Three years ago, we discussed the conviction of a British man for “toxic ideologies,” under the draconian laws criminalizing inciteful or dangerous speech. The erosion of free speech appears to have only accelerated in the UK. As is often the case, the attacks on free speech increase during periods of unrest, anger or fear. With the recent anti-immigration riots, British authorities have used their laws to round up a large number of citizens expressing anti-immigrant views and some have already been convicted. Those cases include Wayne O’Rourke, 35, who has been sentenced to three years in prison for “stirring up racial hatred.”
As I have previously written, the riots were triggered by false reports spread online about the person responsible for an attack at a Taylor Swift-themed dance event that left three girls dead and others wounded. Despite false claims about his being an asylum seeker, the alleged culprit was an 18-year-old British citizen born to Rwandan parents.
The government and news outlets were quick to challenge these accounts, but violent riots have raged across the country, including such despicable acts as burning immigrant housing.
There is no question that the government should crack down on such violence and arrest those engaging in criminal conduct. However, the government immediately pursued those who were expressing hateful or inciteful views.
In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss the collapse of free speech protections in Europe and the United Kingdom specifically. That discussion includes the case of Nicholas Brock, 52, who was convicted for his collection of racist and extreme right material in his home. Detective Chief Superintendent Kath Barnes, Head of Counter Terrorism Policing South East (CTPSE) acknowledged that others might collect such items for historical or academic purposes but Brock crossed the line because he agreed with the underlying views:
“From the overwhelming evidence shown to the jury, it is clear Brock had material which demonstrates he went far beyond the legitimate actions of a military collector…Brock showed a clear right-wing ideology with the evidence seized from his possessions during the investigation….We are committed to tackling all forms of toxic ideology which has the potential to threaten public safety and security.”
That “commitment” is evident in a slew of arrests after the recent riots.
The United Kingdom is an example of what I describe as a pattern of “rage rhetoric” becoming “state rage” in these periods of unrest.
Once again, many of these postings are worthy of condemnation as racist and inflammatory. Many of us have done so. Defending free speech is not a defense of the underlying viewpoints but rather the right to express opposing viewpoints. Good speech can then rebut the bad speech.
The United Kingdom is now committed to silencing opposing views through censorship and criminal charges. As discussed in the book, such laws have never succeeded in history. Not once. They have never killed “toxic ideologies” or deterred any movement. What they do is suppress the free speech of everyone in an ill-conceived effort to legislatively ban hate in society.
An example is found in Germany, which has long had some of the most harsh censorship and criminalization laws.
According to polling, only 18 percent of Germans feel free to express their opinions in public. Fifty-nine percent of Germans do not even feel free expressing themselves in private among friends. Only 17 percent feel free to express themselves on the internet.
They have silenced the wrong people, but there is now a massive censorship bureaucracy in Europe and the desire to silence opposing voices has become insatiable.
Recently, I wrote about the chilling message of Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley that not only will British authorities arrest citizens for anti-immigration postings but may pursue others in countries like the United States for stirring up trouble.
Now, they are imprisoning “keyboard warriors,” who express inciteful thoughts.
According to the local Lincolnshire Free Press, O’Rourke encouraged his 90,000 followers to join the protests and told them how to remain anonymous during protests. That is similar to many posts on the left by groups like Antifa.
O’Rourke wrote such postings as “People of Southport where the f**k are you, get out on the street,” “give them hell lads,” and “Sunderland, go on lads.”
Notably, his counsel Lucia Harrington assured the court that her client wants to “re-educate” himself on these issues.
His self-imposed “reeducation” was not enough for Judge Catarina Sjolin Knight, who denounced O’Rourke and “[t]he flames fanned by keyboard warriors like you.”
Lincolnshire Chief Superintendent Kate Anderson promised more such cases for those espousing disfavored views: “This charge demonstrates that we will take fast and decisive action against anyone suspected of sharing harmful content online. We retain a commitment to proactively police and keep people safe across the county.”
Many others have been similarly charged. That includes first offender William Nelson Morgan, 69, who was seen holding a stick and refusing to disperse at a protest at a library in West Yorkshire. He was sentenced to two years and eight months in prison even though he did not take part in rioting. While there can be legitimate charges and penalties for a failure to disperse, the roughly three-year sentence seems fueled on the content of his viewpoints rather than his specific actions.
