Tag Archives: oppression

The Unbridled Hate of Hate Speech Laws

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” This quote, often attributed to Voltaire, is at the heart of our First Amendment right to free speech, at least where the authority of our government is concerned. A free society, and, in fact, a free people, must be able to speak freely in order to challenge power, ideological aggression or the coercion of faction. To limit or eliminate this fundamental right; this essential check to balance, is to limit or eliminate freedom in its most cursory form. Put succinctly, limiting free speech rights is tyranny in its most basic form.

It is for this reason that the Progressive Movement’s continued assault on free speech rights – both here in the United States and throughout the free world – is of such immediate concern.

On January 16, 2014, TheHill.com reported:

“Thirteen House Democrats have proposed legislation that would require the government to study hate speech on the Internet, mobile phones and television and radio.

“The bill, sponsored by Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (P-NY) and 12 other House Democrats, would look at how those media are used to ‘advocate and encourage violent acts and the commission of crimes of hate.’

“The Hate Crime Reporting Act, HR3878, is meant to update a 20-year-old study from the National Telecommunications & Information Administration. That study, delivered to Congress in 1993, looked at hate speech on radio, TV and computer bulletin boards.

“Jeffries says the NTIA needs to see how hate speech is transmitted over the various new modes of communication that have sprung up over the last two decades…

“‘This legislation will mandate a comprehensive analysis of criminal and hateful activity on the Internet that occurs outside of the zone of the First Amendment protection.’”

The other co-sponsors of this bill include: Reps. Gregory Meeks, (D-NY); Ann Kuster, (D-NH); Michael Honda, (P-CA); Judy Chu, (P-CA); Bobby Rush, (P-IL); Carolyn Maloney, (P-NY); Pedro Pierluisi, (D-PR-At Large); Tony Cardenas, (D-CA-29); Mark Pocan, (P-WI); Eleanor Holmes-Norton, (P-DC-At Large); and Ron Kind, (D-WI).

Again, the entirety of the issue of “hate speech” is predicated on who is defining “hate.” Put another way, one person’s “hate” is inevitably another person’s “free speech.” Cases in point: Nazi, Soviet and Communist Chinese censorship.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (Emphasis added)

So, the desires of the sponsors of HR3878 – and, in fact, the whole of the Progressive Movement – are juxtaposed to the guarantees of the United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights. If the US Constitution guarantees that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech,” then no speech – no matter how offensive, societally unacceptable or politically incorrect – can be abridged, sans speech that directly incites violence toward another or which directly calls for the violent overthrow of the United States government.

Therefore, assurances made by the sponsors of HR3878, that only “criminal and hateful” speech occurring “outside of the zone of the First Amendment protection,” are presented disingenuously at the proposal’s genesis because no speech can be considered – short of speech that directly incites violence toward another or which directly calls for the violent overthrow of the United States government – “criminal” and/or “hateful” by constitutional measure.

Understanding this as fact, it is not out of line to charge that the sponsors of HR3878 are either, constitutionally illiterate, deceptive in their intentions or both. Only the constitutionally illiterate would fail to understand the First Amendment free speech clause was meant to prevent factions from silencing dissenters of the majority, thus executing one of the pinnacle purposes of the Charters of Freedom: protecting the rights of the minority. Conversely, if the sponsors of this piece of legislation do understand the unconstitutionality of their proposal, they advance the measure for nefarious reasons; reasons antithetical to true freedom and liberty for all.

But this shouldn’t surprise anyone who has been paying attention to Progressive Movement from its inception.

