The anti-free speech movement in the United States was largely an outgrowth of higher education where viewpoint intolerance has taken hold of many schools. Indeed, intolerance and orthodoxy are often defended on the left in the name of tolerance and pluralism. Harvard Professor Timothy McCarthy is one of those voices demanding the removal of faculty with opposing views in the name of tolerance. He recently told New York University’s Washington Square News that any faculty who do not support “gender-affirming care” should be stripped of their academic titles and fired.
Many academics and citizens oppose “gender-affirming” policies on religious or other grounds. Some believe that school-enforced policies inhibit debate over gender dysphoria and the basis for various treatments and protections on both sides. McCarthy believes that no such debate should be allowed among faculty, declaring that “there’s a particular place in hell for academics who use their academic expertise and power to distort and do violence to people in the world.” He was targeting two professors at NYU who are affiliated with groups critical of surgical and chemical interventions for gender dysphoria.
Professor McCarthy offered the usual nod to free speech and academic freedom before eviscerating both in his comments. He admitted that “a level of suspicion and inquiry into medical practices is healthy,” but then dismissed such views as harmful and mere efforts to “poison the waters.”
There was a time when such intolerance was directed against the left and groups ranging from feminists to those in the LGBT community. Now, it has become a badge of honor, the expected bona fides that show the correctness and firmness of one’s views.
The irony is crushing. Harvard’s Kennedy School website states that McCarthy “was the first openly gay faculty member” at the public policy school “and still teaches the school’s only course on LGBTQ matters.” When I first went into teaching, I had friends who still remained in the closet out of fear that their sexual orientation would undermine their chances for tenure or advancement. Likewise, far-left academics associated with the critical legal studies (CLS) movement were viewed as “poisoning the waters” of higher education and often blocked from teaching.
The left has now adopted the same intolerance and orthodoxy once used against it. Indeed, it has been far more successful in purging the faculty ranks of conservatives, libertarians, and dissenters. As we have previously discussed, Harvard is particularly notorious for this purging of both its faculty and student body.
This year, Harvard again found itself dead last among 251 universities and colleges in the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) annual ranking.
The Harvard Crimson has documented how the school’s departments have virtually eliminated Republicans. In one study of multiple departments last year, they found that more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.”
Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
According to Gallup, the U.S. population is roughly equally divided among conservatives (36%), moderates (35%), and liberals (26%).
So, Harvard has three times the number of liberals as the nation at large, and less than three percent identify as “conservative” rather than 35 percent nationally.
According to the last student survey, only 9 percent of the class identified as conservative or very conservative.
Notably, despite Harvard’s maintenance of an overwhelmingly liberal faculty and student body, even liberal students feel stifled at Harvard. Only 41 percent of liberal students reported being comfortable discussing controversial topics, and only 25 percent of moderates and 17 percent of conservatives felt comfortable in doing so.
Among law school faculty who donated more than $200 to a political party, 91 percent of the Harvard faculty gave to Democrats.
Professor McCarthy appears right at home in his public call for a further purging of faculty ranks.
This is an area that has deeply divided the country, as was evident in the last election. Higher education should play a critical role in that debate by allowing faculty and students to engage with each other in civil and substantive debate. Instead of spending so much time and effort trying to silence those with opposing views, the left could instead focus on refuting these claims. Instead, it is replicating that same pattern of cancellations, deplatformings and firings that marked the last decade. It is the same approach used against academics who questioned aspects of COVID policies including mask efficacy doubts, natural immunity theories, opposition to the closing of schools, opposition to the six-foot rule, and the lab theory on the virus’s origin. They were also removed from faculties and associations. Yet, many of these views have since been vindicated.
What was lost was not just free speech and academic freedom, but a rigorous debate that might have helped us avoid some of the costs of unsupported COVID policies. For example, some of our closest allies listened to skeptics on the need to close schools and opted to keep young children in school. They were able to avoid the massive educational and psychological costs that we incurred in this country. Much like Professor McCarthy, these skeptics were accused of “poisoning the waters” and spreading harmful ideas or disinformation.