Likewise, Billy Thompson, 31, received 12 weeks in jail for posting emojis depicting minorities and a gun with inflammatory language. He did not participate in the rioting.
There are many more such cases being reported daily.
As in Germany, years of prosecuting free speech has achieved nothing beyond chilling the speech of all citizens. For years, I have been writing about the decline of free speech in the United Kingdom and the steady stream of arrests.
A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”
There is an alternative to criminalizing speech. You can punish criminal conduct including proportionate sentencing for the failure to disperse. You can then allow free speech to combat false or hateful viewpoints. British politicians have acknowledged that a large number of citizens hold anti-immigration views. Cracking down on such viewpoints will change few minds and likely only reaffirm the anger directed against the government.
Opposition to these laws has fallen to a dwindling number of free speech advocates in the UK, including author J.K. Rowling. Rowling has opposed a Scottish law, the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, that criminalizes speech viewed as “stirring up hatred” relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex. That crime covers insulting comments and anything “that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive.”
For those in the United States who have remained silent in the face of our own anti-free speech movement, Europe offers a glimpse into our future if we do not fight to preserve this indispensable right.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster).
@Turley,
I was a bit dismayed by your article on Brits claiming that they will extradite US Citizens for posting anti-UK government sentiment.
Anyone with half a brain knew it was a hollow threat.
First we have the 1A.
Second… go look at the treaty between the UK and the US.
Its not a listed crime that would be eligible for extradition. (There’s more to it but basically if they tried, the US would laugh them out of court. )
Their laws end at their border.
Now if you’re a Brit in the UK… unless you’re famous… learn how to hide your identity online.
Not to difficult w a hotspot and a top up card, paying in cash. (Along w other options… like using this to go and bounce it off a foreign VPN)
I won’t go into details… but its fairly trivial.
You are correct – if we actually followed the constitution and the rule of Law – the UK threat against americans would be ignored.
But we have seen democratic presidents and democratic courts and democratic legal scholars egregiously violate the constitution.
Our rights as americans arer only protected so long as those running the country respect them.
Turley: “Brock crossed the line because he agreed with the underlying views [expressed in his private collection]:
“From the overwhelming evidence shown to the jury, it is clear Brock had material which demonstrates he went far beyond the legitimate actions of a military collector…Brock showed a clear right-wing ideology with the evidence seized from his possessions during the investigation….We are committed to tackling all forms of toxic ideology which has the potential to threaten public safety and security.”
+++
Wasn’t it Queen Elizabeth I who declared that she did not want to open windows into men’s souls?
That wise lesson has been forgotten in the England of today and it is more dangerous to its subjects/citizens because of that lapse. Now they will punish what people think as well as what they say or do.
But why do I suspect that they will never punish someone with a copy of Marx’ Communist Manifesto or by Mao or by their supporters.
Why is the unfairness of capitalism holier than the unfairness of communism?
Why is the unfairness of capitalism holier than the unfairness of communism?
The “unfairness” bitterly complained about by Marxists who demand everybody end up with the same result in life, whether or not they risked anything to succeed in a business or just sat on their ass enjoying life while one Unfair Capitalist worked their ass off instead to unfairly succeed.
Order up a round of Participation Trophies for the Marxist kiddies.
How many fallacies can you pack into a sentence ?
First – whenever you use the word “unfair” – you have lost the argument. If you ask 10 people what is fair – you will get 11 different answers.
Skipping your fallacious framing.
The contrast is easy. Free markets raised people – billions of people out of poverty.
Communism – even systems loosely adjecent to communism – not only destroyed standard of living resulted in bloodshed unequaled in history.
Communism does not work. Not in practice – not even in theory.
Free markets work to improve peoples lives – even when implimented badly.
Are business managers and landlords, representatives of capitalism, ever unfair to people?
Can capitalists be unfair? Has anyone ever died because of capitalism?
Its past your bed time troll. Give mommy the phone back and go to your room.
What is wrong with communism? Is it unfair? If so, how?
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Whoever gains control by whatever means is a despot and dictator.