In a recent analysis entitled, It’s Not a War on Christmas, I make the observation:

“If the elitist oligarchs of the modern day Progressive Movement are to assume complete control; complete authority to execute social justice, economic justice and redefine the many ideas of equality, then they must dispense with the idea that they – themselves – are not at the top of the power pyramid; at the top of the intellectual ‘food chain’…

“By playing on emotions – the most potent tool in the Progressive arsenal – and painting those who hold true to their…beliefs as being “un-inclusive,” “intolerant of others,” and “insensitive”…, Progressives aim to ‘shame’ the truly tolerant and inclusive… By shaming or making the majority of Americans ‘uncomfortable’ for the accusations of intolerance and insensitivity, Progressives aim to force an abdication of traditional American values and beliefs. In doing so they inch closer to their goal of expunging the notion of Natural Law from the societal and then governmental lexicons, successfully achieving elitist, oligarchic and totalitarian control over the defining of rights, the common good, and the role of government in our lives.”

This reality applies to the false-flag concept of “hate speech” laws. It can also be applied to the totalitarian “double-jeopardy” of “hate crime” laws as well. To the latter, a crime is either a crime or it is not a crime. By creating a more severe punishment for a “class,” “demographic” or “preferred faction” of people, Progressives seek to artificially elevate the severity of a crime only when that crime is committed against the few, while citing the crime as less severe when committed against all others.

In the end, it is the Progressive Movement’s modus operandi to manipulate the citizenries of free nations through emotion and “feel good” sounding pieces of legislation, all sold to us as a bill of goods addressing the “common good.” In reality, these false-flag, emotion-based pieces of legislation – these “social justice” initiatives – serve to usurp the freedoms guaranteed to us in the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

They are exercises in soft tyranny meant to create power for – and deliver power to – the elitist oligarchs and the tyrannical.

They serve to pollute the airs of freedom; to smother Lady Liberty; and to, eventually, oppress the masses into subjugation.

Of course, to Progressives, those are words of “hate.”

NYC “Feminists” Demand the Right Not to be Seen as Sex Objects. By Going Topless.

boobs baby

boobs babyIt’s possible that “progressives” have weekly meetings to decide what action they can take to simultaneously shock the rational sensibilities of thinking people and even further divorce themselves from reality. And it’s becoming more and more clear these meetings are taking place in New York City, the “progressive” mecca.

In a breathtaking display of hypocrisy and laughable lack of self awareness, “feminists” have decided the best way to achieve “equal rights” (that they refuse to understand they already have) and not be seen as “sex objects” is to parade around topless in public. After all, men do it! It’s only fair! And according to low functioning “progressive” leftists, fairness is not only a real concept, but also something we can legislate. So don’t you dare demand anyone behave with a shred of common decency because, dammit, women have the right to be naked in public. It’s all about feelings, folks. And these women are having a crisis of emotion over the tyranny of t-shirts.

New York City police officers have been instructed not to arrest women who’ve chosen to bare it all from the waist up in public, but have instead been told to disperse any crowds that may form around said topless women, even though crowds shouldn’t form because “progressives” are telling us that boobs in your face on Madison Avenue are totally normal because shut up, Woman Hater.

Proponents shriek this is a good step toward eliminating “unconstitutional gender discrimination”, proclaiming little more than the fact that they’ve never bothered to read the Constitution. In their defense though, when would they have time to educate themselves on our actual rights as Americans when they’re so busy creating “rights” they wish we had? Reality is hard, and oftentimes unfair. Is no one thinking of the female nipple’s self esteem?

There’s even a group of women who’ve banded together to organize protests in favor of lewdness and indecency and they’ve managed to summon the audacity to compare it to the right to vote. They call themselves “Go Topless” (creativity is hard) and they fancy themselves modern day suffragettes, but this time they’re marching for a much nobler cause than votes. They’ve decided that a woman’s value should be placed on her sexuality, that she’s no more than the sum of her parts. Elizabeth Cady Stanton would be so proud.

I’m a fan of equality and I’m a fan of boobs. I have both. I’ve used both to my advantage. But, and call me old fashioned if you wish, if modern “feminists” have decided that my having to wear a shirt in public means I’m a victim of a patriarchal society, I will happily embrace that “oppression”. Because fairness.

