The headline is a quote from Gina Carano. The MMA Fighter and actress was on Russel Brand’s podcast to discuss many things, including what she and Russell have in common. Big Something’s trying to cancel them for sharing opinions the Big Something’s didn’t like.
Originally published on Steve’s Substack.
Carano had to deal with the #Woke Disney Beast. It’s Corporate bullying. She recounts how a Mouse House publicist penned a statement for her to read, and all she had to do was abandon her principles and beliefs and say sorry, and they wouldn’t excommunicate her.
Disney might be as bad or worse as the rest of them, but in my experience, their idea of diversity is a room full of people who look different but all think (or at least say) the same things.
Carano said no way, so they tried to destroy her.
Years later, she has succinctly (IMO) boiled this down into one statement. “I’m not doing anything wrong. I’m just not doing what you want me to do.”
I think that’d look good on a bumper sticker.
We have More in Common Now Than Ever.
It started when the Left politicized nearly everything (yes, they are working on whatever remains), and we are supposed to agree with them. Refusing can be career-ending or—in some instances—career-making. Russell Brand has been doing well after his conversions. He’s all about speaking freely and being able to disagree, asking questions, and interviewing people who have opinions the Big Somethings may not like. He seems happier and more energized, a transition that has attracted millions of interested listeners.
At its root is the same simple premise. “I’m not doing anything wrong. I’m just not doing what you want me to do.”
Like Joe Rogan or Jordan Peterson, Brand appears to have achieved escape velocity—the ability to express your truth, agree or disagree, to whoever wants to listen. But it should be like that for everyone. The First Amendment affords you the right to speak freely without fear of the government or its proxies (Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big U, and so on) shutting you down. And yes, we can quibble about whether that relationship is in reverse. Government dancing to the tune of globalist corporate masters. I think it works both ways, but the victims are the same.
Everyone who might want to disagree. And that is something that a vast swath of (at least Americans), without regard to party registration or lack of it, could agree.
Corporate Media, the political establishment, Music, Hollywood, Sports, corporate board rooms, and international organizations have coalesced into a monolithic group-think tank. They’ve gone to war with individual liberty, and Free Speech cannot be allowed to be a casualty.
Agree to Disagree
I’ve been wallowing in the political trenches for almost two decades, and one of the things I know I’ve always been on the right side of is not silencing people with whom I disagree. It is, in fact, an article of faith. Let them speak. That might prove you right. So, I feel confident in my ability to ask anyone, from the apolitical to street-action activists, to stand up for what I have phrased elsewhere as the right to be wrong.
It is neither yours nor the government’s place to define truth and not just because The State is so bad at it. It is simply unconscionable to presume that there is just one right idea or that yours applies to everyone else.
Science cannot be a consensus. There can be a prevailing agreement on the current observed circumstances, but without challenge, experimentation, and open debate, the Earth might still be at the center of the universe. This is an apt comparison to the thoughts and beliefs of anyone who insists that those who disagree with them are peddling misinformation or disinformation.
Your ideas are not the center of any universe but your own, and if you think it is a good idea to enroll any entity with police powers to ensure it, you should be met with considerable dissent and resistance.
To enslave a person’s speech is to enslave their will and their actions. If I am not entitled to my opinion, then am I not a slave to yours? And who will stand to contest the lies we know alongside the ideas and demands we feel compelled to challenge? It is not just our ideas but your right to express yours whether we concur or not.
It is but one of many matters on which most of America should agree. A point of convergence from which much harmony could evolve. And perhaps that is why some want so desperately to criminalize it now.
Your right to disagree with me and I, you, is as fundamental as our right to be. Without open debate, neither of us will get any further than what is in our heads.
If you think that’s a good idea for any institution, especially one with police powers, then be prepared to be disappointed. At some point, not long from now, you’ll be doing nothing wrong, but something they don’t want you to do, and you won’t like how they let you know it.
Note: It is true that the First Amendment only applies to the government. Private entities can suppress your speech at will. That is not at issue. What is at issue is the cabal of public and private interests who are working in concert to terrorize ordinary citizens into silence.
