I have previously written columns about the rising generation of censors in our country. After years of being told that free speech is harmful and dangerous, many young people are virtual speech phobics — demanding that opposing views be silenced as “triggering” or even forms of violence. Now a Pew poll shows just how much ground we have lost, including the emergence of the Democratic Party as a virulent anti-free speech party. Pew found that “Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to support the U.S. government taking steps to restrict false information online (70% vs. 39%).”
I was raised in a politically active Democratic family in Chicago. Free speech was viewed as one of the defining values of the party and championed across campuses in the country. That changed dramatically in the course of the last ten years as many liberal politicians and professors called for opposing voices to be banned or canceled. I no longer recognize the party as it pushes for censorship and speech regulation.
The result is reflected in the poll which shows that “Just over half of Americans (55%) support the U.S. government taking steps to restrict false information online, even if it limits people from freely publishing or accessing information.”
What is particularly chilling is that this poll is occurring after the disclosure of biased censorship efforts by the government and corporations, including the suppression of views that were later found to be legitimate. That includes the banning or cancelling of scientists who raised concerns over Covid-19 that are now considered valid from the lab theory to the efficacy of masks to natural immunities. It also includes the suppression of political stories like the Hunter Biden laptop.
The growing support for censorship may reflect the echo chambered media environment. Many people watch and read news that continues to downplay or entirely omit reports on biased censorship. President Biden even charged that companies who refused to censor opposing views on social media were “killing people.” Others have denounced free speech as “a white man’s obsession.” New York democrats called for limiting speech as a way of protecting democracy. Indeed, former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich has declared free speech is “tyranny.”
Many journalists have joined politicians and professors in decrying the dangers of free speech. Some falsely claim that hate speech is not protected under the First Amendment. Others panicked at the notion of free speech protections being restored at Twitter. On CNN, speech limits were called a “harm-reduction model” for the media.
The result left free speech values in free fall in our country. We have previously discussed the alarming rollback on free speech rights in the West. The European crackdown on free speech has now reached our shores and there are a growing number of citizens calling on the government to limit their right to free expression. It is a form of constitutional immolation by citizens who have never known true authoritarian government.
The Pew poll shows how dire this struggle has become. Despite our long history of free speech protection, every generation can renew or rescind that support. This is a crisis of faith that we cannot ignore. Justice Louis Brandeis once warned that “The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”
It is really hard to comprehend how far this countries ‘Useful Idiots’ have come regarding free speech. I lived in Berkeley in the mid to late 60’s where the demand for free speech was the pinnacle of the social change movement. Yes, I remember the teargas and the National Guard being called up to restore law and order.
So, my ? is now what? Can’t these old world primates make up their mind?
Don’t forget George W. Bush’s “Constitution Free Zones” – a citizen couldn’t exercise Freedom of Speech within earshot of a Bush photo op.
Bush also used CFZs to draw an unconstitutional no rights zone 100 miles from any national border. That effectively meant the majority of the U.S. population had no constitutional rights, since it was easier to control immigration that way.
CFZ’s were invented way before Bush, primarily to prevent free speech near abortion clinics.
70% + 39% = 109 divided by the two parties
54.5% favor censorship by the government
Democracy has spoken, now shut up racist.
70% vs. 39% + 55% = no censorship, even if ur a racist. There likely needs to be a 3rd party. Now shut up you racist. Better yet, leave and go to a country that doesn’t allow free speech. Let us know how you like living there.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits censorship by the government, directly or indirectly. Fear not, however. To get the First Amendment altered or removed, all you need is a two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives, a two-thirds vote in the Senate, and the votes of three-fourths of the states.
On that Social Security issue mentioned earlier. If you paid into it, you get back all of your money in about 5 years, then it’s subsidized by other taxpayers (a Capitalist/Socialist hybrid model):
In 1960, there were 5.1 workers paying in to social security to support 1 recipient. Today, there are about 2.8 workers per recipient.
Largely due to the Baby Boomer generation. Once illustrated as “an egg passing through a snake”, there is a population boom and bust as this unequal population passes through the economy.
How do we get back to 5.1 workers per Social Security recipient of 1960? Only through legal immigration or Americans better start having more kids! That’s the only way to smooth out that Baby Boomer problem.
