In this article, I want to explore a topic that is of enormous importance in keeping our society free, namely — freedom of speech. Without real freedom of speech, in all those gathering places where people come together to speak — which in modern times, means primarily on social media — we cannot have a legitimately free society.
The first thing to clarify is something that a number of people are quite confused about. Namely, there is a difference between a social media platform as a whole, which is where the principle of free speech applies, versus various “private groups” on any platform, where “free speech” never applies, because private groups need to have rules in order to maintain civility in the group.
To help illustrate this difference, I’ll use 2 examples.
First, suppose someone ardently wishing to exercise his “right to free speech”, left the public sidewalk where he certainly has that right, and went into a grocery store, and started to have a rally and protest inside the grocery store, either related to that store’s policy, or even related to something quite irrelevant to the store, such as a rally for 2nd Amendment rights, or perhaps, for the leftie loonie toons, a rally AGAINST 2nd Amendment rights. Well, he and his friends trying to do this would be dragged out of that grocery store by police, because even though the general public can go into that store, the store itself is not a proper or lawful place to exercise “the right to free speech.”
Similarly, suppose this same man went into a private house where he was renting a room from the owner, and began to have a “rally” in the kitchen, where he invited his friends in to join him in rallying for a communist position against property ownership…perhaps because he’d become annoyed with his landlord and thought no one should own any property. I hope you can see that doing this inside someone’s private home, particularly where it’s clear he is doing this to antagonize the owner, would not be appropriate, or lawful. Simply put, a tenant does not have “rights to free speech” inside someone else’s home. Yes, he is renting a room there so it is his home too in a sense, but every tenant has to abide by rules set down by the property owner, and in general, behavior that could clearly be seen as intended to antagonize or provoke others living in the space, is not allowed.
So hopefully people using common sense can see that no, we do not have “the right to free speech” absolutely anywhere and everywhere. Most particularly, areas which are in any way “private” are not places where we can expect the right to free speech. Among other things, this means that on Facebook or Telegram as a whole, you should be able to expect free speech, eg you can create whatever group you want and post what you want in your own group. But what you can’t do is join someone else’s group and insist that you can post whatever you want in someone else’s group, particularly if they have rules against the type of thing you want to post there. Eg, posting atheistic posts about how there’s no such thing as God, in a group oriented to Christian Bible study, would not be viewed as appropriate and most likely wouldn’t be allowed.
However, if we are posting to the platform as a whole, and not within a private group, we should have expectations of completely free speech, with only a very few rules needed to prevent harassment. For instance, with posts on Twitter, on our Facebook page, on YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and other platforms where you just post to the whole platform.
Now, we have not actually had completely free speech for quite a while now, so much so, that people may have forgotten what it looks like to have it!!
The Only Limitation on Free Speech, Should be the Law, Eg Unlawful Speech
If we think about what free speech really means, I think we can begin to see that the only legitimate reason to limit speech in a truly “free speech” setting, would be to follow the law itself, and only prohibit speech that is “unlawful.” What is that? Well, though the Cabal has been pushing very hard to make anything “offensive” (eg to their narratives and twisted, demented ideologies) unlawful, actually “being offended” is not what makes speech unlawful. Rather, speech is “unlawful” when it contains things like threats to commit crimes or harm others. So, threats to kill or assault or rob someone, blow something up or destroy or vandalize someone’s property, or any encouragement of others to do such things: that is what unlawful speech would be. Similarly, the well known example of yelling “fire!” inside a crowded theatre, would be unlawful, if there is not actually a fire, because of the hysteria, disruption and subsequent danger that such a false alarm could cause.
Once we understand that, we can see that “mere opinions” can never be unlawful, regardless how “offensive” such opinions might be. This is the area where most of us have experienced being extremely limited and censored, for quite a while actually. Most everyone who is not aligned with the Cabal’s demented narratives, has realized that we have to be very careful about what we put on what I call “WeCensorYouTube”, because any “incorrect opinions” will be viewed as “in violation of community guidelines.” Well guess what. In a free country social media platforms do not have censorship heavy “community guidelines”!! In fact, there’s really no need for “community guidelines” at all, except a VERY few rules needed to prevent spam. Such as rules prohibiting people from spamming the entire platform, which would look like posting the same ad 100x, 1000x or 10,000x. Or creating “bots” to post the very same reply over and over. A rule against doxxing may be needed since doxxing, meaning, posting the actual full name and/or address of someone whose account does not reveal these things, is not lawful. Other than these, not much is needed.
But on a social media platform where all users have the ability to block those they feel are harassing them, there’s no need to create rules preventing harassment, right? I mean this is just patently obvious.
What Does Free Speech Look Like When “Offending People” is Not Viewed as “Unlawful”?
Once we toss out the silly idea that there is something deeply wrong in “offending” anyone, and realize that actually the truth is rather that it’s characteristic of meaningful speech that it may offend people, we can begin to visualize free speech on social media.
We’ve seen a gradual return to free speech on Twitter, and this has been revealing. It used to be, when the Cabal ran Twitter, that you could get kicked off Twitter if you stated certain simple facts, such as that men were not women and could not become women. Or if you shared anything related to Q or the White Hats’ work in dismantling the Cabal. But over the last year, after Elon Musk bought Twitter ( I believe he was working for the White Hats in doing so), we’ve seen a gradual removal of these Cabal censorship policies. It’s now possible to post on Twitter that men cannot become women, that there is no such thing as “transgender”, that people who say they are “trans” are delusional or mentally ill. Jennifer Bilek is one of the most outspoken people calling out the “trans trance” we are in, saying over and over that there is no such thing as trans. She uses “tran$” instead of “trans” in order to avoid being hunted down by the trans insane who’d dogpile on to harass her.
I believe this is one of the first most important areas where truth can now be told, we now have freedom to speak the truth to the Cabal’s perverse lies and propaganda, and say that there is no such thing as transgender. This whole phenomenon is a massive, absolutely massive lie, and this needs to be said loudly and said everywhere.
Another area where a great number of people speaking truth have been shut down, is with the “racism” nonsense. “U Be Wascist!!!” has been screamed by the lunatic lefties for many years, every time they hear something they don’t like. They’ve been taught by the Cabal controlled woke universities, corporations, media, that they do not need to bother to have a rational argument or use logic at any time. Instead, they have learned, all you need to do is scream “Wascist! Wascist! U Be Wascist!!!!” The idiotic game goes something like this: if you are the first person to accuse the other person of being a racist or white supremacist, you’ve won!!!
This whole lie about America being a basically “racist” nation built on “institutional racism” is a huge con game created by the criminal Cabal, in order to attempt to create division and hate in America, so that people are focused on battling each other, rather than on their real enemy, the Cabal.
The enormous “wascism” whine and all its lies and propaganda, has metastasized into an enormous network of “multiculturalism” and “DEI” (diversity, equity and inclusion) departments throughout academia and corporations, all of which have promoted a very ugly anti-white racism. So the irony, as with just about everything the Cabal does or touches, is that they are doing exactly what they accuse others of doing. Those lunatic lefties who continually call others “racist” are themselves the biggest racists. Their racism against white people is extreme. But their racism against “minorities” is also there, in the form of treating minorities as perennial victims, people incapable of free will and agency, who apparently can’t do anything on their own behalf, can’t be held accountable for their own choices, and simply need to be treated as dependents their whole lives.
Christopher Rufo is one of the main people working to expose the truth, and to abolish DEI departments in university departments and corporations. We just cannot have these hateful, fraudulent, propaganda-promoting, inherently racist programs in all universities and corporate settings.
Now, when people speak the truth and point out that there is no vast system of “institutionalized racism” all over our nation, lunatic lefties who reply, will often immediately attempt to box you into the logical fallacy of a false dichotomy. They will say do something like point to ONE incident of racism, and then say “so you think there’s no racism????” Obviously this is a very stupid reply, as ONE incident of racism does not in any way prove that there is massive racism all over the entire nation. And there will just never be NO racism anywhere (or no other forms of unfairness, injustice, crime, etc) as long as humans are the imperfect people we are.
This is why it helps so much for you to learn critical thinking skills, to learn logical fallacies, which I cover in other articles on this site. Such as this one: https://commonlawamerica.wordpress.com/2021/11/07/sharpening-your-critical-thinking-boundaries-and-self-governing-skills/
When you have strong critical thinking skills, you can more readily point out the illogic in these kinds of replies. You can point to exactly what type of logical fallacy is involved, in this case, the false dichotomy.
But What if People are Allowed to Say Racist or Other Offensive Things?
In response to people pointing out the serious problems in censoring people over allegations of alleged “racism”, this will often be the next question. Lunatic lefties sometimes talk as if they imagine that if we don’t censor anything they deem “racist”, then, the next day, a great many posts on social media would be racist. This is just not the case. There aren’t millions of people just waiting on the edge of their seat to charge out and say hateful, racist things.
