Progressives Use Censorship to Establish a Monopoly in the Marketplace of Ideas

BmagJDxCAAAsmDP

It all started when George Will wrote a column about RAPE®. Okay, it wasn’t specifically about RAPE®. It was titled Colleges become the victims of progressivism but it talked quite a bit about the alleged epidemic of sexual assault on college campuses.

It would be really helpful if you went ahead and read his column before continuing. I’ll wait until you get back.

{{musical interlude}}

Done? Okay, let’s continue. Were you outraged and offended by what he said? I wasn’t. I’m not saying that I agree with everything he said, but I didn’t see anything to get upset about. Others saw it differently.

George Will is a conservative Republican. He is also a cisgendered white-privileged factory-equipped male. Obviously he has no business offering an opinion on ANYTHING to do with RAPE®. There is ONLY ONE politically correct view on the topic. George Will committed blasphemy.

Naturally, his column resulted in a lot of hyperventilating, pearl-clutching, panty-twisting and bloviating. The typical response twisted or flat-out misstated what Will said, and was heavy on emotion but really low on cogent thought.

Here’s what Jezebel had to say:

Washington Post Defends George Will’s Atrocious Rape Column

Earlier this week, a shitstorm swirled in the wake of toupeed troll George Will’s latest column in the Washington Post wherein he argued that being the victim of “sexual assault” (his dickish quotation marks, not mine) conferred a “coveted status” that came with “privileges.” In response, several groups called for the Post to discontinue running his column. The Post’s response was, predictably, shitty.

The National Organization for Women called for Will to “take a break” from his column, maybe go sit in a corner, think about what he’s done. And four Senators, in a letter to the editor, urged Will to stop being such a dipshit. Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Tammy Baldwin, Richard Blumenthal, and Bob Casey wrote in a joint statement,

Your column reiterates ancient beliefs about sexual assault that are inconsistent with the reality of victims’ experiences, based on what we have heard directly from survivors. Your words contribute to the exact culture that discourages reporting and forces victims into hiding and away from much-needed services. For starters, your notion about a perceived privileged status of survivors of sexual assault on campuses runs completely counter to the experiences described to us.
The Post’s editorial page editor Fred Hiatt rushed to Will’s defense, telling Media Matters that his column was “within the realm of legitimate debate.” Using the word “legitimate” — a word that has been invoked by conservative men in a rape apologist context before — to describe Will’s column must have been a Freudian slip.

If George Will had written about any other indignity or crime perpetrated by the powerful on the disempowered — race-motivated violence, xenophobia, child abuse, — and implied that victims who came forward were just doing it for the “status,” he’d be out on his ass faster than Donald Sterling on greased roller skates. When the Chicago Sun-Times ran a republished stupid and deliberately trolly transphobic op-ed from a National Review contributor who is sort of like a kindergarten George Will, the paper responded to public outcry by taking the post down and apologizing. Yet, because pieces called “It’s Time to End Rape Culture Hysteria” and “The Rape ‘Epidemic’ Doesn’t Actually Exist'” (written by the same conservative think tank flack author) that ran in TIME and USNews, respectively, are still up, and somehow, George Will’s editor accepts his embarrassingly ignorant and damaging screed as “legitimate,” I cynically reach the conclusion that something bigger is going on here. Are victims of rape and domestic violence (occasionally men, but overwhelmingly women) the final politically acceptable punching bags for opinion pages? The Washington Post sure seems to think so.


That was last week. Last night the progressive community was rejoicing in a small but not insignificant victory:


Oliver’s tweet triggered a little interaction:


The back-and-forth continued for a while and was joined by a few members of Oliver’s fan club. One of them posted the graphic at the top of this post. Like Oliver, they kept talking about the first amendment. I, on the other hand, was talking about freedom of speech which is a principle that exists independently of the constitution.

This was the parting shot from one of Oliver’s fans:


I’m old enough to remember when the free speech movement was alive and well at college and universities. Free speech advocates carried signs and put up posters quoting Voltaire’s “I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.

Mario Savio must be spinning in his grave.

From the Nazis to the Stalinists, tyrants have always started out supporting free speech, and why is easy to understand. Speech is vital for the realization of their goals of command, control and confiscation. Basic to their agenda are the tools of indoctrination, propagandizing, proselytization. Once they gain power, as leftists have at many universities, free speech becomes a liability and must be suppressed. This is increasingly the case on university campuses.

