In Northampton a small group of demonstrators took to the streets this week to protest the opening of an adult-video store. The protest brought together an unusual coalition of feminists, religious conservatives, and just plain folks, warning their neighbors that a crime spree is on the way. DVDs of consenting adults bonking and cavorting with dramatic, real-life abandon apparently will incite residents to rob, pillage, and worse.

In Colorado the public-broadcasting affiliate cancelled a two-hour documentary on Marie Antoinette. The reason for the self-censorship was concern that the program, which reproduces 18th-century sketches of sexual activity relevant to the guillotined queen’s story, would incur Federal Communications Commission (FCC) fines.

On Beacon Hill, Governor Mitt Romney was so afraid of alienating right-wing voters in his undeclared race for the White House that he denied Harvard the services of the state police when the university recently hosted former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami.

In New York City, Columbia University invited and then retracted its invitation to current Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinjehad to speak at its school of public affairs under a set of circumstances that can only be described as ambiguous. Columbia, upon reflection, feared that it could not adequately provide security. Opponents of the visit hailed the move as a reaffirmation of the university’s dignity and high moral purpose.

ADVERTISEMENT

Meanwhile, in our nation’s capital, President George W. Bush all but condemned newspapers for publishing reports that intelligence officials now believe the war in Iraq decreases national security by inspiring the Islamic world to greater acts of terrorism. The act of reporting these facts, Bush intimated, not only gives aid to our enemies but jeopardizes our well-being and threatens to “confuse” the American people.

These are not odd, disconnected snapshots of our national life. They are highly representative. They are part of a larger picture: a disturbing mural of a nation that is afraid not only of others (often with very good reason), but fundamentally fearful of itself. Somewhere along the way, after winning the Cold War, after achieving unprecedented prosperity, after amassing more military might than history has ever been able to imagine, we’ve lost our collective sense of self-confidence.

Legend may hold that we are the land of the free and the home of the brave, but the very idea of sex is apparently enough to strike fear in the hearts of many — and not just the holy rollers. It’s not a secret that sex is big business. It’s bigger than General Motors, not that this is saying much given the once-mighty automaker’s current economic woes. (And, in case you didn’t know, GM and many other Fortune 500 companies diversified into adult films years ago.) The X-rated video-and-DVD business is bigger than all of Hollywood. It’s bigger than all professional sports teams. And while men are the primary consumers of sexual fare, women are active as well — accounting for 20 percent of the market — and are more likely, according to experts, to turn their fantasies into reality. These are well-known and well-reported facts. Why, then, are we so afraid? Why does the reality that so many seek consolation or inspiration from commercial sex arouse our insecurities? Are we so timid? So hypocritical? What, as a nation, are we afraid of?

The current Republican regime, having fallen captive to the religious right, certainly does all it can to fan the flames of fear in a — so far — successful effort to divide and conquer the electorate. Under Bush, the FCC has edged dangerously close to becoming a sex-police force, moving beyond prohibiting the seven “dirty” words that comedians used to joke were unspeakable for broadcast but were somehow conveyed to audiences anyway. Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink. In place of specific bans and something like reasonable guidelines, Bush’s FCC has imposed by fiat vague and undefined “standards,” leaving many to engage in self-censorship to avoid historically punishing fines. And not content to regulate the airwaves, Bush wants to extend the government’s reach to cable and satellite radio.

Bush’s urge to control broadcasting — be it dramatic or erotic — is part and parcel of his administration’s even more sinister effort to control what our not-very-imaginative-or-courageous-but-nevertheless-still-free press reports. Bush’s war on the media makes Nixon’s attempts to cow the Vietnam- and Watergate-era press seem tame, almost academic.

In universities, Bush has found unwitting allies. The very idea of free speech has been so corrupted by 20 years of obsession with political correctness that universities have forgotten that their role is to foster and provoke free inquiry. That visits by two Iranians should arouse consternation is not a surprise. These men represent a way of thinking that is even more inimical to free thought than Bush’s. But the fact that so many can mistake offering someone a podium with endorsing their views is not an overnight occurrence. Such erosion of the very concept of free speech does not take place in a flash. It’s born of a shallow sense of self-certainty that is a defense — a feeble but very real defense — against the threats of the larger and very real world.

Those who applauded Columbia’s decision to rethink its offer to sponsor a speech by an anti-Western, anti-democratic, would-be wielder of nuclear weapons should ponder the fact that Time magazine published an interview with the Iranian leader this week. Did that magazine betray its commitment to free speech by allowing its readers to see for themselves that Ahmadinjehad is a cunning enemy of freedom?

Romney’s fear of providing police protection for an enemy of freedom can at least be explained away by rather base — but typical — political motives. What of Columbia? Will understanding those who oppose us weaken us? No more so than denying that some are kinkier than others will make sex go away.

The growing sense of fear that envelops us grows stronger every day. We cannot make it dissipate until we look it squarely in the eye.