Censorship never stops at just one individual or group.


A renewed debate about free speech has been going on the past few years. On one side some of the richest, most powerful billionaires in the world, running Silicon Valley Tech companies, joined by their 1% Wall St. friends, and a disturbing amount of people who call themselves "Liberal". On the other side average people who are Conservatives, Indepentants, or who actually are Liberals and believe in the inalienable right of Free Speech!

Censorship never stops at just one individual or group.

What seems to be an "Unspoken" promise made to Liberals is that these Billionaires, and the "activists" that they employ would only censor Conservative Pro-Trump voices saying it was "Hate Speech" "Misinformation" etc. This Opninion peice in the NYT seems to sum it up nicely:


The REAL definition of "Hate Speech": Any Speech the Censors HATE!

Basically, the promise is "Liberal" speech is used as a "Sheild" and is protected, but if its "Conservative" speech its a "Sword" and "weoponized". These are ofcourse ALL LIES. Done to get politically biased people who identify as Liberal to go along with putting Censors in control of what can be said! Once the Censors are in place they will INEVITABLY censor Everyone!

Interestingly enough the NYT uses Catherine MacKinnon as a source, a feminist who as argued that heterosexual sex is rape!

To those "Liberals" calling for censorship let me just say that being "Liberal" will NOT stop you from being Censored! Over the past 20 years Michael Moore has become one of the most successful documentary film makers there is. You may not agree with the content, but he is still very successful, and one of the most "Liberal" activists out there. He is also CENSORED!


While I haven't seen the film, obviously, aparently it was exposing that many current "Green" technologies aren't as Environmentally friendly as they adviertise! The Billioniares on Wall St. and in Silicon Valley that have invested heavily didn't want a pesky activist filmaker exposing them, so they Censored him!

Former NYT reporter Alex Berenson, had his book yanked by Amazon (90+% of the online book market) No Reason Given!

class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Oh fuck me. I
can’t believe it. They censored it. <a

—" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">pic.twitter.com/GfPEr7OiV2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://t.co/GfPEr7OiV2">pic.twitter.com/GfPEr7OiV2

Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) <a
href="June" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1268529570480824320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June
4, 2020</a></blockquote>


Not only that Big Tech has been Censoring Liberal groups for years, but the media is trying desperately to spin this as a Left Vs. Right issue, when it is NOT!


"But Conservatives want to Censor too." Yes some do, for instance some think we should keep the media from covering the Riots because they are "fanning the flames." While this may be true, it would become the same problem as the Left, putting Censors in charge that will eventually censor EVERYONE!

Free Speech is NOT just for those that agree with you! No Government, no Coporation, no Group, and no Individual has the right to take it from you, or anyone else!

Censorship never stops at just one individual or group.
Censorship never stops at just one individual or group.
Add Opinion

Most Helpful Guys

  • hellionthesagereborn
    Those who are in power do not wish for those who are not to speak because inevitably they will start to speak the truth and that is never beneficial to ideologies or those in power. You cannot argue against the truth, you cannot manipulate the truth, it is a force of nature that once its out it is out and its unstoppable. So they do the only thing they can do, make sure that no one speaks the truth, to keep it locked away so that it doesn't threaten them.

    That is why only liars and cowards fear free speech, the former because they know that what they say is false and the truth will expose them, and the latter because they fear what they say and believe is false and will be destroyed once the truth is out. Their is no such thing as weaponizing truth, no such thing as hate speech, all speech is free, it always has been and always will be, its just a matter of how violent actions will become when speech is silenced.
    Is this still revelant?
  • TadCurious
    Well done. You make a lot of excellent points. You rightly distinguish those who identify as "liberals" today from what is more accurately known as "classical liberals." Classical liberals are against censorship and believe that if you have an issue with speech or expression you don't like that the solution is more speech. It's more accurate to call the so-called liberals of today what they really are --- Leftists. And the Left always ends up consuming its own, as you highlight with the example of Michael Moore. And all the Leftist white people today "taking a knee" before the mob asking for forgiveness are fools to think they'll be spared.
    Is this still revelant?

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

  • OlderAndWiser
    When legal commentators talk about the Free Speech Clause, they usually refer to "the slippery slope.". As soon as you start justifying censorship based on content, you are creating vast per in the hands of the person or group that judges that content. The ensuing censorship places even more power in that individual or group, and soon you have an appraiser or tyrannical regime. The only way to avoid that scenario is to avoid taking the first step on that slippery slope, because you will otherwise soon be slipping and sliding to the inevitable conclusion.
  • SomeGuyCalledTom
    My prediction is that control of speech (and therefore control of information) will become the most valued currency in the post-postmodern world. Just look at how social media algorithms are designed to wall people off into their own echo chambers where nothing they see challenges their beliefs or intellect. The only speech that's truly protected is the kind that can't be recorded or leave any digital footprint.
    • That is what is known as Tyrany. Just another reason "post-modernism" is "neo-feudalism".

  • goaded
    The first amendment only restricts the government from censoring people, not companies.
    There are other outlets for their misinformation (anyone can create a blog).
    Tagging misleading tweets with fact checks is not censorship; the tweet is still available.

    As an experiment, someone cut-and-pasted Trump's tweets and sent them; their account was suspended in short order.
    • This is not true. These rights are inalienable. No government, corporation, group, or individual can take them away.

    • goaded

      Yes, it is true. Quote the first amendment for me, and show me where it says that.

    • On your profile it says you are from Germany. I guess your opinion means zip

    • Show All
  • Lliam
    That was a very balanced, nonpartisan take and I agree with you 100%, genuinlysensitive.

    The most honest journalists are being censored. Many of those people have what I would have called genuine liberal values as I used to understand liberalism. Their sites have been taken down and they work to find alternative outlets. They get suspended from Facebook for telling documented truth about Israel, murderous U. S. imperialism, vaccines, and government lies.
    In addition dozens of health sites have been removed over the past couple years. Those sites weren't even political.

    What has happened is, corporate and Deep State America has gone to war with those who challenge their profit-making agenda. It's across the board. Mainstream media is nothing but a propaganda echo chamber for manufacturing consensus. All other information is under attack. But of course the attacks are concealed behind a facade of protecting the ignorant masses against "fake news", foreign propaganda, extremism, hate speech, etc.
  • Sargentcaptain
    I agree. Personal I don't like communists, but they have a right to spread their nonsense. Now the thing is that while the government should not be able to censor what it deems to be hate speech, private corporations should have that right, if they say that they are publishers. Platforms should be treated same as the government, but publishers should be able to quorate the content they put out.
    • That is just it, they say they are not publishers when they censor as publishers.

  • AcidT0y
    I agree to an extent. I don't think tht governments should be able to censor any speech, including hate speech. However privately owned companies such as twitter and facebook have every right to use their own discretion to decide what speech they want on their own platforms.
    • As a publisher you are correct but as a platform all speech is acceptable or no speech is acceptable

    • AcidT0y

      I don't understand. If the platform is privately owned they can censor whatever they like, no?

    • They can but only if they also assume liability for speech on thier platform. If they want to operate as a public forum which is how they are running themselves, all speech is protected.

    • Show All
  • Exterminatore
    It would seem to me the left are the ones doing all the censoring. They are the ones who push political correctness. They are the ones who attempt to silence dissent from liberal ideology by labeling it as hate speech. They are the ones who respond to nearly every disagreement with “you’re a racist” in an attempt to silence you.

    They are the ones if you think homosexuality is a sin as it says in the Bible who attempt to label you as a hate monger and label saying that as hate speech. They preach tolerance for the homosexual, but not for the Christian who opposes homosexuality.

    The left in America no doubt are not only trying to control speech, but also alter perceptions of the truth. For example, in regards to the riots. Cuomo has said not to be fooled by images of violence and damage, and that those things are attempts to discredit the protests. So I decided to investigate. I live in upstate NY and work with 2 separate people from the Bronx. Both shared photos with me of the damage done by rioters. Both are not conservatives and both have said they’ve never seen anything nearly as bad and that the damage is severe. I got an email from BLM, requesting donations to help bail out protestors. Why would peaceful protestors be arrested? I think all of us watching the looting would agree the police were not doing nearly enough to stop it. That they seemed to be standing down. That is an attempt by the left to promote lawlessness and set the guilty free. We are told by the left it’s white supremacists who are doing the violence and not Antifa. Really? Why would BLM request money to bail out white supremacists? Because we all know the left is using their idea of what free speech is to lie and spread propaganda.
    • The left wants to control speech and they want to present distorted facts because they want to overthrow our system. This should be seen for what it is. Not political disagreement but an attempt to subvert our laws and way of life and to replace it with socialism/communism and by using any means necessary to do it, including promoting lawlessness and allowing good people to suffer at the hands of the violent... all to discredit Trump so they can win the election and carry out their agenda more easily.

  • Bananaman177
    Censorship never stops.

    End it there.

    The truth is, it's all part of one great animating spirit that never rests, never ceases to push and poke and prod it's black little fingers around the throats of free men and women.

    A thousand generations of men will pass and a thousand battles will be won and lost and a thousand empires will rise and fall, but this Enemy spirit will always be with us.
  • Suraj1711
    I often speak for myself and don't involve in any political parties cause in my opinion I think both republican and democrats only care about themselves. China is probably one of the most racist nationalist country I've ever seen. China fully supports censorship and doesn't like foreigners. My Malaysian and Singaporean Chinese friends dislike China cause of this. Not everyone in China is obviously racist. I mean a bilion people live in China. The government will do everything it takes to silence everyone who criticizes them. Blizzard on the other hand, banned a Hong Kong pro Hearthstone player for his support of the protesters in Hong Kong while they support the George Floyd supporters. All these companies, they don't care about you. Only thing they care about is money. Star Wars proves this by removing John Boyega in the Chinese poster of star wars the force awakens. Hypocrisy at its finest.
    • Its not even money. Star Wars grossed low, most of the woke remakes of movies bomb, it is about propaganda. For instance 6 of the 8 Hollywood Production Houses are owned by Chinese government controlled companies. No wonder so many movies suck nowadays! As for Blizzard, they now ban you if you disagree with Black Lives Matter! Damn shame, I loved Starcraft.

    • Suraj1711

      Have you watched the top gun remake? I'm not sure if you noticed but the flags on the jumpsuits were very different in the us release versus the Chinese version. Most of the movies are catered for horny 16 year old girls and China

    • I didn't see the movie, but I read about it. That is just the tip of the iceberg! All the "purge" movies for instance, a transparent attempt to race bait and foment riots. Notice how those movies produced by Chi Com companies are banned in China? All the "woke" movies that bombed as well, banned in China, because they are ment to cause culture wars.

  • worldscolide
    I know what you mean.. Interestingly according to leftists im conservative, and according to conservatives im liberal.. i can't figure me out lol.
  • LoU_Hades
    Useful idiots think always that they are right because they are idiots.
  • There is so much wrong with your post that I now have a headache from even just barely perusing it. Well done. That takes talent.
  • DWornock
    I don't approve of censorship but the government, in fact, most governments, censor information they don't want the public to know.
  • ThisAndThat
    Those that are OK with silencing others are only OK with it until it comes back on them.
  • Medlife
    I am confused thats what i am
    • Shamalien

      good place to start, don't make up your mind too quickly or you might miss something important

    • Medlife

      I can't vote anyway so am not really worried.

    • Shamalien

      as if voting did anything

    • Show All
  • Anonymous
    Something I noticed this last year on Google is that certain searches on certain subjects will often yield the opposite of what you are looking for. For instance if you search for white man killed by police no matter what the first 400 results you get are all black men killed by police.