Back in 1964, it was Mario Savio, a campus leftist, who led the free speech movement at the Berkeley campus of the University of California, a movement that played a vital role in placing American universities center stage in the flow of political ideas, no matter how controversial, unpatriotic and vulgar. The free speech movement gave birth to the hippie movement of the ’60s and ’70s. The longhair, unkempt hippies of that era have grown up and now often find themselves being college professors, deans, provosts and presidents. Their intolerance of free speech and other ideas has become policy and practice on many college campuses.


We have seen many stories lately about campus protests against planned college commencement speakers like Condoleezza Rice. We also see colleges and universities adopting “speech codes” that limit free speech. Unfortunately the problem isn’t just confined to the halls of academia.

“We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people, hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.” – Hillary Clinton, CNN Townhall, 6/14/2014


Yesterday the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s appeals board cancelled the Washington Redskins’ trademark because it was “disparaging” to some Native Americans. Recently Mozilla forced CEO Brendan Eich to walk the plank when it was revealed that six years ago he made a donation in support of Proposition 8, California’s anti-SSM initiative. A few months ago Scarlett Johansson came under fire for making an ad for Sodastream, thus running afoul of the “boycott Israel” movement.

These days if you deviate from what the left considers politically correct they will try to shout you down and/or shut you down. This is not merely the “free market at work”, this is a deliberate attempt to establish a monopoly in the marketplace of ideas.

Censorship does not require government action. The Nazi Brownshirts practiced censorship before they gained power by using organized violence. The Progressive Sturmabteilung generally sticks to organized harassment and monetary coercion. Generally.

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis famously said that the remedy for bad speech was more speech, not censorship. I guess progressives just don’t have enough faith in their ideas to permit any competition.

(RAPE® is a registered trademark of the Democratic party. Any use without their express, written consent is prohibited.)


tolerant-liberals-84020092004


Advertisements

About Myiq2xu™

Being an asshole is all part of my manly essence.
This entry was posted in Freedom of Speech, Vile Progs and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to Progressives Use Censorship to Establish a Monopoly in the Marketplace of Ideas

  1. The Klown says:

    Personally I could care less about what happens to George Will or any other bloviating gasbag. It’s the principle that matters.

    • Constance says:

      I am not a fan of George Will and I found his column a hard read because it wasn’t interesting. But I don’t think he is a danger to anyone and needs to be silenced.

  2. DeniseVB says:

    That’s what strikes me about the Redskins brouhaha. We all know it has more to do with using the fed bully tactic, There’s not that many people “offended” with the name, it’s just a football team.

    A little bit from the Blaze….

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/11/do-you-know-the-history-behind-the-name-washington-redskins/

    Sort of reminds me of the old Sambo’s restaurants that used the character from the child’s book Little Black Sambo in it’s decor. One day someone got offended and people stopped eating there, and voila it became a Denny’s with new decor. To this day, whenever I see a tiger I get hungry for pancakes 🙂

  3. Lulu says:

    You must have censorship to psychologically manipulate people. The further the great controller falls in the polls (evidence his manipulations are no longer potent) the more strident calls for censorship will become. You can see it happen in any group, organization, church, business, whatever. Then they fail. Repeatedly lying doesn’t help. The conventional wisdom is emerging that Bronco has the taint of a loser and losers can’t be successful manipulators. Willis is just a sad little flunky of the failing and flailing group.

  4. Lulu says:

    “Department of Homeland Security officials tasked researchers from the University of Texas at El Paso with identifying the scope and depth of the problem posed by the growing numbers of unaccompanied children caught crossing illegally and alone in the Rio Grande Valley.

    Their findings, first published in January, foretold the crisis to come. Word had spread in Central America about a “lack of consequences” for illegal entry, the researchers wrote, based on conversations with Border Patrol officials. Smugglers were exploiting the system, which by law requires the Border Patrol to transfer unaccompanied children to a shelter system run by the Office of Refugee Resettlement within 72 hours.” http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/border-5559991.php

    They knew this was coming and it would be a huge mess. The administration did nothing as usual.

  5. The Klown says:

    The Federalist:

    But I think everyone should be terrified by the new ruling by the US Patent Office cancelling the team’s trademark.

    The ruling was based on a dubious argument that “redskins” is a slur against Native Americans. Well, then maybe we’d better rename the state of Oklahoma, which drew its name from Choctaw words that mean “red people.” Or maybe we should petition the US Army to decommission the attack helicopter it named after a people it defeated in 1886. Then again, forget I mentioned it. I don’t want to give anyone ideas.

    This name-bullying has become a kind of sport for self-aggrandizing political activists, because if you can force everyone to change the name of something—a sports team, a city, an entire race of people—it demonstrates your power. This is true even if it makes no sense and especially if it makes no sense. How much more powerful are you if you can force people to change a name for no reason other than because they’re afraid you will vilify them?

