Free speech – Fine for me but not for thee?

by

One of the questions that inevitably occurs to any politically aware defender of liberty is this: Will the time ever arrive when active resistance is required? Will the political class eventually gain enough control over government that it will step over that invisible line for millions of Americans? It is a thought that comes in the quiet, dark hours of the early morning. And each person has a different line. Here is one of mine:

On Thursday evening, November 12, 2009, while channel-surfing I noticed Keith Olbermann interviewing Adriana Huffington. I don’t normally watch Olbermann, as I don’t approve of the hatred and vitriol he displays toward his political enemies, but what I saw stopped me in my tracks. The two were discussing why the government should suppress Glenn Beck and his ideas. "There is a reason that free speech is not unlimited," said Huffington. "That is why we cannot yell fire in a crowded theater." She went on to explain how Glenn Beck’s words and his program are like yelling fire in a crowded theater, and thus the suppression of his speech by government force would be legitimate and desirable. Olbermann agreed and approved.

These people are not joking, and they are not powerless fringe-players. They are serious national commentators. Their likes have been seen many times in the past. In the 20th century such people became activists for fascism, communism, national socialism (Nazis), Maoism, and other movements. Such people, whatever group they align with, share common core goals: They champion the persecution and domination of people they disagree with, which includes the suppression of inalienable rights, including that of freedom of speech noted in the Bill of Rights. If such people are successful today in suppressing freedom of speech rights of their political enemies, then the time will have come for active civil disobedience.

Author

Share to...