There is no difference between the intolerance of figures like Professor McCarthy from those who once sought the same measures against liberals, homosexuals, or feminists. Now firmly in control of higher education, many on the left are using their power to win public debate through retribution, coercion, and attrition. In the process, they are destroying the very essense of higher education for not just our students but ourselves.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
I was a Law School Professor for 45 years. Luckily my years coincided with the Free Speech movement. I even had my Dean and the President defending me verses a couple of left-wing Trustees.
Won’t happen in 2025.
“Shut up, he explained.” -Ring Lardner
“Instead of spending so much time and effort trying to silence those with opposing views, the left could instead focus on refuting these claims.”
I think converse of this statement is more accurate: “Can’t refute, therefore must silence”. Note that this doesn’t imply truth either way. It’s more like a court case, where one side loses the case if they can’t make a coherent and convincing argument besides “shut up”.
. . . this doesn’t imply truth either way.
But wouldn’t you agree that, if one side cannot make a coherent argument opposing the other side’s position, then the other side is probably the one whose position is accurate, i.e., true?
Wrong. Default by not making a coherent argument does not equal success for the opposition. Opposition still has to have support through merit.
we need to take away any funding that the gov gives them. this is so wrong!
Keep on bringing the laughs…
https://x.com/DefiantLs/status/1900249804589973860
“Prrrriceless!”
This is another great column. The Washington Square News column cites the Southern Poverty Law Center as a source. “In December 2023, the Southern Poverty Law Center — a nonprofit legal advocacy organization dedicated to civil rights and public interest litigation — identified Therapy First, originally named the Gender Exploratory Therapy Association, as a group that spreads false information about trans people.” Curious, I went to the Therapy First web page to see exactly what false information might be spread. I came across “A Brief Guide for Parents” on the Therapy First web site and was very impressed with the thoughtfulness, even handedness, and consideration of the article. From the article one gets that gender dysphoria is not a one-approach-fits-all problem. It would appear that the author of the Washington Square News article, the SPLC, and the good professor McCarthy are all of the one-approach-fits-all crowd – that is to completely accept the premise that all adolescents have a clear and correct understanding of their sexuality and this understanding should not be questioned. While it is possible that there are adolescents that have well reasoned understandings of their sexuality, I find that position to be at odds with my recollections and the benefit of decades of hindsight of my own ill formed adolescent ideas – sexual or otherwise. I am appalled that Prof McCarthy would not welcome consideration of alternative approaches and open debates on this topic.
For many years now, the SPLC has been a garbage organization that puts out lie after lie. It is a hate group. Yet, media sources reference it as if it were legit. It is the opposite of legit. It is complete trash. It’s map has led to actual violence, like toward the Family Research Center in DC.
OldManfromKansas-I Agree, it once was a useful organizations that did point out much that was wrong in the United States but it has definitely lost its way. It has become the enemy that it sought to destroy.
No they are a hate group that uses pseudoscience. It is akin to the “scientists” of old that measured head size to justify the inferiority of certain races.
Please actually read what they actually espouse which is basically conversion therapy because they assume transgenderism is a mental illness. It is not, and there is no medical basis for that conclusion.
#74. Conversion therapy is simply punishment and cruelty. They’ll punish until death if not converted. Really sick idea.
“MR. MCBRIDE’S FANTASY”
After referring to Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware as “Mr. McBride” during a congressional hearing this week,
Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, said he is not obligated to engage in McBride’s “fantasy.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________
It’s not “gender-affirming,” it’s psychosis.
These people are unstable and overcome by pathology.
Does Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) menstruate?
Does Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) have ovaries, fallopian tubes, and a uterus?
Did Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) have a hysterectomy?
Does Representative Sarah McBride (D, DE) have XX chromosomes?
The dims have to come back to reality. They are not with mainstream America.
#74. The Phillips head screwdriver is a case in point. It’s purpose is to screw in screws with a cross on the head. The Phillips head screws are self centering unlike the flathead screws and flathead screwdrivers.
Phillips head screwdrivers were created for a specific purpose. It’s their telos. People use the screwdrivers off purpose as ice picks, to stir paint, to poke holes in cans and boxes and to stab people. The Phillips head screwdriver is much abused.
People are a little like screwdrivers. They use their bodies off purpose. They abuse it in myriad ways. It has a purpose. Trans or homosexuality etc are disorders. Whether it’s physical or mental or both, innate or not the misuse is a disorder.