On that Social Security issue mentioned earlier. If you paid into it, you get back all of your money in about 5 years,
Not even close to true.
Just under 15% of your income is what you deposited. Then compound interest takes over.
And had I been allowed to take that money, invest in a index traded fund back in 1986 (DJI was at about 4k) when I first started working, I would be a millionaire by now.
Instead, it might not be there at all.
Upside is, one of the largest transfer of wealth will be as Baby Boomer generation passes on.
Of course, Democrats want a wealth tax to redistribute that wealth to people who are not even related to those Baby Boomers.
That is socialism for you.
And imagine if ss were an actual private account, the balance could be passed on to heirs, and also create massive wealth gains for the lower class
SOCIAL SECURITY IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL INDIVIDUAL, SPECIFIC, AND PARTICULAR WELFARE.
SOCIAL SECURITY IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FAVOR AND CHARITY.
SOCIAL SECURITY IS DISTINCTLY NOT GENERAL WELFARE.
The entire communistic American welfare state is unconstitutional including, but not limited to, matriculation affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HHS, HUD, EPA, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax ONLY for “…general (all, the whole) Welfare…,” omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, favor or charity. The same article enumerates and provides Congress the power to regulate ONLY money, the “flow” of commerce, and land and naval Forces. Additionally, the 5th Amendment right to private property was initially qualified by the Framers and is, therefore, absolute, allowing no further qualification, and allowing ONLY the owner the power to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property.
__________________________________________________________
“…[Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please;…”
“The laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”
– Thomas Jefferson
________________
Government exists, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to provide maximal freedom to individuals while government is severely limited and restricted to merely facilitating that maximal freedom of individuals through the provision of security and infrastructure only.
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
How can one post get so many things wrong. Someone suggested Churchill is Svelaz. That would be a good reason because Churchill shows the same ignorance.
“in about 5 years, then it’s subsidized “
Wrong and demonstrates dismal knowledge. If at 20 years of age one puts $100 how much will it be worth 45 years later. Go back to school. Take math, logic and obtain some critical thinking skills.
” Only through legal immigration or Americans better start having more kids! “
Learn the purpose and original design for social security. When you learn it, come back. In that way we need not say hello again.
This is what happens when you get a person, or group of persons convinced that only their view is right. Why would they want to hear from anyone else? If everyone else is wrong, they could do damage, right? This is how Hitler came to power. Watch the next step…
As the Kleptocracy Turns [The Cover-Up Continues]
Congress & SBF are ‘Off-the-Hook’, but no matter there are plenty of new Crypto Platforms to disperse various nefarious Election activities in place for 2024.
Today’s Read:
Sam Bankman-Fried a.k.a. SBF was notably accused of making over 300 political contributions to the tune of tens of millions of dollars through straw donors and using corporate funds.
“Bankman-Fried’s use of straw donors allowed him to evade contribution limits on individual donations to candidates to whom he had already donated,” reads a superseding indictment.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/feds-drop-campaign-finance-charge-against-sbf
RE: For a refresher course on what went on here on previous episodes of The Cover-Up see: (scroll down to mid-page)
The Cover-Up says: February 6, 2023 at 5:50 PM
Crypto Campaign Contributions
HOW IT WORKS …
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/02/01/objectivity-has-got-to-go-news-leaders-call-for-end-of-objective-journalism/comment-page-3/#comments
P.S.: While you were watching Major the W.H. ‘Cocaine Dog’ chew up West Wing Secret Service Men left & right, and Hunter once again trying to slip one under the wire, … You’d have better check your backyard to see if anyone parked a Battleship in it. Systems are buckling, Commercial Real Estate is the Ghost of Bail-Outs Past, and Citizens are completely Tapped-Out. Rome is burning but We’re Eye’s Wide Shut. Oh yeah, and that War thingy in: Ukraine, Syria, Taiwan, N. Korea, and Mexico (Boarder & Drug Wars)
Washington only cares about it’s Own Ass – Not Yours.
That 39% of republicans and leaning republicans support government monopolizing access to information that partisan bureaucrats arbitrarily decide for the people to be true or not is not a good result either. When political parties become means by which information is controlled, they will as George Washington had warned “become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
Especially Democrats should watch the documentary “Might Ira”. The film is exactly about this authoritarian/civil liberties topic.
