Etc, dictate a feeling of superiority over the minorities? I believe that in the authors’ point of view, since they come from multi-raced backgrounds, this is possible.

But for me just by looking at the history of the American culture, I believe that it is near to impossible if this mindset is set to change. Clearly stated in those arguments it tells a different story on class and justice in America. Laws that should protect citizens from these discriminations should be able to distinguish what is oral defamation from a simple freedom of speech.But as the civil organizations put it, they are not exactly ready to accept changes or revisions as they may call it. These may gather certain restrictions on how we perceive the first amendment. But restrictions as to how they may be perceived puts greater emphasis on how these maybe in some way are able to help reduce the racial oppression that the minorities encounter everyday. But the political setting, almost if not, doesn’t give straight importance to the rights that these restrictions may offer to the minorities.

The political perspective in America may not be too keen on awarding these few rights which they feel could be seen as sympathy to these minorities as opposed to the hard-pressed policies that they support towards the public. Have you ever wondered if there would be a lot of representatives in congress who belongs to the minority class, could there be any chance that these changes may push through? I remember a rap song from Tupac Shakur and the lines from the song “Changes” “to see a Black President”.It’s probably one in a million chances that a Black President may assume office. As from racists eyes may put it, “it’s another one of them black jokes”. This is a sad reality in society which clearly shows that a person from a minority is not to be given the privilege to express oneself and to probably hold office. Which brings it out altogether the very narrow views of society towards minorities? Who am I to differ? Since few of civil liberty groups are welcome to the idea that the restrictions be granted.

I think it is a near to nothing possibility that these regulations will be recognized. 4 It’s a simple question of how far are the politicians willing to go to help protect the interests of the minority. The authors clearly stated in their essays in the book that they do represent the minorities they are very much are depicting. One is of Asian-American descent, the other two African-Americans and a Chicano. They write these essays in relation to how they feel towards the subject.Arguments, in my view, are a bit one-sided coming from them.

I have nothing against it. Although they are able to produce facts from reliable sources which sorts of balances their views with other professional opinions, I feel as a reader, it would be best if one of the authors if not from the minority. At least one of them must belong to the dominant class of society. In my view this would be a perfect synergy of thoughts if we would be able to hear essays and opinions of them the authors from different racial groups in society.I mean this is not to think that their work is not too credible if the arguments are coming in from them belonging to these minorities but it would be a good alternative if another author coming in from the dominant class would be able to share his insights on how, belonging to the dominant race defines and sees the minorities without crossing boundaries with his fellow authors. After all this is what is clearly stated in the first amendment. Don’t get me wrong on their arguments, they are perfectly expressed.

I’m just looking for other persons alternative opinions which may be different from those of the majority of the author’s writings of the book. This, in my view, would be a perfect exchange of thoughts from the authors themselves. And my final take on this book review.

I believe strongly that this book delivered all the questions that needs to be answered to regards to the racial discriminations that most of the people in the minority is experiencing. They have laid out arguments relevant to the first amendment about freedoms exercised and abused by some towards racial discriminations.But as I have said most of the argument was towards the oppression of blacks, there were clear cut cases of oppression also seen from other minorities but in my view blacks were the favorite in the book. And also what’s lacking in the book is the diversity of the author’s racial backgrounds. If only they have other authors in the book that belongs to the dominant society, I believe that a much smooth flow of arguments could be seen and heard that is, from my perspective.

Matsuda, Mari J. Words That Wound. Westview Press; Reissue edition (May 1, 1993) , n. d.