Liberals and Free Speech Part Ways


24 Comments for “Liberals and Free Speech Part Ways”

  1. posted by MR Bill on

    I listened live to the Pat Buchanan Speech at the ‘92 Republican Convention, the one Molly Ivan’s said “sounded better in the original German’..All gay folks were an enemy then…
    I rather trust the ACLU, and defer to their judgment on what the think is a valid complaint.
    And I see the Right trying to impose things it feel are “politically correct”: making up specious disrespect when football players take the knee (with no delay of game!);or how I, as a rural Southerner should feel about the Confederacy, and the specious history sold as “Heritage”; or bans on flag burning, or mandatory Pledges of Allegence, or assenting to 10 Commandments monuments, put up as what amounts to Evangelicals territorial pissing.
    The reality is speaking out as a liberal can get you fired, or abused. I had Republicans show up in my bookstore threatening a boycott for saying we were going to Iraq based on lies, and Dubyah Bush wasn’t actually a Texas Cowboy, saying I was “disloyal”. I had little Republicans bastards telling me I should go to Russia (ironic now) for opposing Vietnam. ..
    And I had a contractor fire me because I was a Democrat: it appears to be a not uncommon thing, no matter what the RightWing Noise Machine’s claims: “Moreover, there’s a consistent pattern in the data when it comes to conservatives — one that tells a different story than you hear among free speech panickers.

    “Most of the incidents where presumptively conservative speech has been interrupted or squelched in the last two or three years seem to involve the same few speakers: Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, Charles Murray, and Ann Coulter ,” Sanford Ungar, the Free Speech Project’s director, writes. “In some instances, they seem to invite, and delight in, disruption.”

    What Ungar is suggesting here is that the “campus free speech” crisis is somewhat manufactured. Conservative student groups invite speakers famous for offensive and racially charged speech — all of the above speakers fit that bill — in a deliberate attempt to provoke the campus left. In other words, they’re trolling. When students react by protesting or disrupting the event, the conservatives use it as proof that there’s real intolerance for conservative ideas.

    The other key thing that emerges from the Georgetown data, according to Ungar, is that these protests and disruptions don’t just target the right. “Our data also include many incidents, generally less well-publicized, where lower-profile scholars, speakers, or students who could be considered to be on the left have been silenced or shut down,” he writes.”
    …”effrey Sachs, a political scientist at Canada’s Acadia University, put together a database of all incidents where a professor was dismissed for political speech in the United States between 2015 and 2017. Sachs’s results, published by the left-libertarian Niskanen Center, actually found that left-wing professors were more likely to be dismissed for their speech than conservative ones(…)”
    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/3/17644180/political-correctness-free-speech-liberal-data-georgetown

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      The fact that you celebrate gay voices being silenced in order to appease anti-gay ex-gay pseudoscience proves you are the bigot here.

      Reply
  2. posted by Kosh III on

    Oh no Mr Bill
    You are letting facts get in the way of Regressive propaganda designed to damage gay people.
    Shame….shame…..shame

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      The Regressive Left is the one supporting ex-gay therapy in the name of Big Pharma.

      Reply
  3. posted by JohnInCA on

    If liberals are “parting ways” with Free Speech, what are conservatives doing? Lobbing grenades?

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      Maybe conservatives are just the only ones who are both mature enough and honest enough to realize and admit that people who spread bullshit and won’t shut up need to be forcibly shut up by any means necessary.

      Reply
  4. posted by David Bauler on

    Conservatives and free speech part ways.

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      Fuck freezepeach. I’m tired of being forced to tolerate anti-gay propaganda or anti-Jewish blasphemy. All non-gay forms of human sexuality and all non-Jewish religions should be banned.

      Reply
  5. posted by Jorge on

    Ah, yes, I read that Michael Barone column a couple of years ago. It was okay. A little sub-par, for him.

    “As a right-of-center gay man, I am heartbroken that major gay rights organizations have become virtual hate groups.”

    Whoa! He’s responding to Sen. Hatch? These right-of-center gays find the oddest things to draw inspiration from. (Too bad now I can’t read the Op-Ed without a subscription. But that’s okay. I’m me.)

    I rather trust the ACLU, and defer to their judgment on what the think is a valid complaint.

