Support Free Speech

Who is stomping on our free speech rights? Who is working to silence public speech?

Kathy Griffin 2017

This is where you find out if YOU are into democracy or fascism. Are you allowing free speech? What about hate speech? What about the speech of climate skeptics? Liberals, anti-Trump’ers, pro-Trump’ers, and Conservatives?

If you think any of these ideas should be restricted from public speech you are more in the fascists’ camp than the democracy camp.

The Liberal-Progressive side of society has fallen into the trap of Hate Speech being illegal. Berkley has transitioned from the birthplace of Free Speech to its grave site.

We each have to examine where we are standing on these issues. For instance, if you are conservative, does Kathy Griggin have a right to express this idea:

If you are a liberal or Progressive, does Rachel Maddow have as much right to be on TV as Sean Hannity? More, less?

R Maddow – top — Hannity – bottom

How you answer tells where you are on the scale of freedom. Is your political ideology more important than your freedom? Or just more important than my freedom?

If you think you are on the side of freedom, free speech, and democracy then you should know about the hashtag #StopTheScalpings and the website Media Equality Project.

There are those working to silence people by organizing to boycott and intimidate the advertisers of those they want to silence. Conservatives and Libertarians think free speech is more important than their ideology and have never significantly organized to silence public speakers. That is going to have to change.

Organizations we think of as Liberal and Progressive think it more important to remove opposing ideas from the public discourse than permit free speech. They have numerous well-funded and organized groups working to boycott and intimidate the advertisers of those espousing opposing ideas.

So, in opposition to wrongheaded Liberals and Progressives, those from all political ideologies that understand the value of free speech are stepping up to oppose a minority of the Left. Thus, the creation of #StopTheScalpings and the birth of the website Media Equality Project.

When the Left stops attacking our freedom, we can back off attacking their spokespeople.

If you are for free speech, help them.

If you don’t want to support them why? And what does that say about you?

The idea is that bad ideas (think hate speech) can best be combated with better ideas (often the truth). I suppose that is unfortunate for the Left. The minority working to silence others doesn’t have better ideas. Thus, the need to stop people from hearing the better ideas.



5 thoughts on “Support Free Speech

  1. At what point does it go from free speech/artistic license to incitement to violence and murder? Individual rights end at the point where they deny the individual rights of others. And in this case, she is implying that Donald Trump has no right to live or she is inciting others to kill him.

    If this were Tim Allen or James Woods holding up the severed head of Obama in 2016, they’d be called racists and blacklisted and audited by the IRS. Or, if they were holding up the severed head of Hillary, tarred as misogynists and blacklisted by the Clinton Foundation Donors looking to protect their investment.

    And I do not believe that anybody has a RIGHT to be on TV, just as you do not have the right to spray paint your manifestos on my driveway or tattoo them on my face. Each medium requires resources, and those who own the resources have the right to expression over them that they can allow others to use. But it does not obligate them to allow others. The producers make their choices, the sponsors make their choices, and the audience makes their choices. The market dictates the winners and losers, within the hopefully limited boundaries that government provides (without unnecessary subsidy).

    In the case of broadcasted medium through the FCC-licensed spectrum, the owner is allegedly the citizens. But when you can make the case that Dancing With The Stars informs the public and serves the public interest, I’ll believe that. Just look at the parting rant from the former editor of NewsBlues for the current state of that industry.


    • You think… We think a bit differently.
      In our system, no one has a right to harm another or infringe on another’s freedoms. The twist promulgated by the media is, one is not allowed to say things that harm another. That wasn’t/isn’t the founding idea. Their statement is a misleading phrasing of the idea. We are free to say things that harm another and we are also responsible and liable for tangible, and sometimes intangible, harm.

      Our system and freedom are based on reactive law, not preemptive law. A reactive law also relies on past experience as a basis for reacting in the present, which can appear preemptive. Thus, an officer does not have to wait for a person to pull the trigger or even completely aim at the officer before they fire, thus being preemptive.

      There is no law against yelling fire in a theater when there is no fire. The illegal part is the incitement to panic. Past experiences of resulting harm are the basis of the idea. When things pass the ‘incitement’ line becomes complicated for new things. Is yelling fire in a virtual theater going to cause harm?

      So, your question of whether Kathy is being artistic or inciting people is the basic point. But, she has the right to do both under free speech ideology. But, she can be prosecuted for the later whether it results in actual harm or not because past experience shows the likely outcome, of which a person is considered to be aware and therefore self-restrained. So, intent becomes a factor. The problem most often comes from who gets to decide if she had malicious intent and crossed the line when no harm resulted.

      I disagree with the wording of the idea not everyone has the right to be on TV. As you worded it, it is an idea the Left strongly supports. I think everyone has the right to build a TV station and be one it. The owner of the station has the right to decide who is on it and what is said on it.

      As we have an idea of public air-waves we license TV and radio stations to assure a public resource is well used and avoid technical conflicts. There is a fuzzy idea of serving the public good. But, the licensing runs into problems with ‘public good’ when it tries to control the content presented by the broadcasters.

      The people individually get to decide what is in their best interest.

      The citizens are not the owners of the stations unless they are the owner, partner, shareholder, etc. The FCC is there to protect the broadcast medium, the airwaves, which are considered public domain. Sort of like we privately own cars and as citizens, we own the roads they travel on.

  2. IMHO, the left has always been fascists. Everything they want to implement requires more and more theft from the public. All they have are bad idea because they all require force to be implemented. That is the measure too, for a good or bad idea, whether you have to force people to do it. As you can probably tell, I’m a hardcore libertarian. I did not vote for Trump, as he’s not a libertarian, but Trump winning shows us that the nation is not so blind to the left’s BS. Trump winning could be called an awakening. Maybe Hillary scared people that much. I say to the leftists, “Please keep it up”, as the crazier they get, the more people awaken to what real freedom is.

    • I like the Libertarian ideology. I am not sure how or why that party attracts so many candidates that appear insane, way out of touch with reality.

      Not all laws that are enforced at gun point are bad. Don’t murder, don’t speed, … However, your point is well taken.

      The Left/Progressive leadership is interested in taking power and having citizens serve them. The Russians and Chinese along with a scattering of other nationalities have written on how to defeat democracies. The current Left is running the playbook. Basic plan: disconnect a people from their history, disarm them, control their education and medical services, control the media and all speech…

      I am amazed at how few people recognize when they are working against their own best interests.

Leave a Reply

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