“Mighty Ira” is about Ira Glasser (former ACLU leader) who is now considered too rightwing. Never heard of liberal ACLU leaders being viewed as rightwing.
Glasser is famous for allowing all speakers, of any group (right or left) to speak freely. In the documentary, Glasser points out that any law barring a hate group from speaking – that same law – would also bar African-American speakers or Jewish groups or LGBT groups.
Glasser never supported any rightwing hate group (likely voted Democrat), but he supported the First Amendment. Many of today’s Democrats don’t understand the unintended consequences of government censorship.
And yet oddly it is Republicans who are actually passing anti-Free-Speech laws.
Sammy equates banning teaching 7 year old children about oral sex as “anti-free speech”. Sammy thinks stopping a teacher from telling a 7 year old boy that he can be a girl is “anti-free speech”. Sammy is a radical. Sammy is wrong. Sammy is a fascist. Sammy would take away all your rights in a heartbeat.
“Sammy equates banning teaching 7 year old children about oral sex as “anti-free speech”.
Sammy, Fishstick, Dennis, etc are so hard up for physical intimacy, that grooming our children (since they have none of their own) is their only option
And books, classes, anti-voting laws, words like “gay”…. Protestors, shutting down libraries, defunding libraries, try standing on a street in Florida and protest the Governor.
Nothing you said is true. There’s no shutting down of libraries, and one most certainly can stand on a street in Florida and protest the Governor.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/librarians-say-a-missouri-house-proposal-to-eliminate-library-funding-would-have-devastating-ripple-effects
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3731380-michigan-residents-vote-to-defund-public-library-again-over-lgbtq-books/
vox.com/politics/2023/5/5/23711417/republicans-want-to-defund-public-libraries-book-bans
Okay, can we examine this logically? The second link is to an article about citizens voting. How is that limited to Republicans?
As for the first one, I would disagree with defunding libraries. But is that the same as censoring? I mean (1) defunding a whole library is not exactly targeting a specific person to censor, regardless of the motivation, and (2) any books objected to are still available in society at large. My library, in a fairly educated town, is moving drastically away from books and toward media. Why? I imagine (a) that’s what people want, and (b) all the books are available on Amazon. So defunding a library is not the same as censoring a particular point of view in society at large – which is precisely what the weaponized federal government is doing.
So, again logically speaking, am I wrong? If so, show me how and I am ready to admit it.
OldManInKS,
Ah! Logic. Something Sammy cannot answer to based off his lame links that you so accurately point out.
Logic. Truth. Facts. All things leftists cannot withstand.
The statement was “There’s no shutting down of libraries”. I disproved that. You used the “straw man” fallacy in your post.
Republicans who are actually passing anti-Free-Speech laws.
I keep hearing people say that, but like you, they don’t bother to give an example so we can discuss it. I wonder why?
Because it is not worth our time. People like you just ignore facts, or deny them, or attack the source as “liberal bias”. Facts mean nothing to you.
Sammy – that’s a cop-out. You haven’t given any actual facts or examples, just an assertion.
It’s a fraudulent tactic to say: I assert X, but I refuse to give any evidence of X because “people like you” would reject it.
So, you have nothing.
So disturbing. Truly a dividing line, maybe The dividing line. Not Right v. Left, but Authoritarian dogma v. Civil Liberties. Once a “left leaning Independent”, I am now to the right by default. Too many on the left have capitulated to fascism. True for a few on the right, but many fewer it seems. And the majority in the middle are at their mercy. For the time being.
Glenda,
Authoritarian dogma v. Civil Liberties, good observation. I think we need to start addressing it that way vs Left vs Right, or Democrat vs Republican.
When you say, “a “left leaning Independent”, I am now to the right by default.” is that by way of the Bill Maher, “I did not leave the party, the party left me.”?
Based off various polls I have been reading, more Independents are leaning Republican. Those would be a number of majority in the middle.
“Pew: Seventy Percent of Democrats and Democratic-Leaning Independents Support Speech Limits”
– Professor Turley
_______________
DICTATORSHIP OF SPEECH
Communists are the direct and mortal enemies of the American thesis of freedom and self-reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Americans and America.