Children cannot be transgender because they’ve never been a man or woman. When they’ve fully grown they can decide themselves. Gender is immutable. Poor children who’ve been told this isn’t true.
The term “gender-affirming care” is Orwellian. It is in fact gender disaffirming care. When I grew up it was called a sex-change operation.
This whole ——- place has been Orwellian for quite some time now.
Scam scam every where but don’t worry , every one is not a cheater, very reliable and profitable site. Thousands peoples are making good earning from it. For further detail visit the link no instant money required free signup and information…….__
For more information about online businesses,
go to.…… https://find2boost21.blogspot.com/
Jonathan: You have been anti-science for years. During the Covid-19 pandemic you opposed vaccines, face masks and other policies to prevent the spread of the deadly virus. Now you have joined the anti-scientific anti-trans crusade.
Your column comes after DJT issued an EO on January 28 banning transgender care for anyone under 19 years of age. That was quickly followed on 2/13 when federal Judge Brendon Hurson in Baltimore blocked DJT’s EO. After the decision a spokesperson for the plaintiffs said: “Today’s intervention by the court underscores the cruelty and recklessness that is embodied in this order [DJT’s EO] and affirms our commitment to resist the administration’s extremist agenda that targets trans and non-binary young people and privileges ideology over medical expertise”.
Now you say “many academics and citizens oppose ‘gender affirming’ policies on religious and other grounds”. The problem for you and DJT is that decisions on gender affirming care for children should be based on medical science–not “religious” or political ideologies. Most doctors, scientists and academics support gender affirming care. The few who don’t are flat earthers and those whose ultimate goal to to put the LGBTQ+ community back in the closet. Never going to happen no matter how many columns you write on the subject!
It’s the same demographics of people getting gender affirmative care as it was getting lobotomies and electroconvulsive therapy in the 50s. This is mostly just medical homophobia. It’s important to remember that the lobotomies were exclusively voluntary, and required informed consent, and were considered best practices then.
“Gender Affirming Care” sounds so sweet and kind. In reality it is child mutilation and sterilization. The child who undergoes this barbaric procedure is then dependent forever on big Pharma and big medicine. We will look back years from now and see that this barbarity will greatly exceed the grand ideas of frontal lobotomies, Thalidomide, sterilization of Native American women and more.
Say, here’s an idea. Make this procedure strictly an out-of-pocket expense and you will an immediate plummet of candidates.
This is not a religious fight only. This is an affront to common sense. For thousands and thousands of years, people managed without “gender affirming care.” Other countries think we have gone mad. It is insanity to say mutilating a vulnerable child is normal. How many people have gone back and read their journal when they were in 8th grade and were not shocked at what knuckleheads we were at that vulnerable time of life. Boys and girls should be playing hide and seek, worried about girl cooties or playing a ball game.
In the words of Pink Floyd, “Hey teacher! Leave them kids alone!!”
When Dennis uses the words extreme, what he is fearful of is that people are returning to normal, to common sense. The emperor has no clothes.
If you want to read common sense comments on this subject, read or watch anything by Miriam Grossman, M.D., Child Psychiatrist with 40+ years of clinical experience working with kids and young adults including many who have expressed concerns with gender dysphoria.
https://youtu.be/abTMFKoytMo?si=N4mcgwLWGd5ghz83
Dennis – the science is that 99.997% of humans are born with XX chromosomes – and are female or XY chromosomes and are male.
There is a tiny percent of genetic anomalies.
This nonsense by the left is NOT about those people who do not have XX chromosomes or XY chromosomes.
It is about people whose actual sex is perfectly clear, who without any scientific evidence at all wish to be a different sex than they are.
MOST of the time – that is a harmless delusion that we can play along with. But when you start talking about chemical or surgical intervention in the lives of children, you are anti-science and pro child abuse.
As to Covid – cloth masks – which is what most people wore are WORSE than useless. N95 masks were not sufficiently efective to stop- ANY respiratory virus – THAT is the science. It always WAS the science. It is those of you claiming otherwise that are denying science and reality.
There was no science behind lockdowns. and no science behind social distancing.
I applaud those who sought to actually stop the spread of the virus – but good intentions do not justify lies and bad acts.
You do not get to harm people in the name of the common good.
I also applaud those who developed the vaccine in record time.
But the FACT is that it was not effective – and they KNEW it would not be effective before it was released.