    Question 1: Is this A) because you don’t believe the ACLU is changing, B), because you don’t care, or C) you don’t want to go through the time or bother of checking their work, or yours?

    Question 2: Is this A) because you don’t believe the Republican National Convention is changing, B) because you don’t care, or C) you don’t want to go through the time or bother of checking their work, or yours?

    Most of the incidents where presumptively conservative speech has been interrupted or squelched in the last two or three years seem to involve the same few speakers: Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, Charles Murray, and Ann Coulter ,”

    An alt-lightist, an establishment conservative, a B-level scholar-author, and a neoconservative; two Gen Ys, an old man, and a middle-aged woman. Those four people have very little in common other than a barely suppressed death wish.

    You cannot hide your ignorance by playing up your knowledge.

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      The Regressive Left falsified everything it claims to know. Anything they claim is true is fake news, and vice versa. That’s why they claimed to be gay allies while all the while they were plotting our destruction at the hands of Big Pharma.

      Reply
  6. posted by Mr Bill on

    I absolutely know I am ignorant of many, many things.
    I am not ignorant of the way the Culture War, implicit in the actions of the Republican Party if not it’s platform (which, because I’m a sick bastard, I read) was the descendant of McCarthyism and the John Birch strain of conservatism: of how Buchanan’s old boss Nixon furthered it with going after hippies and folks of color, and how it still rolls on: Republicans rode fears of the horror of Gay Marriage to power in Georgia and North Carolina, the states I have a political stake in. I’m aware the party has changed some: and still they remain the clearest threat to my free speech, as well as the rights we seek to have recognized. GA GOP Governor nominee Brian Kemp has promised to sign a restrictive “Religious Freedoms” law that would seem to allow anyone to refuse anyone service for any reason..
    I’m paywalled out of WSJ, so I’ll remain ignorant of Barone’s exact wisdom: but I’ve caught his ‘reasonable conservative’ act as a pundit and think he’s a partisan player.
    I no longer can afford to support the ACLU, but my daughter does, and I review the report they give…It’s not a rich organization, especially at the state level, and they get to choose where they spend resources. I’d suggest media figures like the ones cited, who are seeking controversy as professional provocateurs (the Virgin Ben Shapiro, who first rose to media prominence at WaPo, and fell like a spent bottle rocket for plagiarism, included) should use their considerable network to support their legal claims…but I’m ignorant of the details of everything the ACLU does. The Right has demonized them many, many times in my life: and they periodically support some vile rightist because they have rights too.

    If Barone was actually giving money to ACLU, he might have some weight in suggesting what they should or should not support.
    And I try to avoid insulting folks

    Reply
    • posted by Jorge on

      I think you can find Barone’s Op-Ed elsewhere. I read it in the NY Post.

      I no longer can afford to support the ACLU, but my daughter does, and I review the report they give…It’s not a rich organization, especially at the state level, and they get to choose where they spend resources.

      My goodness, I think I found that persuasive.

      Have all those years of poorly veiled partisan hackery (that never quite broke free of the establishment gravitational field) under Anthony Romero finally caught up with the ACLU in the pocketbook? All right then, I bury its memory. At last! It is my view that no Republican worth an ounce of pride should give one penny to the ACLU or should have done so at any time within at least the past 15 years, since the War in Iraq. This is probably a slight against the Ron/Rand Paul wing of the party, but it’s not intended as one.

      Reply
      • posted by Matthew on

        The American Communist Liar’s Union has never cared about civil liberties. The Regressive Left doesn’t care about minorities, women, or gay people unless they can control us and keep us down. Time to start calling their bluff.

        Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      John Birch was a pinko.

      Reply
  7. posted by MR Bill on

    And Barone’s claims in his Intelligencer pieces are about his framing of issues: domPublic Accommodations laws compel speech by saying “you serve all comers?” Barone and his cohort think so.
    He thinks the California law telling the “pregnancy crisis” centers to be honest up front and not lie about their mission to women who are seeking abortions looks lik a Consumer protection to me: should there be a sanction for dishonest advertising?
    The “free rider” issue (if you benefit from Union contract, an increasingly rare thing) do you owe the union the pittance of Union dues even if you oppose the Union? Some states said yes: and the ACLU doesn’t see it as a Free Expression.
    Again, I trust the ACLU a great deal more than most of the folks trying to game Free Speech into allowing invidious discrimination. And the folks telling the ACLU what they should be doing/supporting should use their free speech to form a Civil Rights organization that support their ideas..