The objectives of all communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) are the repeal of the Constitution and the establishment of the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
Central Planning . Control of the Means of Production (i.e. unconstitutional regulation) . Redistribution of Wealth . Social Engineering
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”…
The complete communist package.
It used not to matter what they supported, because we had a right guaranteed by the Constitution. But Democrats routinely cancel any rights with which they disagree. The Constitution MIGHT help you now…depending on the state and the judge…maybe.
Anyone – of either party – that used black & white “bumper sticker” slogans is misrepresenting any issue. Governing is not black & white and anyone that disagrees with you is not the enemy or a communist.
Can anyone name 1 Democrat in the USA that publicly supports Stalin, Lenin or Communism? Name just one!
The truth is somewhere in the middle. Most voters, including Conservatives, support a balance of Capitalism and Socialism
If Republicans 100% support Capitalism, then the next election propose eliminating Medicare and social security (subsidized by other tax payers after about 5 years). Propose eliminating public police departments, public fire departments, etc.
Ronald Reagan voted for 11 tax increases along with his Republican members of Congress. Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower (Allied Commander of the D-Day invasion that defeated Nazi Germany) had a top tax rate exceeding 70% – more fiscally liberal than any Democrat since. Bill Clinton left office with a balanced budget – the last president to do so.
Maybe invest a few minutes in watching in the non-partisan film “Saving Capitalism” which stars Conservative Tea Party Republican Dave Brat (no liberal and no communist) and Bill Clinton’s former labor secretary.
What is more unpatriotic than hating your fellow Americans?
Police, fire protection for the citizenry is a Constitutional duty of government not Socialism. And if you ask Republicans if they were allowed to invest 6% of their paychecks since they started working, almost all would gladly agree and be wealthier at 67
Jeff Grann,
About SS, spot on.
The wife and I invest as if SS will not be there when we retire. At first our economic advisor thought that was crazy. A year later he whole hardheartedly agreed.
If SS is there, I expect it will be a pittance of what I paid into.
Although I support more funding for constitutional activities of police and fire departments, neither is listed in the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution only lists the military and post offices, everything else is technically socialism. Conservatives have underfunded the U.S. Postal Service – actually listed by name in the U.S. Constitution.
Again most voters support a balance of Capitalism and Socialism – including most Conservative voters supporting Medicare and Social Security (partially subsidized by other taxpayers after about 5 years).
“. . . a balance of Capitalism and Socialism . . .”
That’s like wanting a balance of health and disease. Unless eradicated, the “balance” becomes all disease.
Can anyone name 1 Democrat in the USA that publicly supports Stalin, Lenin or Communism? Name just one!
Peter Shill, Enoch Poor, Svelaz, Reagan Enforced Treaty Against Torturous Commies, and the many other sock puppets you have used
Pro-tip: never use the sockpuppet name “Churchville, VA” when you troll from West Hollywood, CA
😉
“. . . that used black & white “bumper sticker” slogans is misrepresenting any issue.”
You mean like you just did?
“Anonymous” is whining that I am wrong about his commenting 200 times a day and he is doing so in about 200 comments!!
Hey Svelaz, er, I mean “Anonymous”, we know it’s you and we all still think you are just a paid hack or a contrarian weirdo. Anyone who sees what we have seen over the last months, weeks and days and then says “there is no evidence…” is either a liar, a troll, a partisan hack, a person without any analytical skills at all or a paid participant on the payroll of either Biden, the DNC or the FBI.
HullBobby,
I would go with liar, troll, partisan hack and a person without any analytical skills.
His posts are so just plain dumb no one in their right mind would pay him. And if they did, they are regretting their investment and likely an embarrassment. But then again, he could be a useful idiot.
The Schmitt-Paul Bill seems promising, what’s the catch?
– Federal employees shall not use their official positions to influence content moderation decisions at social media platforms and media organizations.
– Federal agencies shall not enter into partnership agreements with third parties to monitor social media content or receive free advertising on the platform.