There is SOME argument that it might have been worth the risk for people over 55 especially and/or those with comorbidities.
That said the data is that the adverse reactions to this vaccine are the worst of any vaccine that has ever been approved – and it would not have been approved in a normal world. While I would get rid og NIH. FDA, and CDC and let those who produced the vaccine try to sell it to people.
I would also hold them accountable – if they failed to provide information on the known risks.
There have been numerous lawsuits against Trump’s EOs – except for the Birthright citizenship one – I expect all of those cases to ultimately be decided in favor of Trump. Large numbers already have.
Judge Hurson will be overturned.
What is cruel and reckless is telling teens that their life will magically get better if they are given horomone blockers, incorrect hormones with results that could be highly damaging and irreversible, as well as surgery that is irreversable. All in response to a delusion – often sold to them that because they are confused teens with raging hormones – IS THERE ANY OTHER KIND OF TEEN ? that all there problems many of which are just nature taking its course, will magically disappear from surgery and drugs.
THAT is cruel and Reckless.
There are thousands of reasons to oppose drugging and mutilating children.
I have no idea what Most Doctors do – though as this article points out – it is unlikely that most doctors and academics feel free to express anything different from left wing dogma.
With respect to the LGBTQ+ community – no one is looking to “put them in the closet” – You are absolutely correct that is not going to happen.
Adults are free to live their lives as they please – so long as they do not affirmatively harm others.
It does not matter if their choices are good, or bad scientifically based or not.
Sexual attraction appears to distribute along a bell curve like many other attributes.
That said – there is absolutely no actual scientific evidence of a scientific or biological source for anything in the LGBTQ+ panopoly.
Ultimately all claims regarding sexualtiy – beyond normal heterosexualtiy are matters of belief – not science.
Some time in the future – if such research is actually allowed -and the left has actively tried to thwart it.
WE MIGHT find some scientific foundation for LGBTQ+ – but we have not thus far.
So no the science is not on your side.
The only thing you have going for you it the freedom of adults to make choices that do not harm others
Wrong again!
COVID establishment narratives reverse five years later on lockdowns, school closures, origin
“Media falsely claim “recent” research exposed failure of nonpharmaceutical COVID interventions, which was in fact known from the start. German intelligence reportedly believed in Chinese lab leak since 2020.”
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/covid-establishment-narratives-reverse-five-years-later-lockdowns
Professor Turley,
Based on the article you hyperlinked to, you are MISQUOTING Professor McCarthy. The article says:
“McCarthy said that if any professor at any university, including Harvard, were found to be a member of organizations like Therapy First and Genspect, they should be removed and stripped of their academic titles.
He did not say that anyone who doesn’t support gender affirming care should be stripped of their academic titles. Those organizations actively promote exploratory or “non-affirming” therapy, which assumes that trans identity is a mental illness.
There is a BIG difference between those two things.
I took Professor McCarthy’s class called “American Protest Literature: From Tom Paine to Tupac” about 15 years ago. He is a phenomenal professor and was, at the time, one of the few professors that would include conservative perspectives in his class (I remember as a centrist-leading student – which meant I was right-wing for Harvard standards). He included conservative protest literature in his class, for example.
More importantly, at that time, he would talk openly about how difficult it was to be openly gay at a time when other faculty members treated non-heterosexual orientation as a mental illness. This has clearly struck a similar nerve for him. And it does a disservice to your readers to MISQUOTE him so incredibly poorly. Please do better.
For more context, your misquote is like taking someone who says “being a member of the KKK should be disqualifying” and summarizing it as “being against affirmative action is disqualifying.” Those are NOT the same thing.
He’s mentally ill, the organizations represent exactly what the good Professor wrote. You know nothing says I love you more than a colostomy bag…
Good catch! Professor Turley (or perhaps Darren or Kristen) should correct and update this post.
There is no doubt, it is a disorder.
Scientific evidence to back that up?
The problem is that in the last 15 years the Overton Window has shifted so far left that the professor is probably not the same guy he was when you had him in class.
As an example I ask that you search for speeches by Bill Clinton or Obama on gay marriage, the need for a strong border and even English being needed to be spoken in America. check out Obama trying to cut waste, or at least saying so. Check out support for Israel vis a vis the Dems support today.