    Given the equivocal history of the term “redskins” and the differing opinions—among Native Americans as well as everyone else—over whether it is offensive, this was a subjective judgment. (One observer suggests a list of other sports names that could just as plausibly be considered offensive.) When an issue is subjective, it would be wise for the government not to take a stand and let private persuasion and market pressure sort it out.

    Ah, but there’s the rub, isn’t it? This ruling happened precisely because the campaign against the Redskins has failed in the court of public opinion. The issue has become the hobby horse of a small group of lefty commentators and politicians in DC, while regular Washingtonians, the people who make up the team’s base of fans and customers, are largely indifferent. So the left resorted to one of its favorite fallbacks. If the people can’t be persuaded, use the bureaucracy—in this case, two political appointees on the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

    That’s what is disturbing about this ruling. Our system of government depends on the impartial administration of the laws by the executive. In this case, executive officials declared that a private company doesn’t deserve the protection of the law: if the ruling survives an appeal in the courts, the federal government will stop prosecuting violations of the team’s intellectual property rights, potentially costing it millions of dollars.

  6. votermom says:

    I’ve started calling Progressives the “Oppressives”

  7. The Klown says:
  8. The Klown says:
    • Lulu says:

      Gunboats on the Rio Grande! Yeehaw! Really the smugglers and criminals have run of the border now. No enforcement of any kind is being done except by state and local government. The general feeling is that the federal government has abandoned us to further Obama and Democrats feel good public relations of bait and switch. We are not citizens but second class residents sacrificed for criminals. It is not a good feeling that your own government ranks you and your own children below foreign nationals.

      • Falstaff says:

        Have you seen the Rio Grande lately? It can barely float a rowboat.

        • Lulu says:

          I know. I personally haven’t seen it but have been told it looks like a puddle. What the DPS and local law enforcement are going to do is pick up illegals. They will run criminal checks (fingerprints, etc) and matches will go to jail and shipped off to the proper jurisdiction. The rest will be dumped on INS. Much of this is a deterrent action to let them know they will be picked up by the state and not the feds and they will not be treated the same way. One thing that is not being mentioned in media is that illegal alien criminals like to run back and forth across the border. Even legal and natural born criminals do it frequently because the border is not THAT far away. Mexico doesn’t care as long as they don’t commit crimes in Mexico. DPS and sheriff departments are nowhere near as politically correct as INS and will do full criminal checks especially if they get state money to do it. The illegals picked up will not be mistreated but it will not be fun being finger printed, questioned like they are accused criminals (they are actually by crossing the border) and then shipped off by DHS out of Texas where they are considered a public safety and public health threat. Like I said this is for deterrence because INS has completely stopped doing their job.

  9. The Klown says:
  10. The Klown says:
    • Lulu says:

      The Puritans liked censorship. And the stocks. And economic warfare. And exile. And hanging or burning witches. Vicious bastards those Vile Progs.

      • DeniseVB says:

        They just want us to STFU ! Otherwise, they have to debate the facts which never seem to be on their side 😉 I love when myiq and votermom turn the vile prog stupidity back on them.

  11. votermom says:

    Bwahaha check out the video

  12. DeniseVB says:

    #TBT ! Good read on Nixon v. Obama and how Nixon’s staff would rather resign than do anything illegal, sigh, back in the day…….Obama’s media a circle of jerks!

    http://www.redstate.com/2014/06/19/protecting-the-precious/

  13. The Klown says:
    • The Klown says:
      • Lulu says:

        Southern men are effeminate says Schweitzer. Huh? I thought they were all hick, hillbilly, gun totin’, ignorance lovin’, moonshine swillin’, tractor pullin’, Neanderthals. They really like flower arranging and painting their fingernails? So all the elite Dems are wrong? For the past 200 years?

        • DandyTIger says:

          I’ll shoot the fool that messes with my flower arrangement. It takes a long time to arrange those with my tractor, while drunk. We’ll cry to a good country song, and shoot you for kicking our dog. We’re complicated.

  14. The Klown says:
  15. DeniseVB says:

    😀

  16. The Klown says:

    WTF??? First Period Party???:

    Do boys get parties for their first wet dream?