– Federal employees (the individual perpetrators) who violate the above, will be subject to discipline including monetary fines, permanent loss of security clearances, and forfeiture of all pensions and other government benefits. Any contractor found guilty of violating these provisions would be permanently ineligible from working under future government contracts.
– Individuals harmed by a violation will have a private right to sue the federal government and actors who abused their power.
– Agencies will be required to report on an ongoing basis to both the Office of Management and Budget and Congress any violations of the prohibition on communications between employees and platforms mentioned above.
– The Disinformation Governance Board and any future iteration of it is permanently disbanded.
– Forbids the executive branch from issuing any grants related to programming on mis and disinformation.
– Federal grant recipients shall certify that they do not create nor promote lists of media organizations who they deem to be mis or disinformation.
– Blocks a president from using emergency powers to unilaterally take control of the internet and other telecommunications tools.
– Ends FOIA exemptions for records related to communications between covered providers and government employees.
Jonathan: You say you were “raised in a politically active Democratic family in Chicago”. Boy, have you strayed far from home! Now you are a right-wing political hack providing an echo chamber for the views of Murdock–for whom you work–that spews out misinformation every day. I wonder what your family thinks about that?
Now you continue to claim “free speech” is under attack. When it comes to conservative and right-wing propaganda nothing could be further from the truth. Steve Bannon and a host of other right-wing pundits constantly push out all sorts of false conspiracy theories but no one has silenced them. You publish columns every day. As a conservative have you ever been censored? Nope.
Now the biggest purveyor of misinformation and disinformation is the Trumpster. Every day on his Truth Social, DJT threatens and attacks prosecutors, judges–even their families. But no judge, thus far, has silenced him. DJT latest TS post illustrates just how far he is willing to go to distort the truth:
“January 6 will go down in history as the day the government staged a riot to cover up the fact
that they certified a fraudulent election”
This is propaganda and disinformation on a grand scale. On Jan. 6 DJT was the President. He WAS the “government” and he was the one who “staged” the insurrection! And the 2020 election was not “fraudulent”. DJT lost all his legal challenges. No court could find any fraudulent ballots that would have affected the outcome of the election. AG Bill Barr and even his election advisors told him the same thing. So everything we hear from DJT are lies. But no one has silenced and censored him.
The Q is what kind of speech is covered by the 1st Amendment? You apparently think almost any speech is covered. But what about Marjorie Taylor Greene when she held up the sex photo of Hunter Biden in the House hearing last week? Hunter’s attorneys have already filed an ethics complaint about MTG’s little antic. No doubt MTG will claim what she did was protected by the “Speech or Debate” Clause of the Constitution. If/when Hunter’s lawyers file a lawsuit against MTG they will point out that MTG’s gross behavior is not protected when she engaged in personal and deliberate acts to inflict injury on Hunter–which are far outside her legislative duties. Since you have not commented on MTG’s gross antic we can only assume you think it was protected speech. I don’t but, perhaps, you can inform us.
Now you are a right-wing political hack providing an echo chamber for the views of Murdock–for whom you work–that spews out misinformation every day. I wonder what your family thinks about that?
Dennis full filling the sterotype of leftists unable to debate the topic and launch into baseless ad hominem attacks
Nice job retard
Iowan2: Hey, I didn’t raise the issue of JT’s family history. He did. I am not attacking JT’s character. But when he says he comes from a “politically active Democratic family” we are entitled to Q those credentials. I think JT precedes his column with that description to try to convince us he is a big supporter of “free speech”. He isn’t–not across the board. He only supports the “free speech” rights of arch conservatives and those that think like him. Has he ever written a column defending the “free speech” rights of teachers in Florida under Gov. DeSantis? Has he ever defended librarians who have refused to remove books from school library shelves and have been disciplined or fired? Has he defended the rights of students to read what they want to? All these are important “free speech” issues that JT ignores.
The Q you have to ask yourself is how a guy who comes from a “politically active Democratic family” could morph into a writer for and supporter of Fox News? Why did he turn his back on the family’s rich political tradition? JT has given us no clues because he never mentions his four siblings or anything else about his family. except the aforementioned. Could it be that some in the family don’t support his views? In the end, it doesn’t really matter. I don’t care about JT’s family history. What I do care about is his attempt to make us believe he follows in the political tradition of his family. He doesn’t! I am just raising legitimate Qs. But nice try anyway–retard.