On Human Liberation

gadsden-bg3 - Copy

Before a revolution takes place, there must be a change in the ideas circulated in the public arena. Rather than allow the hard left to corrupt the public sphere unopposed with false conceptions of freedom, we must liberate the minds of our fellow citizens by enlightening them as to the true nature of freedom.

Freedom must be rightly understood by members of society in order for it to exist in a political order. Those societies that offer people meaningful choices as to how to direct their own lives, what to buy or not to buy, what ideas to believe, and what religion to practice or not to practice cannot be oppressive; while those that constrain people’s choices are oppressive. A free state uses coercion to punish harmful behavior, not to shield politicians from accountability or to protect people from themselves.

As a movement, we conservatarian radicals demand social freedom, which is the absence of coercion in society; economic freedom, which is the right to freely exercise our labor and our market decisions and to reap the fruits of our own labor through the aegis of private property; and political freedom, which is the right to live without the state seeking arbitrary control over our lives. We demand no more, and no less.

The clashing conceptions of freedom in America have led to the formation of two broad based ideological movements: the Tea Party and the New Left. Their views of freedom could not be more drastically different.

The Tea Party movement believes in freedom of choice, and the upholding of the Constitutional order that has clearly led to the most  materially, socially, and ideologically diverse polity in world history, and thus the one with the most freedom of choice for individuals.

The New Left seeks, through its “freedom of choice” to deviate from the Constitutional order, to: socially constrain through political correctness, economically constrain through the doctrines of sustainability and equality of results, and politically constrain through bureaucratization, legalization, and executive fiat.

An outstanding test for freedom thus becomes, “Does this action or policy enable or constrain my freedom of  choice?”

When governments become oppressive, the seeds of liberation movements must be sown.  Liberation is the cause of human beings who perceive themselves to be enslaved, exploited, or dominated by fellow human beings or by some inhuman or alien force.

Being a subjective cause, liberation is bound to human identity, and the perception of justice. Liberation is a deep-seated motivation for human action, and under certain conditions, drives men to fanatical and potentially violent behavior. Therefore, it is imperative that men have conceptual clarity about what they are being liberated from.

Being able to objectively evaluate whether one is liberated or oppressed turns on the definition of freedom. Freedom is the state of human existence when a man is able to exercise free will, in accordance with his rational mind, and to make decisions among real world choices that generally determine the outcomes in his own life.

What is crucial for people to understand is what freedom is not.  Freedom is not a state of being free from economic reality; specifically, work, scarcity, or opportunity costs; or free from accident and tragedy, as influential neomarxist theorist John Rawls implies; or free from intellectual or ideological challenge; or free from the presence of people in any way different than you.

The two majors sources of misunderstanding on the left is a lack of appreciation for the constraints of objective reality and the eternal inconstancies of human nature. Freedom is a matter of allowing necessarily self-interested individuals to exercise free will based on rational choice within real world constraints. It is the nature of a human to seek to live his own life.

While classical Marxists fail to understand economic reality, neomarxists fail to understand the nature of social oppression. For perhaps psychological reasons, neomarxists often associate social freedom as social acceptance. Because they believe their opposition to be laboring under “false consciousness” as a reflection of “forces” within the capitalist economy, they believe capitalism to be hierarchical and and thus society reflects and reinforces that hierarchy.

But it is not a crime against one’s fellow man to pursue success, in accordance with one’s nature as a self-interested being, so long as one does not violate others’ rights. In fact, while The Declaration of Independence is a guide for understanding freedom, The Constitution is the attempt to provide the conditions for freedom by recognizing and counterpoising self-interest within a plan of government. But this plan of freedom will not last if society continues to misunderstand its nature.

The Tea Party movement seeks to fiscally restrain the government,  limit its scope to the defense of our rights, and to push back the oppressive drive of government through winning the hearts and minds of the public. We seek liberation from arbitrary state coercion and the freedom to live our lives as we so choose.

Be Careful Who or What You Allow to Move You!

I read an article last week by Thomas Sowell which related to a day in Barack Obama’s not too distant past, when Barack was ‘moved’ (to tears) by a message from his pastor and friend, the sometimes ostentatious and very often racist Reverend Wright. I do not accurately know the message Rev. Wright shared with Barack that day—it might have been a great Bible-based spiritual message, so I will not speculate on what exactly ‘moved’ Barack to tears. I would like to know the exact context of the message was on that day. That information would make what I am about to write about more dead-on specific for our current President. Although I do not have that specific information, fortunately, there are plenty of other historical examples of citizenry being ‘moved’ by a message or messenger that does enable me to get my point across.


First, let me say that just because people are ‘moved’ by a message or an occasion it does not mean that the message or occasion that moved them was truthful, correct, or in their best interests.. A lot of people were ‘moved’ by the idiotic or evil political or social messages of people like Carl Marx, Charles Darwin and Adolf Hitler in past, very harsh lessons learned throughout history. Worse yet, a lot of people were ‘moved’ to tears of sadness and sorrow the day evil people such as Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Ivan the Terrible, Mao Tse Tung, Idi Amin, and Genghis Khan etc. etc. etc. died. Even though the previously mentioned murderous dictators were responsible for millions of heinous deaths, they were, and still are worshiped to an extent, even today.


Being ‘moved’ to the point of tears, being moved to a deep inner conviction and/or inner enlightenment by a message or teaching that someone gives happens all the time. The problem with these inner movements of conviction, enlightenment or revelation is that a lot of people get ‘moved’ by the wrong messages or deceiving messengers. (There is a difference between right and wrong, light and dark, and evil and good.) I believe some people teach or share wrong messages simply because they are ignorant of the facts. The man-made philosophies of evolution and global warming are excellent examples of just how misinformation and propaganda can change people’s perceptions of what is right and what is wrong. I know that many people believe this false global weather scam because they listen to the inaccurate and misleading teachings of teachers who they themselves have been misled or deceived. It is truly bewildering to me to think that there are a ‘whole lot of people’ on planet earth who are genuinely convinced (i.e. so environmentally moved) that they believe they are really helping ‘Mother Nature” or ‘Mother Earth’ when they push their unrealistic go-green philosophies. Now, I am in favor of being (somewhat) environmentally responsible. E. I do not believe it is an environmentally smart thing to randomly and haphazardly store radioactive waste in populated areas. I am against dumping known toxins, chemicals, poisons, etc. etc. into the world’s waterways. I believe we need to do what is feasibly (i.e. practically and economically) possible to protect our environment. However, I do believe environmentalists have gone way too far with their ‘save the planet” movement. Anyone with more brains than a piece of toast knows that windmills and solar panels will never, ever provide enough power to keep this country running. When environmentalists are ‘moved’ to the point that they consider cow farts and CO2 environmental hazards they are moving in the wrong direction!


It is amazing me how easily people are ‘moved’ into believing things that are so foolish. We all have seen examples of the many naively false or purposely deceiving teachers simply teaching what they teach for political or economic gain. Most of the whole ‘tree hugger, ‘save the whale’ and protect the reindeer” movement is based on exaggerated and misleading information,and yet millions still fall for this politically biased philosophy. Now, once again, I am not saying that we humans should not be concerned about our environment. The good Lord put us here as stewards and made us responsible for helping to keep planet earth clean—but there is only so much we can do. However, more environmental ‘damage’ is done in one day by a spewing volcano than all the coal plants in America have ever done. So let’s be realistic here. I simply do not believe that saving a rare river snail or creek minnow at the cost of millions of jobs is the correct way to do things today, but that is a different message for a different time. However, it does amaze me how many environmental wackos have more concern for helping a beached whale then they do for helping an innocent baby that is about to be aborted in its mother’s womb!


Back to my article topic:


I have read that Adolf Hitler was a great orator. I have read that his public speeches mesmerized many who listened to him. (I have to be honest. I have listened to his public speeches and they did nothing for me. Of course I am Irish, and a strong Christian man. I believe the Lord opens the eyes both spiritually and intellectually . But nevertheless, many Germans thought Adolf to be almost like god-like. The people of Germany were so ‘moved’ by the messages of Adolf that a vast majority of these well-educated and extremely civilized German people believed it was good to not only exterminate Jews, but anyone who was not of ‘pure’ German race! Sad isn’t it? A whole nation ‘moved’ to commit horrendous atrocities such as murdering millions of Jews by the message of one deranged man!


History has shown that time after time, entire races of people or entire nations have been so moved by a message or philosophical teaching that it led to the death or serious decay of their citizenry. America went through this during our Civil War. Some American citizens were so ‘moved’ by the issue of slavery that they were willing to kill (sometimes even their own family members) just so they could have the ‘right’ to own people!


America went through another trying time in the sixties. A whole generation of young people decided that peace and love (not war and morality) were what was right for America. Thousands of people (mostly college kids and their liberal teachers) began protesting the Vietnam War. The people shouted, “Violence is not the way” and “War never solved anything” as they illegally and violently took over many of America’s larger college campuses. (By the way, I need to remind these ‘war never solved anything’ people that I know for a fact that war defeated Communism, Nazism, Fascism, and slavery, and that American warriors are presently working on wiping out crazy Islamic fundamentalists who use innocent women and children as bomb carriers.)


While these anti-war protests of the sixties were going on, this same culture of young people decided it was best for America if people were more ‘open’ in their sexual behaviors and drug usage. So this generation of young people decided to push a philosophy that taught that it was good to freely and openly express one’s sexual behaviors. An entire nation of young people was ‘moved’ by the ‘message’ of free love, peace not war, and tripping out on acid as a way to really discovers one’s “inner self.”. Our culture was changed by this whole ‘hippie love’, do drug movement,and it was not necessarily a good change! Fifty years later, look where this movement has gotten us. America is a largely doped up, sexually permissive society. There are over fifty different types of sexually transmitted diseases floating around in America these days. This ‘free love’ movement produced another dilemma; unwanted pregnancies. So free loving liberals decided America needed a law which would make it ‘legal’ to eliminate the unnecessary side-effects (i.e. babies in wombs) of sexually promiscuous people. People were so ‘moved’ by the message of free love (i.e. I will use my body as I choose) that they used this same reasoning while arguing that it should be the pregnant woman’s choice to decide if she wants to kill or keep the baby inside her womb. How dark is a society when it legally allows innocent babies to be murdered in their mother’s womb? What kind of righteous movement is that? We are throwing aborted babies in garbage cans like they are simply part of the daily trash. Yeah right, ‘free love’ and legalized abortions; those are just the kind of things I want to be moved to support. Not!


The peace/love movement of the sixties sounded real nice—but it did not turn out real nice. An entire nation of people were ‘moved’ by the peace/free love/do drugs music of the sixties. You know the saying; “ If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” America is in such a horrendous drug epidemic that I believe the only Someone who can restore this country is the good Lord Himself when He returns for his second coming. (The next time Jesus comes to planet earth he comes as a judging/avenging lion and not an innocent lamb. Paraphrased: Jesus is going to do some serious righteous ‘butt kicking’ the next time he shows up on planet earth.)


Famous leaders like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, Kim Sung, Hideki Tojo, Leopold II, etc. etc. many times deceived not only other nations into thinking their political agendas were good, but also their own people. The political philosophies of these ruthless, wicked dictators ‘moved’ the people to point of assisting these evil rulers in viciously torturing and murdering millions upon millions of innocent people.