Bill Clinton’s policies of 1996 are Trump’s policies of today.
Apparently within the LGBTQ+ community itself, many are opposed to children making irreversible (lifelong) surgical choices requiring lifetime drugs at that age.
They fully support trans rights but think only adults (or at minimum parents) should make those lifelong decisions. Many LGBTQ+ adults have said publicly that they are glad they weren’t able to do that as children.
So there isn’t agreement in the LGBTQ+ community itself.
[Source: Andrew Sullivan appearing on the Bill Maher show].
Lisa Selin Davis @LisaSelinDavis
“Timothy McCarthy, a human rights activist and professor at Harvard University, told WSN that the tactics employed by organizations like Therapy First and Genspect are part of a longer history of spreading misinformation about trans identity. McCarthy said that while a level of suspicion and inquiry into medical practices is healthy, the purpose of questioning the validity of gender-affirming care is oftentimes intended to “poison the waters” and raise concern around the common practice.” Huh, weren’t lefty academics just saying they cared about free speech? Really horrified by the inaccurate reporting in this article.
By: Lisa Selin Davis – X ~ Mar 13, 2025
https://x.com/LisaSelinDavis/status/1900187172168163606
At least 2 NYU affiliates involved in organizations that promote anti-trans practices
An adjunct professor and alum have ties to nonprofits accused by human rights and medical experts of engaging in medical practices opposing gender-affirming care.
Byline photo of Ania Keenan
Ania Keenan and Raea Lovett ~ February 24, 2025
https://nyunews.com/features/news/2025/02/24/affiliates-tied-to-anti-trans-practices/
His description says:
“He is a frequent media commentator whose work has been featured in Salon, Huffington Post, The Daily Beast, Pangyrus, Gay and Lesbian Review, The Nation, NPR, Al Jazeera, and BBC…”
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty/timothy-patrick-mccarthy
Might as well condense it to “Fascist”.
But then–Harvard.
He was a phenomenal professor when I was there. And I was a Young Republican at Harvard. It’s sad that you have no idea what a fascist is
A fascist is someone who would demand that anyone who doesn’t agree with him be fired.
He qualifies easily.
Our best colleges (not assuming that Harvard is still one of them) would benefit from having formal debating societies, like the Oxford Union, where almost any topic can be aired in a setting that attracts leading academics and politiicians and allows for reasonable interchange beween the audience and the speakers. https://oxford-union.org/pages/formal-debates Maybe our leading politicians would then be able to rise above the level of repeatition party-approved talking points. Journalists might even be able to think for themselves.
If you can’t debate, you can’t think. If you can’t think, you will be the prisoner of rhetoric. Even self-debate is better than no debate.
Edwardmahl,
I think you are on to something there. It would explain why they do not want to debate or try to shout down anyone they disagree with and will not engage in serious debate with them.
Explains the inbred nature of MAGA where there is absolutely no questioning of Trump no matter how outlandish or clownish his statements are.
EdwardMahl-I would agree. Debate is fun when you can state a subject, get prepared and then argue it out in front of spectators. As long as people are civil and respectful. You can be quite passionate but civil and respectful. Even better is to argue for the view that you desperately dispise.
His desired tactic should be fully implemented by firing him.
I thought that we had had most of this argument yesterday. Then it was the 1st court of appeals acting as loons and now a Harvard Professor is acting like a loon. I was able to state in my note, even not knowing the justices who made unsigned decision, that they had obviously been appointed since 1992. A kind soul looked up the Justices and found 1 was appointed by Clinton and 2 by Obama and all were women!! I wonder if they were all named Karen.
This Harvard professor is committing educational malpractice. Here he is pontificating about gender affirming care when 3 studies I quoted yesterday showed not only was the surgical and non surgical care not effective in helping the patient’s gender dysphoria but was, in many cases , harmful. If he is a professor he is undoubtedly way behind on his reading (and as an aside, his comprehension skills must be questioned). If he was member of a journal club or its electronic replacement in this age) in his university he would probably get an F.
In Academic Medicine and is some non academic centers, journal clubs, over the years were a key component where residents, fellows, faculty and students were all assigned reputable journals to review and then, in an informal setting, people would sit and discuss the various features and findings in articles to bring all up to date. This was often done monthly or bi-monthly. This has no doubt fallen by the wayside in our electronic society as we can sit in a comfortable recliner and review journal after journal at our leisure while drinking our diet root beer.