What they fail to realize is that unlike rules based on actual laws which pertain to such clear-cut behavior as overt threats of violence, the policing of people’s “opinions”, even if there were some legitimate reason for it (which there is not) is not a clear-cut matter. This would require an “arbiter” of opinion, or someone to decide which opinions were “dangerous” and why. And we can never have that in a free society. This is found in dystopian novels like 1984 or Brave New World. The key logical problem that lefties have, is that they don’t realize that the censorship they crave to be used against their “foes”, could just as easily be used against them. And WOULD be used against them, and against everyone, if the Cabal succeeded in its plans to impose a One World Totalitarian Government. These lefties tend to think “my side is right, that’s why the other side’s opinions are censored”, but fail to realize that what they view as inherently “right” could be decided to be “wrong” tomorrow, and they could be subject to the same censorship, or worse, than that which they would impose.
It is completely, utterly, totally unAmerican and unconstitutional for people in a nation to decide that their favored worldview will be promoted, and other people’s worldview will be demoted and censored. It’s a terrific shame that any American came to have this totalitarian worldview.
As well, we need to learn to make fine distinctions again. There’s a difference between what is moral or ethical, and what is lawful. Just because people have the right to do something, like post racist or otherwise unkind things on social media, doesn’t mean that there is any good reason to do so, or that lots of people will start doing this.
Most of what I see people craving to do, is not post hateful things, but rather, tell the truth as they see it, and not be silenced or suppressed in doing this. So, for instance: the lunatic left has too often taken the extremely illogical point of view that simply to talk about how much crime is perpetrated by blacks, as compared to whites or other races, is inherently “racist.” This is NOT the case. The left has simply used the accusation of “racism” to suppress the truth, often a rather inconvenient truth that points to social problems it tries to hide.
As well, the tired old oversimplistic and essentially false narrative of animosity between Indians and Whites that goes, “White man bad, he come to America, he take stuff” needs to be put to rest by confronting it. Hopefully we’ll all learn in time that the actions of a few unethical early Americans, cannot be pinned upon “all whites” as though we all did those things. None of us were alive then, some of us didn’t even have families in America until the 20th century. And “white people” are certainly not the only ones who ever did bad things.
Some may criticize Matt Walsh’s reply as shown below, but it contains uncomfortable truths. Note that the person using the term “dirty” to refer to the other, is the American Indian, the “Lakota Man”, not Matt Walsh. BTW I think it’s best not to refer to American Indians as “Native Americans”, since the term “Native American” actually applies to anyone born in America, such as myself, regardless what race we are. Use of terms like “indigenous” or “Native American” can be viewed as part of the Cabal’s propaganda campaign. They are trying to suggest that only minorities are “indigenous”, but this is nonsense, because every group of people is “indigenous” to some part of the Earth. We all originally came from or started out somewhere.
As well, there’s been a strong push by the Cabal and their brainwashed lefties, to depict white people and Europeans as the “villains” of the entire world, colonizing it, pushing others out, exploiting and enslaving others. Yet in fact it’s not “whites” who’ve done this, but the global crime syndicate, the Cabal, which has been around and growing in power for centuries. European culture has been treated in a derogatory way by the Cabal lies and propaganda for some time now, but as Matt points out, there have been important developments and inventions from “Europeans” that didn’t show up elsewhere. This doesn’t mean other groups of people didn’t contribute valuable things to the entire human community, but it does mean it’s high time to stop hating on whites and Europeans, and to start getting honest in appreciating just what each unique group of people has contributed and is contributing to our whole human family.
One Result of Free Speech: A Return to Stronger Critical Thinking Skills
Actually in contrast to the loonie lefties who imagine that, if people were allowed to speak freely, a huge wave of hate would burst out of the gates, I think we’d eventually see quite the opposite. We’d see more civility, and eventually, a return to better critical thinking skills, because people would learn that it no longer worked to try to shut people down with accusations like “U Be Wascist!!” That would no longer be effective. The Cabal system would no longer exist to protect the loonie leftie brainwashed point of view. All points of view would be free to express themselves.
Hence, in the new environment with all points of view being equally allowed, people would learn, gradually, that if they wanted to make a point, they needed to learn to do so skillfully — meaning, with good critical thinking skills, organized presentation, and actual logic instead of just empty and pointless accusations. The point of view with the best logic would have an advantage over those which were poorly argued or supported. Which is as it should be.
Summary
So, in summary, I believe we will see a gradual return of freedom of speech on all social media. We will no longer have to worry that if we are talking about an inconvenient truth, we’ll have our video or post removed. This will happen along with the gradual removal of all the official “thought police” from social media companies, as well as government and corporations. Anyone who thought they could make a living telling others what they could think, what opinions they could have…you’re out of a job. And good riddance to bad rubbish.
Common Law America 