Censors and Censurers

The Roman Censors (always one of two officials, until Augustus established the Principate) were men of consular rank elected to their posts every four or five years.  "Elected" in this context refers to the often fierce and sometimes violent struggles involving money, pandering, favors granted and owed, family affiliation, military support and prowess which typified elections under the Republic; not all so different, come to think of it, from elections taking place now.

The Censors possessed a variety of powers, related to taxation and other matters, but what they are most known for now was their authority over public morality.  Perhaps the most famous of the Censors appears at the head of this post.  Behold Marcus Porcius Cato, the Elder, who is said to have been particularly diligent in ensuring that Roman virtues were practiced and respected.  He's also famous for ending his speeches in the Senate, regardless of their topics, with the assertion that "Carthage must be destroyed."  Judging from his bust, he seems to have been someone who didn't smile easily.

Our Great Republic is now replete with censors or wannabe censors, i.e. persons who eagerly and often point out what they consider the failings of others.  Unlike the Censors of ancient Rome, though, our modern censors are entirely self-appointed. Also unlike the ancient Censors, modern censors aren't required to engage in arguably useful public action, like assessing and collecting taxes and keeping track of population.  They're entirely free to assess blame and find fault with any person, something it's quite easy to do in this age of limitless expression.  Since "censor" in modern use refers to prohibiting or ending communication, however, our modern censors are more appropriately considered censurers.  They freely criticize and assess blame but lack the authority to silence communications, though they may, if influential, manage to shame or berate others into silence.

Censurers are, by nature and definition, busybodies.  They scour the news, forums, the Internet generally, and having spied something they believe inappropriate they hurry to point it out.  It doesn't matter that they aren't involved in a dispute or discussion, they will intrude in one merely for the sake of preaching, merely for the purpose of displaying their own righteousness.  They comment and meddle.  That is, after all, what a busybody does.  

There are of course professional censurers, who are paid to vilify those who don't accept their standards and beliefs.  But compensation isn't required for a censurer to censure given our technology, which allows any one of us to pontificate and abuse publically and frequently.  

There have always been people who, unsolicited, intrude and meddle in the affairs of others, who gossip, criticize, are loudly self-righteous, who are preachers, who are Pharisees (which is to say "holier than thou").  The busybody is sometimes an object of contempt or laughter--there seems to be one in most every sitcom, usually a neighbor.  

There seems to be something in our nature which induces us to pry into the affairs of others and smugly degrade them.  It requires a meanness and pettiness of soul, and great self-regard, but these are characteristics which are encouraged in these times, or at least certainly tolerated, and are ubiquitous as they may be indulged in at any time.

Censurers are therefore dangerous, now.  They may remain objects of contempt but can do much damage to free expression and conduct, and cannot be effectively punished.