Dennis continues with off topic ad hominem attacks.
You go retard.
Stop listening to anyone who tells you the Biden regime is incompetent or making mistakes or full of accidents.
That’s not true — the Biden regime has been paid by China to complete a communist takeover in America.
You know it’s true.
@EmeraldRobinson
The Biden Justice Department’s sweetheart deal with Hunter blew up yesterday.
So how soon before Garland indicts Trump again?
Answer: The very next day.
@mikedavis
“Apparently the author of the infamous New York Post “
His credentials are everywhere, but you choose not to look. You depend on ignorance for your arguments.
Biden was installed in a 3rd world banana republic election.
Joe Biden is illegitimate. he knows it. the country knows it. the entire world knows it.
We are now living in Biden’s banana republic.
We are witnessing the complete breakdown of rule of law under Joe Biden’s banana republic.
No conservative is safe. Everyone should be very afraid.
“I am not attacking JT’s character.”
JT is a “right-wing political hack . . .”
That’s *not* an attack on his character?!
Out of gruesome curiosity, what would you consider such an attack?
JT, hate to break it to you but according to dennis mcintyre and other s@@tlibs like him, you’re a nazi too. Your previous traditional liberal views in the tradition of Daniel Patrick Moynhan are of no use now.
antonio
antonio, ‘hate to break it to you..’ but you could at least educate yourself re: what is a ‘nazi’ before making a fool out of yourself by erroneously attaching that designation to Prof. Turley.. who is quite clearly the antithesis of anything close to being a ‘nazi…’
I would reread antonio’s comment if I were you, eighteenthhole.
“Steve Bannon and a host of other right-wing pundits constantly push out all sorts of false conspiracy theories but no one has silenced them.”
All the conspiracy “theories” are actual conspiracies.
“And the 2020 election was not “fraudulent”.
It was an obviously fraudulent banana republic election that installed their puppet, Biden.
“No court could find any fraudulent ballots that would have affected the outcome of the election.”
No court can find what they refuse to look for. The election was full of fraud and it was obviously stolen. The entire WORLD understands what a banana republic illegitimate election looks like. It looks like Joe Biden’s inauguration.
“Pew found that “Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are much more likely than Republicans and Republican leaners to support the U.S. government taking steps to restrict false information online (70% vs. 39%).”
******************************************
Define “false.” The evidence just keeps mounting that most Dims are lots of things – just not Americans.
Gee, restricting speech (what a Fascist idea) and who supports this detestable idea- who else, none other than the libs, they hate free speech, it exposes who they are, what they represent. Majority of Americans who do have common sense and a basic understanding our why America is exceptional: our Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the freedom to speak openly and honestly without incrimination, too also bear the right to guns for protection from domestic and foreign enemies. Pretty damn simple but for whatever reason the libs who think they are so smart and self appointed elitist will try to skew it all, or manipulate situations. Why don’t you libs just let ideas flow, if yours are so good, and benefit the good of the majority, why restrict speech, you’ll win on the merits of your argument, right? The problems seems to be you can’t win on your arguments, all have failed in the past, they can be pointed to, you have nothing, and you know it. You just want to push a sad life on all of us, and it is resented hugely by most Americans, don’t fool yourself.
What’s missing is leaders of both parties explaining the unintended consequences of censorship. Once voters understand how it will harm them, then they can vote accordingly.
It’s not that hard to do. Simply using existing censorship laws in Europe in 2023 – today many online posts (both Republican or Democrat) would result in most of us being fined or imprisoned. On any social media site today.
Censorship could censor song lyrics (country music, rock or rap). Most TV police show dramas would be illegal in the USA. Many movies from Clint Eastwood to horror flicks might be illegal. Parts of the Bible may be illegal under censorship rules.
Prior to the 1930’s it was illegal in many states for men to appear topless on public beaches. Prior to the 1960’s interracial relationships (including marriages) were viewed as obscene to be censored. Government does a really bad job at censoring.
America has solved this problem in the past with the “Hollywood Parental Ratings” system (R, PG, Violent Content, Nudity, etc). Instead of giving government unconstitutional-authority (which it doesn’t have) to violate the First Amendment, this system empowered “parents” (adult citizens) as censors, not politicians running for the next election.