  17. DeniseVB says:

    Here’s a little treat for the TCH Boyz ……and maybe new blogs to check out ? 😉

    http://www.rightwingnews.com/special/the-20-hottest-conservative-women-in-the-new-media-for-2014/

  18. foxyladi14 says:

    😀

  19. The Klown says:
  20. The Klown says:
  21. 1539days says:

    This post brings together a lot of gripes I have with progressive derangement syndrome. There’s “freedom of speech” that the left views as only the First Amendment. If they want to play that game, then why is that hateful troll Dan Savage lauded for campaigning against bullying? Of course, the answer is that he both bullies those he disagrees with and clutches his pearls (metaphorically) when a liberally protected group has their feelings hurt.

    On the content of Will’s column. It’s pretty clear the purpose of sexual conduct codes is to eventually discourage sex among students. The sexual revolution served its purpose by making the family non-nuclear, but continued sexual liberty takes away from a citizen’s obligation to the State. Look at Japan. The access to high quality pornography and shopping has reduced marriage as well as sexual activity among young people. Going back to my favorite example of 1984, Julia tells Winston that Big Brother is against non-procreative sex because sex leads to a state of euphoria where people don’t give a crap about the State.

    Of course, the irony is that Will writes about the speech codes that led to the conduct codes and then is subject to his own speech code. The “victory” of one paper dropping him is minimal. George F. Will is an old man who is hard for Millennials to read because he uses five-dollar words. He still gets a lot of readers in print, but he may not do as well with an online audience.

    These changes are nothing new. These people have been pushing this agenda for decades. When they see enough of a shift in society, they put out these trial balloons. If there isn’t a huge backlash, they take new ground. America is at a tipping point with Oppressive liberalism. Sometimes they succeed, like with state gay marriage laws, or they fail, like with the Duck Dynasty boycott or the Chik-fil-A shaming.

  22. mothy67 says:

    Many proggie friends have said or emailed me that they could care less about everything. I am refraning from saying told you so. Detox is tough. Even during the healthcare rollout they defended. Not now. Amnesty is the real hot button issue. I know women who had decent jobs 45 to 55 years old who were single mothers that got up to go to a boring job with decent pay and the bam jobs are gone. Some clean houses, some was dishes, a few load up their cars everyday and deliver the newspaper at 5 am. The democrats want to sell noone will do these jobs but illegals. Then it was scripted to be about the poor kids crossing the border. Sell that to a woman working her ass off.

    If Hillary chose to speak and speak loudly about illegal immigration she could get them back but celebrity alone will not change these women’s minds. I loud unapologitic fuck off this is insane would endear her again.

  23. mothy67 says:

    Question seems many people write a book before running for office but they are always touchy feely. Debates are garbage and political ads involve puppies,feel good stuff or attacks. So if they can write a book why not a website that allows one to hear than a two minute answer to immigration questions.

  24. mothy67 says:

    If the republicans win the Senate and put obama in check I think it is due to one woman. Sarah Palin. She stood up again and again. Wardrobe attacked at convention. She has not disappeared but lingers in every obots mind. The Tea Party would not exist in my opinion if it was not for her. The woman is shaking up politics.

  25. DeniseVB says:

    Heh….

  26. insanelysane says:

    I love George Will.
    I love his baseball analogies. I love his historical perspective on Presidents.
    And I love that he has a bit of snark and always a small joke.
    Oh and …he always has such great quotes that he speaks without a teleprompter.
    I admire how he was able to slightly pierce Obama magesty on the Sunday talking head Stephananopolis Round Table that left the Lib/Prog spouting the talking points flustered and red faced.

    Of course he was dropped recently after years on the show when he got a little too truthful.
    .

  27. DeniseVB says:

    The Scott Walker Must Be Destroyed Movement is failing miserably. Twitchy has a roundup of the latest stupid stuff…..Walker fights back ❤

    http://twitchy.com/2014/06/19/scott-walker-takes-on-categorically-false-media-feeding-frenzy-about-alleged-criminal-scheme/

  28. threewickets says:

    How much of Jezebel feminism is LGBT feminism. Is it the same thing? Does Nick Denton and Jezebel lead the women’s movement in America today? They’re so hipster parochial. There is more to America than Brooklyn, Porland, and San Francisco.

  29. mothy67 says:

    I know many here may disagree but I think it is time to fight fire with fire. Too often the left uses the media as a terrorist weapon. Paula Dean Really . Glenn Beck I maybe watched fifty times and never heard him utter a racist word yet there was a huge campaign with boycotts to get him off FOX with cries of racism. Time to turn the tables. Hollywood got a wake up call this year with the success of Christian films. What if Christian groups supported brand A and said screw brand B Because someone said something a decade ago. What if we brought back Made in the USA but this time by legal workers.

Comments are closed.