We all need to be very, very careful that the ‘movement’ our heart is following or leaning towards is not foolishness or worse yet, simply evil. The good Lord created humans with emotions and these same emotions came with a free will. No one can use words to make us do something we really do not want to do, unless they are heavily disguised words to hide theie true meaning, such as “Social Justice.” Unfortunately, way too many people allow their free will to be controlled by their emotions. Way too many people listen to what teachers or leaders are telling them without having all the facts before them, or worse yet, not even be willing to look at the facts! (A religious pastor can be taught how to be a great evangelist. Like a good actor, he or she can go to school and learn how to fire up and deceive people with words. As we now know, great orators or religious motivators like Adolf Hitler or Osama Bin laden do not necessarily make for great human beings.)


A lot of other people listen to what political, religious, social or economical teachers tell them knowing that what they are being told is wrong, but they continue to listen anyways because an inner evil part of them likes what they are hearing. Racist skin-head preachers or promoters are a good example of this. A lot of their ‘followers’ are people who like what these (mostly anti-black people) racist skin-head leaders teach simply because the person listening to them already hates minorities. So these new followers use the racist movement of groups like the skin-head as justification for hating minorities. After all there is power in numbers. A movement,right or wrong, does not need a lot of followers to become a movement. The wacko religious cult known as Heaven’s Gate moved (with its message) 38 people to commit suicide so they supposedly could catch a comet ride to heaven. What is scary about a lot of these religious and political movements is that it is hard to get out once you get in. It is very, very difficult to convince liberals who have been moved by a deceiving socialistic message that socialism does not work. It is hard to convince religious people who get moved by a cult religious teacher that they are on the wrong path of ‘light.’ As with the Heaven’s Gate’s followers, once people move in a certain direction it is very, very difficult to get them to back-up. So, please be careful what you get moved about.


It is difficult for me to understand why intelligent, non-doped up or non-drunk people are moved by messages or philosophies that are obviously wrong or just plain evil. It saddens me that there is a group of hateful, evil people out there in America who did belong, and still belong to groups who’s sole purpose is to try to eliminate (innocent) fellow Americans of minority races! What ‘moves’ people to even listen to idiots like this? However, it happens all the time!


I guess I am just too logical, practical and analytical to fall for these self-centered, evil, selfish things. (Although I am quite aware that peer pressure is a very powerful influence in some people’s lives.) I challenge the movement that promotes hating people because of their skin color. Hey, all you idiotic skin-head types need to read the part of the American constitution which states that the good Lord created all people equal, although in your case he did not create people with the same intelligence! (I say that sarcastically. I do not want people who follow stupid, evil promoters of racism to use stupidity as justification for your evil philosophies.)


I also challenge those people of ‘science’ who promote a movement which time after time attempts to debunk the wisdom of God. Many times people who ‘get intelligence’, (through supposed places of ‘higher learning’) actually become dumber than they were before they got educated. It always amazes me how some people, who once they get educated suddenly think they are smarter than The One who created all things. You secular geniuses cannot even figure out how light works, and yet you believe you have the wisdom to explain the deep complexities of this universe. You guys do not have a clue on the diverse intricacies of a simple cell, and yet you spew out your idiotic movement that all life happened by random chance! Some would say that the Theory of Evolution is simply science fiction at its best. And in spite of the fact that this idiotic ‘movement’ is ridiculously idiotic—and mathematically impossible—millions follow this movement like lemmings headed to the cliff. So I have a question for all those self-proclaimed academics
out there: “ Just how did all those glaciers melt on planet earth a few thousand years ago? Were there too many tepee factories around back then? ”
Who’s “ carbon footprint ” can you blame that episode in world history and evolution on ?


So be careful people, on just who or what you allow to shape your perceptions of what is right and what is wrong today. Some people are trained to manipulate you to go against what you know is the right thing to believe in, today in America. The future of America depends of all of us to seek the truth on our own, and that must include denouncing what anti-American propagandists with an agenda are telling us. The truth, and only the truth shall set you free.