    Remember that our King of Israel besides been called ‘The Sweet Singer of Israel’ he was also a mighty warrior who protected his people and stood fast to bring down the Goliath. He was a musician but also a fighter. Nowhere in Judaism it says to put your head down in front of your enemy so that he would chop it off. When we are attacked, we are commanded to defend ourselves . The whole idea that Jews should not do anything and let their enemies do as they wish is rather an anti semitic notion, which is foreign to Judaism.

    The hand of Israel is always and was always outstretched for peace, but if our enemies want to chop off our extended hand of peace then we would strike them down and defend ourselves.
    Anyone who doesn’t have this most basic sense of dignity and responsibility is rather practicing self deception and is avoiding the reality on purpose out of convenience, which may be because of status, career, universality, trying to appease the masses, or siding with the Nazis just like those Jews who became Hitler’s Jewish police to brutalize their own brethren in the hopes that they will be spared, but in the end they were also murdered by Hitler.

    Remember one thing, the Hamas and all the other anti semites are more then happy to accept your support, they will use it to their advantage until a certain point where they will need you no more, and then they will be ready to inflict harm on every Jew cause they have a Nazi-like Ideology. Please consider my remarks and maybe just maybe it will give you an opening to take a more in-depth look at the conflict and realize that we Jews are not trying to brutalize anyone, we have never in our history enjoyed any of these things, all we want is to live in peace and security in our tiny and only 1 Jewish State. This shouldn't be a crime you know, unless you purposely are trying to turn Jewish existence and rejuvenation into a crime no matter what.

    Kind Regards,

    Saul Dzorelashvili

    Composer

    NYC

  • Estimado Maestro Barenboim, gracias por compartir su criterio y conocimiento. Es muy valioso para todos los que nos transmite a través de este canal. Concuerdo con su pensamiento acerca de nuestra responsabilidad en cuanto a la libertad de expresión. Un abrazo grande desde Ecuador.

  • Social media ostensibly guarantees the right to freedom of expression but not the right to be heard. Too often it takes the form of a mere soundboard to frustration in a world over which we have increasingly little say.. That world, like social media itself, is driven by corporate interests. Unfortunately for many people this doesn't exactly encourage a sense of responsibility when expressing their opinions.

  • Aunque creo que estoy de acuerdo en todo su mensaje, en mi humilde opinión, debería resumirse en:
    Cuando vaya a expresar mi opinión preguntarse a uno mismo si ésta puede se de utilidad para quienes lo lean o por el contrario les estoy haciendo perder el tiempo, o peor aún, estoy dando un mensaje que le hará mal.
    Por otro lado, aunque no seamos expertos en una materia, quizás si podamos ofrecer información adicional de calidad, aunque siempre es aconsejable que quién lo reciba sea consciente de cuánto valor darle.
    No solo en redes sociales, debemos aplicarlo en cualquier entorno.

  • Absolutely right.
    By other words, only because one can do something, it doesn't mean that he should do it. At the end we all live in community and this community is much bigger than the small world where people tend to isolate themselves in. We are not "the center of the universe"!

    All this can be said in one word, respect.

  • Maestro, I fully endorse your plea for freedom of speech, as I do your request for it to be used responsibly. However, do you believe that the ‘responsibility’ should remain a request, rather than a legal requirement? It strikes me that what is (or is not) ‘responsible’, with few exceptions, is a subjective opinion, which should not be used to prohibit some from being heard.

    It’s my opinion, after huge deliberation, that without bad ideas being heard, they cannot be refuted. Moreover, many ideas now considered good and/or worthy were widely regarded as bad ideas, when first proposed. Women’s suffrage, the abolition of slavery and Darwin’s theory of evolution were all considered ‘irresponsible’, at some point. Notwithstanding your immense effort to reconcile Israelis and Palestinians – or maybe because of it – do you believe it’s still correct that ‘Mein Kampf’ is available for study; and thereby available to be refuted, for example?

    For my part, I’d far rather see such things openly available and debated, rather than festering underground. It strikes me that such vile ideas (my opinion) will never be eradicated; and they’ll be revisited cyclically. However, whilst good and intelligent people are able to refute them, publicly, I believe they’re less likely to become an epidemic. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the matter; being a man I respect and better placed than me to have an informed view, on some of the points I raise. I cannot declare, in advance, that I’ll agree; but I will certainly give them long deliberation.

  • In this time of age when people are working to take away freedom of speech it is as important as ever.

  • Gracias Daniel…

    Por el talento, la disciplina, el conocimiento, tu solidaridad para compartirlos.

    Y sobre todas las cosas, porque luego de todo ello, además brindás tus tiempos para el entendimiento mutuo de los seres humanos.

  • Querido maestro, una pregunta con mucho respeto a su religión sería: por qué los músicos judíos tocan música de Bach si él era cristiano y tenía ideas antisemitas? Sería pecado en su opinión para esa religión el tocar por ejemplo la pasión según San Mateo?

  • I presume a couple of things. That your idea is a well thought out proposition. And, as I can see you are a master in your field, it is also generated on your experience and principles. Now, since I was a child having thought of every expression as sharing co-valency with one's action, without assuming equal importance, I thank you for stating responsibility goes with freedom in regards to speech (if I'm not mistaken). But what can a person do, one not given nor having developed a sense of their speech in terms of their listener, or as significant in regards to the group of their society, to now take on responsibility for the effect of it? I think many people do not consider their impulse to express as related to the reception of its force. I have tried, and I think mostly failed, to be aware of the impact of words. What can be done to learn and develop skills to reduce impetuous, and increase principled, expressions? (By principled here I mean tied to a person's core outlook, tried and tested over time, given weight over momentary fancy and whim, and affecting the outcome most desired, regardless of relative level of competence.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *