Free Speech Attacks

This past week has seen more and more attacks on free speech and civil rights than any time I can remember. I don’t see where anyone is actually tabulating the frequency or even the number of attacks. So, I can’t provide hard data to prove an increase. But, there is no doubt there are attacks and they are legion.

We expect attacks on or systematic elimination of citizen speech in Communist countries. But, I find it amazing Socialists are gaining support as they attack rights and Progressives are joining in…

Hate Speech is Free Speech

Hate Speech is Free Speech


Free Speech Under Attack

As our report shows, curbs on free speech have grown tighter. Without the contest of ideas, the world is timid and ignorant.

In all areas of life, free debate sorts good ideas from bad ones. Science cannot develop unless old certainties are queried. Taboos are the enemy of understanding. When China’s government orders economists to offer optimistic forecasts, it guarantees that its own policymaking will be ill-informed. When American social-science faculties hire only left-wing professors, their research deserves to be taken less seriously.

Freedom of Speech Under Attack on College Campuses

During an interview with the FOX Business Network’s Stuart Varney, Emily Jashinsky of Young America’s Foundation discussed the importance of freedom of speech on college campuses after students at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine were impeached for wearing sombreros at a tequila party.

Free Speech Is Under Attack On The Nation’s Campuses With Too Few Willing To Defend It

Three faculty members confronted Tai. One of them, Melissa Click, who teaches at the journalism school, is shown on a video calling out, “Hey, who wants to help me get this reporter out of here. I need some muscle over here.” She and her colleagues seem to have forgotten that the quad of a public university is public space, and a journalist has the same free-speech rights as do the protestors.

Is online free speech under attack?

Regulators in Washington are showing increasing interest in tightening rules on political speech on the web, arguing that the dissonant voices enabled by “new media” have become too influential.

FCC commissioner: U.S. tradition of free expression slipping away

“I think that poses a special danger to a country that cherishes First Amendment speech, freedom of expression, even freedom of association,” FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai told the Washington Examiner. “I think it’s dangerous, frankly, that we don’t see more often people espousing the First Amendment view that we should have a robust marketplace of ideas where everybody should be willing and able to participate.

Twitter announces ‘trust and safety’ panel to police content

Twitter on Tuesday announced the formation of a new “Trust and Safety Council,” which will work to develop policies censoring speech on the site. The group will be comprised of more than 40 organizations from 13 regions around the world.

 A New Low in Attacks on Freedom of Speech

Attacks On Free Speech From The Left

The unprecedented campaign against free speech

This coordinated campaign has been underway for years. Its creation can be traced to the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision inCitizens United v. Federal Election Commission, when the court refused to accept the Obama administration’s argument that it could ban books, mailers, advertisements or anything else that contained a political message during an election campaign. This simple ruling ensured that Americans retained the fundamental right to use free speech to praise or criticize a candidate running for office.

Free Speech/First Amendment @

Climate Change Activists Clamp Down on Free Speech and Scientific Inquiry


6 thoughts on “Free Speech Attacks

  1. Hate speech is one thing.
    But direct incitement to violence or the glorification of violent acts is another.
    Especially when it’s prohibited by law, treaty, or the charter of a country/organization/quasigovernmental agency.


    • It isn’t the incitement to violence speech that is being targeted. It is any speech someone disagrees with.

  2. But they did fire Melissa Click

    who then blamed it on her being white. [Actually they may have thought they were firing Carrot top KIDDING! ]

    But at least sometimes the right thing is done .

    • … yeah. But, there was a lot of pressure to fire her.

      As the teacher and in the way students responded, I think we see the disaster in how students are conditioned.

  3. Are you seriously quoting neo-Nazi propaganda from Twitter as proof that Germany has turned into a Socialst dictatorship? A source that uses headlines as “The ‘multicultural’ agenda: left-wingers celebrate replacing “blonde hair, blue eyed” Germans with hijab-wearing Muslim migrants”? (in case you aren’t aware, “blonde and blue-eyed” is the stereotype of the Aryan “ubermensch” Hitler used in his racist theories…)
    NO German court will prosecute anyone for “critizing” anything or anyone, nor having a differing opinion…
    The purpose of these groups is not to “critisize”, they’re calling for violence against minorities or cheering others for setting fires on refugee shelters. I think there’s a term for it that’s also valid in the US: Terrorism…

    • So, you read the court case? Did you look up what Germany is doing?

      May be the Washington post is a better source for you?

      Or may be the Left-wing Huffington post?

      Germany is doing all sorts of hate speech prosecution…

      Have you looked to see what Germany is classing as hate speech against immigrants? In general those that disagree with Merkel’s policy to bring more immigrants in to provide a cheap labor pool are being prosecuted. So, a German that thinks immigration is excessive and may drive his wages down risks prosecution when saying so. Read the coverage.

      The reason hate speech is protected is it gives government control in deciding what is and is not hate. The incitement to violence laws were not deemed to be preemptive in regard to speech. That is a new take used by those attempting to control speech. So, if you said something and some one acted on it then you could go to jail as law enforcement reacted. If no one acted on it, you wouldn’t be prosecuted for what you said, free speech. Law enforcement would not preempt in anticipation of a crime. But, the issue is so distorted many think it is about censoring speech and think loss of that right is OK. You seem to one of those.

      The Basic Alinsky tactic is to attack the messenger to discredit their thinking. Why did you use the tactic?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *