To Americans, engaging in free speech is as basic a concept as breathing. That is why the immediate, dire and unprecedented threats to the First Amendment are not taken with any significant level of seriousness.
The concepts enshrined in the U.S. Bill of Rights are under profound attack, by politicians, academics, and the left. In 2012, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) urged “there ought to be limits” on First Amendment rights. At a Senate Rules Committee hearing, Schumer the senior senator from New York, issued the stunning statement that ”The First Amendment is sacred, but the First Amendment is not absolute.”
The assaults first became prominent during the Obama Administration’s tenure in office:
His commissioners on the Federal Communications Commission sought to place federal monitors in newsrooms. His attorney general openly considered criminal prosecution of anyone disagreeing with his views on climate change. He moved to place the internet under international control (which would permit censorship.) The Internal Revenue Service was used a bludgeon against groups opposing White House policies. The Justice Department seized telephone records of Fox news reporters.
The political left did not end their anti-free speech activities after losing the White House, but moved into different spheres of influence. Ari Lieberman, writing for Frontpage correctly noted that “The Left’s assault on free speech is an alarming trend that represents a grave danger to democratic values and principles. They employ code words like ‘safe spaces’ and ‘First Amendment opportunism’ to hide behind the fact that they are tearing apart the very fabric of the United States Constitution.”
In that quest, they have gained notable successes. A recent Campaign for Free Speech (CFS) survey found startling results:
51% of Americans think the First Amendment is outdated and should be rewritten. The First Amendment protects your right to free speech, free assembly, and freedom of religion, among other things.
48% believe “hate speech” should be illegal. (“Hate speech” is not defined—we left it up to the individual participant.) Of those, about half think the punishment for “hate speech” should include possible jail time, while the rest think it should just be a ticket and a fine.
80% don’t actually know what the First Amendment really protects. Those polled believed this statement is true: “The First Amendment allows anyone to say their opinion no matter what, and they are protected by law from any consequences of saying those thoughts or opinions.”
Pfizer and Eli Lilly, the drug pharmaceuticals asked FDA for a valid proof to confirm the link cialis no prescription usa between ED drugs and NAION. It has to be taken orally which is very important for blood to flow properly. levitra from canadian pharmacy For this reason it is in addition called as the erectile dysfunction There are many factors that will lead on line levitra http://www.slovak-republic.org/bratislava/history/ to erectile dysfunction. Urinary infection tadalafil 20mg for women is caused due to bacteria that can have an effect on any part of the body eyes are also subjected to possible threats of disorder which later can affect the eye.It’s actually not true. The First Amendment prevents the government from punishing you for your speech (with exceptions such as yelling “fire” in a crowded area to induce panic).
But more broadly, freedom of speech does not mean you are protected from social consequences for your speech. You may have the right to say something extreme or hateful and not get thrown in jail, but others in society have the right to shun you.
CFS provided an explanation for the results:
“… there are at least two factors at play. One is the obvious polarization of politics and the media…Second, we hear much about “hate speech.” …If the government is in charge of determining what is hate speech, then it inevitably becomes political—a weapon that can be used to punish people on the other side of an issue.”
Donald Trump, Jr., in a Hill opinion piece, notes that there is a distinctly partisan flavor to the censorship imposed by social media giants. “As Big Tech’s censorship of conservatives becomes ever more flagrant and overt… Our right to freely engage in public discourse through speech is under sustained attack…… we now know that Mark Zuckerberg’s social media giant developed algorithms to “deboost” certain content, limiting its distribution and appearance in news feeds. As you probably guessed, this stealth censorship was specifically aimed at conservatives.”
Examples throughout Academia are rampant. Breitbart recently reported that Students at the University of New Hampshire were caught on video tearing down conservative-oriented “Turning Point USA” posters. A leftist student said “I hate you and I hope you die” to one of the members of the school’s TPUSA group after being approached about tearing down the displays.
A Newseum white paper authored by the organization’s CEO Jeffrey Herbst found that “the real problem of free expression on college campuses is much deeper than episodic moments of censorship: With little comment, an alternate understanding of the First Amendment has emerged among young people that can be called ‘the right to non-offensive speech’…The crisis is not one of the very occasional speaker thrown off campus, however regrettable that is; rather, it is a generation that increasingly censors itself and others, largely silently but sometimes through active protest…”
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) maintains that “A culture of censorship has taken root and permeated universities, in part due to some students’ unfamiliarity or disinterest in their rights. A likely culprit, in my opinion, is deficient civic education in secondary schools across the nation. In the absence of engaging civics instruction and classroom debate, some students fail to grasp the content or significance of their First Amendment freedoms, allowing those rights to fall victim to restrictions on campus…”
The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal reports that “Student intolerance and opposition to free speech have been gaining momentum. What began as isolated incidents at the University of Missouri and Yale University in fall 2015 quickly spread to other universities, leading to individuals being targeted for simply expressing their opinions…”
Picture: U.S. National Archives