Do you need guidance and direction from a tyrant?
Genuine and patriotic Americans enjoy Freedom and Self-Reliance under the dominion, not of a maniac like Lincoln, Obama, Stalin, or Hitler, but of the Constitution as supported by the judicial branch and Justices of the Supreme Court who have sworn an oath to that effect.
George the Perpetually Outraged Confederate Democrat Racist is never going to forgive Lincoln for freeing the slaves and driving a stake through the heart of those Kluxxer insurrectionalist Democrat states.
And definitely not the country as a whole for not deporting all those former slaves that were second and third generation born in the USA.
Them damn blackies can even VOTE now!
Let me ask 1,000,000 dead Cambodians under Polpot or million dead Chinese under Mao with my Ouji board and get back to ya, idiot!
The low estimates for deaths under Mao is about 50M. The high estimates are nearly 3 times that.
The low estimates under Stalin are about 40M. The high estimates are nearly 3 times that.
Hitler and the entirety of WWII and the holocaust and all civilin deaths is less than half the deaths of Stalin or MAo.
Socialism and communism do not exist apart from totalitarianism.
End of story.
Next?
“The goal of socialism is communism.”
– Vladimir Lenin
Because every attempt to implement it has resulted in bloodshed.
Because to even attempt it requires massive amounts of FORCE, and it requires government to set prices and or control the distribution of goods and services. Something that free markets not only do for free, but do incredibly well.
Which do you think is likely to workj better – a system that requires force to impliment and requires vast amounts of labor to control things that take care of them selves in a free market ?
If you have to dig a ditch – which system will work better and cost less – one guy with a shovel digging the ditch.
Or two guys – one with a shovel and the other telling him exactly what to do in great deatail ?
There is no question that the government should crack down on such violence and arrest those engaging in criminal conduct. However, the government immediately pursued those who were expressing hateful or inciteful views.
If only the DOJ would crack down on Left wing Anarchists. They have only intensified and coalesced around Democrats who hate observant Conservative Jews. Renowned Harvard academic scholar, Professor Ruth Wisse, explains in her WSJ defense of PA Governor Josh Shapiro whom Kamala kicked to the curb. His crime was his free speech views on defending the Jewish right to exist as a state 30 years ago. The UK govt learned from Democrats.
Can Josh Shapiro’s Party Forgive Him for Telling the Truth?
The damage antisemitism has done to the Democratic Party and the country isn’t best reflected by Kamala Harris’s rejecting Josh Shapiro as her running mate. Far more telling is the Pennsylvania governor’s apology for an opinion piece he published in his college newspaper.
Wall Street Journal
For those interested in learning about Ruth Wisse, the following interview with Bari Weiss is excellent
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/2375/natural-rights–the-enlightenment/
Especially, consider Hobbes’s views, mentioned therin.
No thanks
Benson can’t seem to understand that Hobbes is a pre-Enlightenment philosopher who provides contrast to Locke and other Enlightenment thinkers. Hobbes “had a pessimistic view of human nature, which led him to think that a strong authoritarian government, his Leviathan, was needed to protect people’s rights, most of which are given up for the common good…”
Basically, what Benson is saying is that he, Reeder and their fellow travelers are authoritarians and that that is a good thing. I appreciate his honesty and I hate his attitude.
“most of which are given up for the common good…”
As much as Dave-o loves himself, it’s hard to imagine….
OT
John Jay and George Washington proposed the “natural born citizen” requirement to preclude foreigners from “…Government; and…the Command in chief of the american army….”
The Framers entered that phrase into the Constitution.
____________________________________________________________
“Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”
– John Jay Letter to George Washington, 1787
_______________________________________
Foreigners in Government and Command in Chief of the American Army:
– De facto President – Barack Obama
– President – Kamala Harris
– Secretary of Defense – Lloyd Austin
– Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff – Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr.
________________________________________________________________
The only scholarly definition of “natural born citizen” in history:
The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)
BOOK 1, CHAPTER 19
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
_________________________________
Immigration Law of the American Founders:
Naturalization Act of 1790
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person,…
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
What happened, America?
Comrade General Secretary and Dear Leader “Crazy Abe” Lincoln, fellow traveler of Karl Marx happened.