Obviously the Harvard Professor is not up to date. It horrifies me that such an outspoken Harvard Professor is failing his students and teaching outmoded ideas.
As the Queen of Hearts would say, “off with his head”, because he obviously has no need of it.
GEB,
Great comment and +1 on the root beer!
Both parties, but especially leadership of the Democrats, should start with “What’s important to the average American”.
Most Americans would probably say the price of eggs, price of cars, price of homes, price of insurance, price of college tuition, price of prescription drugs, price of taxes and income not keeping pace with inflation.
These type of issues win elections. On constitutional issues affecting small populations of Americans, those lower level priories to most voters – must be thoroughly explained and debated.
Most people I know (of both parties) support equal rights for everyone as long as those rights don’t infringe on other people’s rights. This issue infringes on the Title IX rights of women and hasn’t been thoroughly explained or debated. That’s why it’s considered Woke since it’s outside the law and potentially infringes on the rights of women (depending on the individual unique case).
Anyone against biology should be fired
DOGE has just cut TSA funding for dogs used to sniff out bombs and drugs.
All expenditures for dog food, veterinary visits and kennelling have been put on hold.
It’s a DOGE eat dog world now.
However, Elmo Muskrat has advised that dogs will be fed if they submit a list of 5 people that they bit last week.
So Kristi Noem, head of DHS, is now starving dogs rather than shooting them.
She just can’t stop killing dogs.
Calling Joe Biden’s Secret Service, please report to the Rabies lab!
Rolling Rolling Rolling
Keep those DOGEs rolling
Rawwwwwhiiide!
OMG, Obama Was Also A Nazi…
“He had his own DOGE and put Biden in charge of it”
Biden in charge of it, explains why it went no where.
https://modernity.news/2025/03/14/omg-obama-was-also-a-nazi/
@Upstate
Saw that. And of course, Biden was in charge of it. 🙄 There is literally nothing the new administration is doing that the dems didn’t do, and that their voters applauded at one time. It’s absurd. Our modern DNC is a disgrace, a joke, and a bad joke. Used to just be politics, and they really do think we’re all stupid and will just fall in line if they promise us enough, not freedom, but ‘free stuff’. They are also counting on a level of ignorance of world history.
There are absolutely younger voters on the East Coast that think socialism or communism means they can stay at home and AOC will buy them designer boots and purses. It’s too idiotic to even consider, and I honestly don’t know how we frame a rebuttal when we are dealing with that depth of ignorance.
James,
They keep saying they are fighting for the working man, yet never actually have anything to say or point to they have done to help the working man. The only thing they have is, “We’d not Trump!” Or, “Trump is a Nazi!” And? In the mid-terms and the 2028 election, what are they going to run on? “You know all that fraud, waste and abuse the Trump admin and DOGE found and cut? Vote for us and we will bring it all back!”
@Upstate
I suspect they will once again attempt to lie and gaslight their way in, and we have to hold steady and not buy it, Conservative, Libertarian, and Moderate, alike. The attacks and petulance are thing for now, they will resume their fakery as we creep closer to the midterms. We have to not fall for it, they will resume precisely what they were doing for the past five years without hesitation, and every dem elected official will be a dyed in the wool puppet. It’s just what the modern DNC is.
Watch Western Europe. If we do not want that for ourselves, then we are not even close to done, we do not get to just relax just yet. The dems are globalists whole hog, they hate our Constitution and separation of powers, and they are not simply going to stop being that, IMO.
Can you post any links that document all the waste and fraud that;’s been found, let alone cut?
UpstateFarmer- I am very interested is seeing what happens with the group that is trying to get voter ID into the California Constitution by way of a plebiscite in 2026. I suspect some very down and dirty actions will occur. Reportedly voter ID is favored by a majority of Californians in polls.
Once upon a time, Americas educational system focussed on education and critical thinking . . . . not activism or the fundamental transformation of western society or our constitutional republic.
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin
_________________
You couldn’t.
________________
“We the People of the United States…secure the Blessings of Liberty to OURSELVES and OUR POSTERITY.”
– Preamble
______________
You didn’t.