Posted by Curt on 28 October, 2021 at 1:08 pm. 19 comments already!


by Ace

The neocons are coming home again to the left-liberalism they strayed from 40 years ago.
A hallmark of the left’s jihad against free speech is the claim that to even permit speech is to endorse that speech.
It’s not enough to say, “I disagree with racism.”
No, you have to define yourself fundamentally as a “committed anti-racism activist.”
And it doesn’t stop there. You’re not allowed to even permit a BadSpeaker to speak. To permit him to speak is to be Complicity In Crime, to be an accessory to Word Murder.

Thus, the deplatforming craze on the left. No one can even speak at colleges except for those approved by the most leftwing of the leftwing vanguard of college student radicals.
Next comes the pressure campaigns against those who permit a “platform” to BadSpeakers. A New York Times op-ed page editor was called a racist and forced to resign because junior SJW editors and “reporters” essentially threatened to burn the company down for permitting BadSpeaker Senator Tom Cotton to publish an Op-Ed saying that there might have to be a National Guard response to stop the lawlessness and murders of the left’s Antifa and BLM violent armed paramilitary shock-troops.
No platform permitted to anything the left disagrees with. The First Amendment, they hold, is just a trick of the White Man to allow coded messages that uphold the White Supremacy Systematic Racism Regime.
The last step is to declare that it is “Okay to Punch a Nazi” — it is now permissible to physically attack anyone the left calls a “nazi,” which is defined, for example, as anyone who disagrees that trans women are literally women, or expresses doubts about whether looting a Neiman-Marcus store is really a “protest” against “white supremacy.”
They start with censorship and deplatforming of their political enemies, en route to declaring open, violent, literal war on them. At least the terrorist dirty sort of war, where any person is encouraged to commit an act of violence against a political enemy.
Liz Cheney — inevitably, I think — just adopted the left’s framework that to even permit a “platform” to an idea you disagree with is to embrace and approve of that idea.
This establishes the predicate for the next inevitable step: that Social Justice Warrior pressure — boycotts, coordinated reputational damage campaigns — will have to be brought to bear against the BadSpeak Platformer to force them to deplatform the BadSpeaker himself.
I note, once again, that the neocons — Jonah Goldberg, Liz Cheney, AllahPundit, Rich Lowry, David French — all claim to be some form of “libertarian” or “conservatarian” to justify their support, tacit or explicit (Blessing of Liberty!), of leftist policies, especially leftist social policy.
But when it comes to the authoritarian controls the left wishes to impose on the most basic, most central right we possess as an American — the right to free speech — they actually justify the left’s censorship and social terrorism campaigns as just “more free speech.”
Rand Paul getting the shit beaten out of him on the “It’s Okay to Punch a Nazi” theory? Meh, no big deal. Just a dispute over hedge clippings or something.
And then neocons like Liz Cheney — government officials with direct control over laws — apply political pressure to supposedly “free and freely-acting” corporations to impose the left’s government-centered censorship on the right.
If you’re a “libertarian” only as regards the kinds of sex the left wants to have and the kind of propaganda it wishes to instill in children at government schools, but then endorse bloody authoritarianism when it comes to enforcing the left’s ever-growing list of blasphemies and heresies, guess what, you’re not a libertarian, and certainly not a “conservatarian.”
There’s a more accurate term who supports license for all the thing the left likes to do, and repression of all the things the left doesn’t like to do: that term is “leftist.”

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x