The 4 unalterable Laws of Thermodynamics, numbered as 0–3 and herein written in a popular-appeal style:
0. There is a Game.
1. You can’t win.
2. You cannot even stay even.
3. And you can’t leave the Game.
——-
As exemplified by Founding Father Thomas Jefferson who inherited great wealth and died deeply in debt.
I am quite wealthy and I intend to die deeply in debt.
Vegas, baby!
If this is that dude from Vegas, no one is falling for it LOL.
It appears that Benson has finished his tapioca, and the orderly is allowing him to keep his phone for a little while longer before lights out.
“3. And you can’t leave the Game.”
“Thomas Jefferson
who inherited great wealth anddieddeeply in debt.”It would appear that Benson lives in a home where medical marijuana is freely administered.
Well, at least now we all have a firm understanding of what “Philosophy of Engineering” is.
Who knew?
And here we thought it was just made up bull shit.
The 4 unalterable Laws of Thermodynamics, numbered as 0–3 and herein written in a popular-appeal style:
0. There is a Game.
1. You can’t win.
2. You cannot even stay even.
3. And you can’t leave the Game.
The actual laws of thermodynamics only apply to a closed system – The universe is a closed system. But no portion of the universe outside the whole is a closed system.
Rebutting the example of jefferson is trivial. Standard of living rise rapidly in direct proportion to the freedom of a nation.
The average american lives 2-3 times better than their parents did. That pattern is true throughout the world – proportionate to the freedomn of a country.
David– You have a point about entropy but I have wondered how the Singularity leading to the Big Bang fits with it. If it happened once, no matter the odds, it can happen an infinite number of times in infinite time. Entropy decays into greater complexity?
Maybe the behavior of migrants is the cause of anti-migrant postings. Did anyone ever think of that?
Oh, yeah, you mean behavior like:
Thou Shalt Not Covet (e.g. I desire and deserve all the money Americans have, all their votes, and all of their country)
Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness (e.g. my third world banana republic s—hole-country government is after me)
Thou Shalt Not Steal (e.g. all the money Americans have, all their votes, and all of their country)
Thou Shalt Not Kill (e.g. American women and children)
Social justice anywhere is injustice everywhere.
Right to liberty:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Hemings
For nearly all of human existance there have been slaves.
When and were did slavery start to end ?
With the west starting with the Scottish enlightenment.
But for the enlightenment values reflected – even at the founding of this country – slavery would still be commonplace.
On the ‘natural right to life’:
“There was a young lady of Niger
who smiled as she rode on a tiger.
She went for a ride
but came back inside
and the smile on the face of the tiger.”
Dave-o
Wow, dude, highly recommend you talk to your doctor about switching to some time released cholinesterase inhibitors, if you are going to post just before shuffling off to supper in the dining hall.
I want some of that!
Benson admits and promulgates the natural rights and freedoms, concluding with natural hazards arrayed against them.
The Founders referenced natural and God-given rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities and concluded with admonitions such as:
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
This expose on the denial of free speech via the law makes the case that The Law is not necessarily our friend. The Law, without Justice, is simply a tool of tyranny. The very purpose of The Law is to function as the guarantor of Justice. What we are seeing with ever increasing frequency is the manipulation of social conduct by tyrannical governments using The Law as their primary weapon. This should strike fear in every person dedicated to the principles of civil liberty. It is time to speak out loudly and clearly, with bravery and resolve, in opposition to tyrannical legalisms that threaten the bedrock of Freedom our society once found unshakable. That bedrock is being chipped away, piece by piece, by the actions of enlightened egoists who have appointed themselves as guardians of some misguided and dangerous creed. We must stand together in defiance of these people. A blind adherence to The Law will no longer serve the best interest of humanity, nor will it provide a future for those who follow us. So, stand up, speak out, refuse to be intimidated. The time is now.
Completely off-topic, but the turgid trolls (whether carbon or silicon based) have drug this through so much mud at this point, I don’t give a rat’s derriere. If this report from Just The News is accurate, this could be significant in the Presidential race:
Kennedy VP Shanahan: Campaign mulling withdrawal, Trump endorsement
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/kennedy-vp-shanahan-campaign-mulling-withdrawal-trump-endorsement
“Or we walk away right now and join forces with with Donald Trump and explain to our base why we’re making this decision,”
Curtain twitchers I say. They’ve gotten their knickers all in a twist. Ya see, we’re over here cause you’re over there. So bugger off!