    Reply
    • posted by Jorge on

      The “free rider” issue (if you benefit from Union contract, an increasingly rare thing) do you owe the union the pittance of Union dues even if you oppose the Union? Some states said yes: and the ACLU doesn’t see it as a Free Expression.

      While I admit being persuaded by Janus’s argument in the end and I am not the least bit unhappy with the decision, I was almost satisfied with the old way of doing things.

      I’d have been even more satisfied if they didn’t fail to give me my refund twice.

      Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      How many gay babies have been aborted by heterosexual women since Roe v. Wade?

      Reply
  8. posted by MR Bill on

    Grr, more coffee..Examiner (which I’m not familiar with, but Mr Wikipedia says “When Anschutz first started the Examiner in its daily newspaper format, he envisioned creating a competitor to The Washington Post with a conservative editorial line. According to Politico, “When it came to the editorial page, Anschutz’s instructions were explicit—he ‘wanted nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers,’ said one former employee.” The Examiner’s writers have included Michael Barone, Tim Cavanaugh, David Freddoso, Tara Palmeri, Rudy Takala, and Byron York.[5]), no Intelligencer.

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      Good. I wish more papers would refuse to kowtow to the Regressive Left and voluntarily refuse to associate with anyone spewing their vile bile once and for all. In fact, I wish they’d go even further than that and only hire gay conservative columnists and op-ed writers.

      Reply
      • posted by Matthew on

        Please ignore my comments. I am a troll.

        Reply
        • posted by Matthew on

          The above comment is a Regressive Left fascist troll impersonator (likely MR Bill) projecting his trollhood onto me. Disregard it along with all Regressive Left propaganda and fake news.

          Reply
  9. posted by MR Bill on

    And the ACLU has a response, if you care: “Kaminer claims the guidelines change our policy. But the guidelines clearly state that they do not “change ACLU policy, which is set by the Board.” They reaffirm our view that free speech rights “extend to all, even to the most repugnant speakers — including white supremacists — and pursuant to ACLU policy, we will continue our longstanding practice of representing such groups in appropriate circumstances to prevent unlawful government censorship of speech.” Nothing in the guidelines supports Kaminer’s claim that “free speech has become second among equals.”

    Kaminer objects to any acknowledgement that speech can cause harm. But that is simply a recognition of fact, and denying it flies in the face of lived experience and ignores the costs of free speech. All rights come with costs, from privacy to due process to the right against compelled self-incrimination. Acknowledging this hardly means one lacks commitment to the rights. It simply recognizes the stakes. The guidelines do not suggest that the ACLU should not represent a speaker because his speech causes harm. Rather, they “attempt to identify the kinds of questions that ought to be considered, the processes for their consideration, and the measures that can help mitigate the harms to competing interests.” We will continue to represent those expressing offensive and harmful views, but we as an organization also insist on our right to condemn a speaker’s views even as we defend the right to express them.

    And if you don’t believe our words, judge us by our acts. We represent Milo Yiannopoulos in a suit against the Washington, D.C. Metro system for suppressing ads for his book. We are defending a student group in San Diego that was penalized for publishing a satire of “safe spaces” that some students and faculty deem offensive. We disagree sharply with those who engage in terrorism, criminal activity, homophobic or racist speech, or attempts to dissuade women from obtaining abortions. Yet we have defended the constitutional rights of terrorists, criminals, anti-gay and racist bigots, and right-to-life advocates. We don’t burn flags, but we defend the rights of those who do. Indeed, we’ll even defend Kaminer’s right to criticize the ACLU. But we do wish she’d get the facts straight.

    (This article first appeared in The Volokh Conspiracy.)” https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/aclus-longstanding-commitment-defending-speech-we-hate

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      By defending hate speech, you enable hate speech.

      How many gays, Jews, and people of color have to die before the line is finally crossed where you realize that hate speech leads to hate crimes?

      Reply
  10. posted by Matthew on

    Since only libertarians support freedom of speech anymore, then only they should have it. How about that?

    Reply

Leave a Comment