Why aren’t our leaders (Republican or Democrat) explaining these longterm dangers from censorship to our voters?
I don’t know what’s worse; that we are losing ground to these totalitarians, or that thinking if we only invoke Hitler, Stalin, Mao, 1984, et. al. that the unenlightened will become enlightened. Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of great comments by the usual suspects. But those usual suspects have been making great comments for years and yet here we are.
It should come as no surprise that the political class lusts for power. That’s been true of every regime in the history of ever. So what’s changed? The political class? Nah. They are who we thought they were. What’s changed is we have a culture of the walking dead. We have a few of them on this blog. These are Bezmenov’s demoralized. Desmet’s hypnotized. They have infected every power center in the country. There is no reasoning with them. Facts and evidence are useless against them. While they are loud, proud and aggressive, I still believe they are not the majority in this country. The majority must be as loud, as proud and even more aggressive, if ever hope to turn this thing around.
“making great comments for years and yet here we are.”
If that is the case, maybe the approach to positive change is the wrong way of doing things.
Most people do not react to discussions of the Constitution. Those that do are already on our side. People react to slogans. They also react to actions even if they don’t mimic Roberts’s Rules of Order. Ties and jackets are out. Rolled-up sleeves and getting dirty is in, at least with those not already in agreement.
We all know Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, but do we use them? Sometimes we are too nice.
S. Meyer,
“Sometimes we are too nice.”
I agree.
But I also think we are going to reach a point and say enough is enough.
To a degree we already are.
A Christian and a Muslim group joining forces to protest against a Maryland law about pro-LBGTQ indoctrination in schools against their religious beliefs.
A large group of students walked out of school in protest to having pride indoctrination forced upon them.
Seeing more school choice popularity, as parents want to get their children out of indoctrination schools or charter schools.
A lot of devote Catholic Hispanics are leaving the Democrat party.
Asians too.
And Blacks too.
The question I have, is what will the leftist and Democrat party do if by some chance a Republican wins the WH in 2024?
SM, the fact is those rules work. Because they’ve been used for evil, undemocratic designs, conservatives are loathe to embrace their effectiveness. It would be like dismissing Sun Tzu’s Art of War because he was Chinese.
IMO, Professor Turley should put an end to practice of running a blog that for the most part protects the free expression of all ideas. Giving a forum for people to express opinions that are antithetical to the survival of our constitutional republic, is not the principled stance he thinks it is. He’s hosting a legal blog, not a mental asylum support group. Surely he can set rules that require sane, rational, evidence-based comments.
I don’t mind all opinions. I think Turley should not permit responses to be emailed or placed on the blog without a distinct icon and name. That should be easy for WP. That is not censorship and need not identify anyone. The blog would run smoother without as much vitriol and less censorship.
OLLY,
Great comments by the usual suspects, great observation.
Of course they would smear anyone who is as loud, as proud and even more aggressive as far right wing extremists, MAGA or ultra-MAGA. They are already calling anything not woke leftism “domestic terrorists.” They are already calling anything patriotic as “domestic terrorism.” Like flying the American flag.
And I do agree we do need to be as loud, as proud and even more aggressive. We also need to push back against the woke leftists propaganda. And we do, every day with common sense, logic here on the good professor’s blog.
We are seeing push back from parents and students.
Moms For Liberty is already an enormously popular parents rights group that did not even exist 3 years ago. They have more visibility then some other, long established parents groups. BTW, those groups also receive donations from Open Society and they are mostly leftists.
I think we will see more and more as loud, as proud and even more aggressive as the 2024 election gets closer.
Dont know who will be the Republican candidate. Who ever it is, I am voting for that person. Even if it is Trump in jail. He is a better choice than Biden and the Democrat party.
Of course they would smear anyone…
I would expect nothing less. As long as JT provides a platform for these zombies to grunt and groan, then Darren will have to keep his mop handy.