This is the only way the globalist left can impose their agenda, by force of law. Scary stuff. Thankfully the US has a constitution . . . . . . for now
@Anonymous
Exactly. No other Western nation has our Constitution, we’ve seen the results, and it is the thorn in the totalitarian left’s side. We have to defend it with our voices and votes, lest we have to defend it by other means. This is so or die, folks. Wake up, because the modern left will not ever, ever, relent.
Judge Catarina Sjolin Knight, Detective Chief Superintendent Kath Barnes, Chief Superintendent Kate Anderson, Counsel Lucia Harrington.
Is it permissable to ask if women are especially open to the idea of viewpoint suppression? The dangerous blokes need to be locked up.
For a US citizen who has never been to the UK, and who is charged by UK officials, a lawsuit in the US against the UK officials for malicious prosecution would be an appropriate remedy.
Collection and liquidation of the judgment might be a problem, but the effect would be proportional.
@Anonymous
I have extended family in the UK (and they are not ‘white’, I am part of a multicultural family). Anyone that believes what is happening there is what the people want is a flipping idiot or a flipping foot soldier for the regime. And that is end of story. Right now we are at Gorbachev. Do we want to go all the way to Stalin or Mao, or heaven forbid, Hitler or Mussolini, after all this time, for a relatively speaking small group of very privileged people that can’t deal with their day to day feelings?
I honestly think that folks that grew up after WWII, the Cuban missile crisis, the Cold War – they are just so privileged and have been so insulated and pampered, this stuff doesn’t even register in their brains. 9/11 is a mystery to them, one in which we were ‘wrong’, and I see this every year as my wife is an educator of early teens. There can be no passing of the torch to them. Those of us that know better do not get to rest in our later years as other generations did. We will have to carry this burden whether we like it or not. A second ‘greatest generation’, perhaps?
You seriously think the generation of the Korean and Vietnam wars were privileged. You need to think again, way off. 58,150 men died in Vietnam 10 years while nearly 50,000 died in Korea over 3 years. Almost all lived under the draft with daily death tolls in the hundreds. Very few are actually handed what their families earned and built, very few can hang on to it. Im in my later years and worked my ass off for everything I have, despite government taxing the fuk out of me all the way. That’s one of the dumbest things I’ve seen you post.
LMAO drag that g-string out of your crack, dummy.
He said after WWII, the Cuban missile crisis, the Cold War. He meant all of those.
Those time frames would include Korea and Vietnam.
You can floss those buck teeth of yours with it once I unwedge it, duuummmmmy. Boomer generation Einstein.
You sound more like a Gen-Z, getting that butt hurt over being corrected for being a numbskull.
You didn’t correct me. When do you think the Korean War and Vietnam Wars were? When do you think the Cold War happened, El Salvador, Nicaraqua, Dominican Republic, Lebanon? It’s the same generational timeline of those “privileged” people he’s talking about. You know privileged to grow up without a father dead from WW 2, privileged to grow up waiting to have your draft number picked to get killed, privileged to have your friends and family maimed or KIA never found. Butt hurt, no just an enlightenment for a younger generation.
When do you think the Korean War and Vietnam Wars were?
Somewhere between WW2 and the end of the Cold War.
And he specifically said “people who grew up after” those events.
Double down on your idiocy, another common Gen-Z trait.
You’re losing ground here. May wanna put down the shovel.
WW2 ended in 1945 and Vietnam ended 1975, that’s quite a span, 30 years. So you’re saying after which, oh you must mean his intent was after the Cold War in the 80’s Regan years?! I’m losing nothing because I have nothing to lose.
“oh you must mean his intent was after the Cold War in the 80’s “
Yea dum dum, now you are catching on.
Ostensibly (sorry for the big word) he was differentiate among the generations likely to be alive yet.
Greatest
Silent
Boomers
X
Vs
Millennial
Z
Also, cholinesterase inhibitors can sometimes help with sundowners.