HATE SPEECH CENSORS OUR SPEECH OF TRUTH TO POWER

 HATE SPEECH CENSORS OUR SPEECH OF TRUTH TO POWER

By Domenick J. Maglio Ph.D. Traditional Realist

 

Remember the child’s ditty, “Sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never harm me?” The United States has lost the powerful truth of this children’s rhyme. A major cornerstone of all our freedoms is our freedom of speech. 

 

Hate speech is a frontal attack on America’s right to politically question and receive answers to our inquiries for whatever we want to know. Any subject that cannot be examined hides the controversy. Whenever a group or person claims a topic or policy is hate speech, any further discussion is halted. 

 

This negative sensitivity to other people’s speech first became acceptable in our universities. “Safe spaces” were created for disturbed students who could not handle the speech of opposing ideas. This concept that only progressive viewpoints should be presented to students that were already known, accepted and believed is the opposite of expanding one’s thinking process. It is self- indoctrination. These students who require safe spaces were perfectly prepared to readily accept totalitarianism. Throughout our educational system from kindergarten through university, from past and present, historical narratives are being recreated to emphasize only what progressive authority figures want us to believe. Without knowledge of history, literature and social dissenters can there be any in-depth thinking, especially critical thinking? 

 

When “cancel culture” is applied to eliminate anyone who questions and investigates the social and news media progressive politician’s narrative, our ability to determine the truth from lies is diminished. Safe spaces are a way to shield oneself from things that might disturb the person while cancel culture is a means of punishing people with different perspectives from one’s own. Cancel culture nullifies an individual’s right to free speech and everyone else’s right to hear the reasoning and beliefs of the person.

 

The censoring of any discussion of fraud in the 2020 presidential election felt as if we are in the twilight zone. Our Supreme Court, whose scope is to decide on national presidential elections, would not even discuss the evidence of national presidential voter fraud. Our news and social media’s refusal to investigate any voter fraud allegations and coverage of the quintessential institution of our constitutional republic’s verifiable election results are repugnant. Corruption of elections results is the ultimate destruction of the legitimacy of any republic.

 

The crucial presidential election irregularities evaporated into thin air. It miraculously became a case of hate speech to bring up any mention of voter fraud. It is amazing how quickly and easily it became socially unacceptable for anyone to raise this issue. The voter fraud issue and the lack of open debate by either party made it appear as if voter corruption was beyond any possibility. It was suggested that the Supreme Court looking into the issue would divide the nation further. Thus, the Supreme Court avoided it so it would not cause turmoil although 50% of the population questioned the results. The same Supreme Court is not ruling on hate speech although in the past the court had ruled that the right to free speech overrode most of the concerns about hate speech.

 

Our past Supreme Court has ruled that this censoring technique of limiting free speech by stating that it is “hate speech” was illegal. They ruled against banning the wearing of Nazi swastikas, burning crosses and burning the American flag as it was allowable free speech. They declared these acts were covered under the free speech umbrella. 

 

John Stuart Mill, a traditional British liberal philosopher, stated in the mid 1800s that restricting hate speech will mask hatred among groups rather than decrease it. The traditional American liberal remedy for hate speech has always been more speech rather than more regulations. Long before these rulings, our founding fathers recognized this broad concept of free speech even allows hostile debate as necessary for the USA to remain free. This is the realization that closing down debate would be suicide for all of our freedoms under our constitution.

 

The Critical Race theorists have stated that protecting biased motivated speech, which has no social value, should be illegal. The essential question is who is going to determine what is “biased motivated speech” and what speech has no “social value?” Only the government would decide it and would then control our speech, and thus our freedoms. 

We are quickly sinking into the sand of a government control of all speech and determining what is truth, are lies and facts. Along with this hate speech, revisionist history, censorship of literature and through cancel culture we are losing the essence for being proud of the USA for all of our incredible accomplishments and our freedoms. 

 

We must stand up to oppose this very intricate progressive scheme to bring down our constitutional protections, especially to speak truth to power. 

 

 

Domenick Maglio, PhD. is a columnist carried by various newspapers, an author of several books and owner/director of Wider Horizons School, a college prep program. Dr. Maglio is an author of weekly newspaper articles, INVASION WITHIN  and a recent book entitled, IN CHARGE PARENTING In a PC World. You can see many of Dr. Maglio’s articles at www.drmaglioblogspot.com.