It is certainly depressing that some commenters here won’t acknowledge that the censorship is coming from inside their house, so to speak. This despite:
* the Twitter Files
* the evidence of Facebook’s collusion with the US government to suppress COVID information that the government didn’t want out there because it undermined the Great Lockdown – much of which has now turned out to have been true all along, and which the government knew was true all along
* “Hunter Biden’s laptop” (their shorthand for “Joe Biden’s long history of corruption, facilitated by using his son as a bagman”)
* the universally Leftist “protests” against speech that range from shouting down speakers to getting professors censured or fired for the “actual harm” of speaking words to accosting people in private places like restaurants to actual riots and looting
They try to equate their defense of putting Gender Queer in elementary school libraries with the ACLU’s defense of the KKK march in Skokie. That is, some may bother to say they disagree with the content but they support the free speech; most don’t bother, leaving us to conclude that – if they’re behaving on this subject the way they behave about other subjects they do and don’t support, see my last bullet point above – they WANT a graphic representation of oral sex in an elementary school library.
But unfortunately for them, they’re overreaching. They claim that conservative efforts to keep that book and similar ones out of a school library, but not in any way threatening its continuing availability in non-child settings, is “book banning”… while they refuse publication of “problematic” studies in scientific journals, rewrite classic literature to remove “problematic” words and themes, and, themselves, support removal of “problematic” books like Tom Sawyer and To Kill A Mockingbird from… school libraries!
great points all around. Kudos
How do they support gender queer in the library for kids but are horrified about MTG showing a picture of hunter biden having sex with a prostitute
Excellent points Jamie. But unfortunately for them, they’re overreaching. I would agree if they believed half of the nonsense they are pushing. A part of me believes, as S. Meyer pointed out, that this is more likely them using Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals to force the reaction they want.
Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”
In his 1787 journal, James McHenry recorded an anecdote which would long outlive him: “A lady asked Dr. Franklin ‘Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?’. ‘A republic,’ replied the Doctor, ‘if you can keep it.’” Can we keep it? Today, to name just a few very dark clouds, we see so-called “Progressives” who demand that we adopt their extreme views such as abortion on demand at any point during pregnancy and even after birth, as well as “gender affirming” surgery for minors, with or without parental consent; we see outlaws like Black Lives Matter and others who turn beautiful streets into burned out ruins or camp grounds for drug addicts; city and state leaders who allow criminals to rob and steal with impunity; a legacy and even social media that long ago sold its soul for ratings and the political bias of its owners; state-supported universities that are churning out ill-informed snow-flakes who are more than happy to condemn and control the conduct of anyone with whom they disagree; the failure of our education system in many large cities while teachers’ unions flex their political muscle to guarantee that teachers are paid more and work less than ever; cherished institutions such as the FBI and even now the Secret Service, whose reputations have been trashed in order to protect the powerful few; and a President whose dementia is exceeded only by his family’s corruption. The list could go on and on. It is more than enough to make me doubt that we can keep it. We are told it is never too late to ask: God bless America.
“America stands on four main values: Faith in God, Freedom of Speech, Family and Economic Freedom. If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism.”
R. Reagan
Oh, the irony.
https://mythdetector.ge/en/what-did-ronald-reagan-mean-when-saying-fascism-will-come-to-america-in-the-name-of-liberalism/
This was never a Ronald Reagan quote. This was fabricated by “Modzraoba Dzlevai Sakvirveli”
Hilarious if intentionally used for a topic on censorship vs. spread of misinformation. Sad, if not intentional.
Oh, poor Anonymous…
From your link: “Reagan’s quote is fabricated and consists of the artificially created mix of Reagan’s statements made in different contexts. The quote of Reagan about liberalism concerns his economic points of view and not the values of family and faith. Not to mention, Reagan made the statement in 1975 and not in 1988.”
In other words: Reagan did say all these things. He said them before he became president, in the year that he declined to run for a third term as governor of California, where he certainly was aware of the creep of illiberalism under the name of “liberalism.” Are you really going to stick with your “Four Pinocchios!” claim?
Of course, it is your side that cheers on the Canadian government’s freezing the bank accounts of dissidents… in the name of “limiting misinformation.” So maybe you will keep on with your doublespeak.
I had 30 seconds to burn, so I followed your link.
Yep, something you would really get your teeth into
Meaningless pedantry. Surprise….they are actual Regan quotes.