Free Speech & Misinformation

Why Censorship is foolish and dangerous.

Nov 04, 2024

Once upon a time, it would have been a safe assumption that any presidential nominee would be one who aimed to protect the Constitution and the rights that it guarantees, not to decimate it. The current presidential election cycle has been filled with concern from the left about Trump and his infringement upon "constitutional rights.” If it is unclear which right is in danger, it is abortion. "But wait," you may say, "I didn't know that abortion was a constitutional right." Well, you are correct, it isn't. However, what is a constitutional right is free speech—an actual right that is being threatened, not by Trump but by Ms. Harris and Democrats alike. The radical left have proved themselves clear that they are in favor of censoring free speech. A direct infringement of the rights granted to us through the 45 words of our First Amendment. But why should one dare be concerned with such insignificant rights as free speech when the deplorable opportunity for women to kill their unborn and unwanted babies is on the table? As Robert Kennedy Jr. stated, To be opposed to free speech should disqualify any presidential candidate. It is a mockery of our constitution and a spit in the face of our founding fathers.

There is a foolish notion that anyone who seeks to protect free speech is simply one who wishes to spread "misinformation" or spew hate speech. Those who hold such ideas clearly lack a fundamental understanding of the importance of free speech.

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 - The First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.

The idea of Free speech is deeply enshrined in the founding and development of this great country. In America, one has the right to express his opinions and beliefs openly without the risk of persecution from the powers that be. A necessary right that allows man to criticize his government if he so pleases. A right to ask why, a right to challenge, and a right to call out abject failures of the nation - such as the current Biden Harris Administration. Ms. Harris has referred to Free speech, not as a right but merely a privilege. Well, I suppose along with taking away free speech, there should follow an act to rename the Bill of Rights to the Bill of Privileges. It appears that rights magically transform into privileges the moment they call to attention the failures and lies of those in power and their like-minded supporters.

The word democracy stems from the Greek words demos ( meaning the people) and Kratia ( meaning power or rule). How are we to be a democracy, a country of the people, by the people, for the people, when the people are unable to partake in the free exchange of ideas and opinions? Our founding fathers held dear to the idea of free speech as they understood it to be essential to the proper functioning of society and the political system in which we operate. I suppose this all means nothing, considering they are all nothing but dead white men, as our leftist friends like to remind us. It is clear that if we are to abandon such a foundational principle, it will be at our peril. To abandon free speech is to abandon freedom itself.

What is most humorous about those who are most in support of censorship is that if censorship had been around all along, a majority would not have the lives they do now. Free speech is the foundation of America's progress. Imagine a world where those of the abolitionist movement lacked the freedom to condemn the inhumane treatment of innocent persons during slavery in America. The civil rights movement of the 1960s could only flourish under the rights of freedom of speech and assembly. If Martin Luther King Jr. and the leaders of the civil rights movement faced censorship, where would we be today? Many ideas that led to the principles we Americans hold dear to us were once ideas that could have been viewed as heretical, spreading "misinformation" Under British rule, our forefathers were viewed as misinformers who sought foolish notions such as democracy.

When censorship begins to creep into the American discourse, goodbye democracy, hello totalitarianism. If it is to be that we are to be told what can and can not be stated publicly, we are now subject to the grasp of a system that will destroy freedom as we know it. When a government is able to control speech, it is then able to manipulate the minds of the public and persecute those who seek to challenge the system. We would no longer be a free people yet mere puppets of a broken system. If we are to simply never challenge the government, if we are to be silent in the face of failing leaders, then one can no longer call America America, for it has abandoned a founding principle.

Censorship is already running rampant among social media companies and video platforms such as Instagram and YouTube. Yet, as I stated in a recent essay, It appears to be only a one-way censorship. That of those who are not comfortably pacified by the falsities that are peddled out by a fringe minority who appear fragile and weak in the face of opposition. It is important to stress again how dangerous the concept of censorship is simply regarding the dangers of avoiding opposing views. If we are to be a country where one can not simply state his opinion to challenge another, where shall we go as a people? It already stands as truth that one of the many issues plaguing this country, especially among the youth, is the inability to face challenging viewpoints, which leads to utter chaos and destruction.

I find it quite interesting that today, many who are fighting nonsensical battles such as the one "Trans Rights" can label what goes against their worldview as "false, harmful rhetoric" for which they wish to censor. Yet if we were to go back just ten to fifteen years, their "fight" and the arguments that stem from them would have been the ones that fell under "misinformation," and if censorship laws existed, they would have absolutely zero validity and be subject to persecution. Those who live in glass houses...

And to clarify, Misinformation is nothing but a silly and dangerous concept that continues to be a talking point of the radical left who aims to strap a muzzle onto the American people. When one allows the foolish notion of "misinformation" to permeate our brains, one then sees any information that is contrary to what they believe is truth as misinformation, which is incredibly dangerous today as we can't even agree to what constitutes as truth among ourselves. When one is able to label something as "misinformation," who is to be the decider of what constitutes as such? Is it to be information that is factually incorrect and can be proven so by hard-core facts and common sense, such as the sky is green? Or is it to be information that simply goes against what the government wishes us to believe or anything that upsets the pacified minority that seeks to redefine truth? Of course, one can safely assume it is the latter mostly because anything in the nature of the first statement is one that no one would need to stop from being expressed afterall it is evidently an idiotic and factually incorrect statement that can be proven so by a kindergartener, So what harm would there be in expressing something everyone knows not to be truth? However, if one is to challenge the powers that be on the information that is provided to us, then that, of course, calls for censorship because if any validity falls upon the challenging statement, that will jeopardize how the American people view those in charge and any further information they provide. So it appears that the true definition of "Misinformation" would be anything that knocks away the hand that attempts to spoon-feed the American people what they should believe.

If we are to persecute those who spread "misinformation," this conservative has some questions about who and what will qualify For, If misinformation must end amongst American discourse, does it apply to all of the falsities that are forced upon us today? Does it apply to the falsity that there are more than two genders? Are we to put an end to the pronoun game that has been a nuisance to the American people? Are we to finally persecute the so called medical professionals who continue to spread false information regarding the benefits of "Gender affirming care"? What about the establishment media that continues to mislead the voters about the accomplishments of Kamala Harris? Anything for the folks who spread lies about Donald J. Trump to the American people on account of their personal discontent with him? Will we see Dr. Fauci and all who misled the American people regarding Covid-19 during the height of the pandemic in handcuffs? What about everyone’s new favorite curriculum of critical race theory and the grossly inaccurate portrayal of race relations in America? Everyone knows that the answer to this question from the very ones who advocate for the eradication of the spread of "misinformation" would be a whopping NO. Therefore, proving both points that the term in itself is silly and dangerous amongst political discourse and that it is not to stop opposition to truth yet to censor and persecute any that seek the truth.