Categories
Quick Analysis

Progressives Disdain Differing Ideas and Free Speech

In 1858, Abraham Lincoln famously stated that “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”  In 2016, one side of the political spectrum, the progressive left (which dominates the Democrat Party) has declared a decidedly uncivil war on the majority of the nation’s citizenry.

The most recent incident is Hillary Clinton’s stunning comment that half of rival Donald Trump’s supporters belonged in a “basket of deplorables.” She went on to claim that those who favor the GOP nominee were “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it.”

This was certainly not the first time a leftist candidate has made unfounded, untrue and inappropriate comments about well over half the nation’s voters. In 2011, President Obama, speaking in California, described those who with differed with him as people who “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

In the 2016 presidential primaries, several progressive groups sought to physically block access to Trump rallies.

The actions of those in positions of legal authority are frightening. Attorney General Loretta Lynch openly speculated about the possibility of prosecuting those who differed with the President Obama’s perspectives on climate change. A number of state attorneys generals engaged in unethical acts of harassment against think tanks that merely produced data and discussion that contradicted the Progressive mantra on climate change.

New York’s Senator Charles Schumer astoundingly introduced legislation to limit the application of the First Amendment in regards to paid political speech.

Natural aphrodisiacs are being included within this kind of treatment in which fine needles are inserted in specific areas of the http://www.devensec.com/forms/DEC_Charitable_Games_Policy_approved_2014.pdf on line levitra body. Treatment for impotence can either be permanent or short cialis prescription canada term. Things to Keep in Mind Before Taking cialis generic cipla . Buleylu oil reduces dullness of the skin on viagra without rx your male organ. It’s not just those in politics and government who make such statements. Throughout academia, universities have engaged in numerous efforts to exclude moderate and conservative ideas. Students on one campus who sought to merely handout copies of the U.S. Constitution were told they could only do so in scrupulously restricted spaces. Those who respectfully disagree with professors are threatened with poor grades or worse. The repression is not limited to college. Some high school pupils who engaged in the simplest acts of patriotism, such as wearing T-shirts with American flag or other patriotic or non-leftist partisan symbols have been penalized.

A study in the Washington University Political Review   notes:

“…a controversy erupted at Wesleyan University surrounding the college newspaper, The Argus. Students were in an uproar, demanding that the paper’s funding be retracted. The editors issued an apology on the front page of the next edition, agreeing to many of the protestor’s demands, but that still was not enough for the protesters. Calls for The Argus to lose its funding continued. The newspaper’s crime? Having the temerity to publish an editorial critical of the Black Lives Matter movement. The great conservative intellectual William F. Buckley once said, “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” Any politically active college student should be familiar with this sentiment. Liberals preach inclusivity and diversity of all kinds, but not the diversity of thought.”

The strident demonization of those who do not kowtow to Progressive orthodoxy goes far beyond mere hysterical rhetoric. Not unlike the extreme socialist regimes whose economic systems they prefer, many progressives seek to actively and forcefully silence and criminalize those with different ideas and beliefs. The examples are profound and significant.

Throughout the Obama Administration, numerous attempts have been made to control free speech. His representatives on the Federal Communications Commission sought to embed “monitors” in newsrooms. Reporters who criticize the Administration have been penalized in various ways.

Now, defeated in his domestic attempts to control contrary opinions, the President has engineered the international control of the internet, an end run around the First Amendment. As this article was being prepared, the U.S. Senate was preparing to convene an urgent meeting to block the surrender of internet control. As reported in the Wall Street Journal President Obama wants this to be the last month of an open, uncensored internet guaranteed by the U.S. government. His plan to end American stewardship would hand new power to authoritarian governments offended by the internet as we know it… U.S. protection prevents Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and other authoritarian regimes from meddling. The Obama administration may not be comfortable with American exceptionalism, but the internet fosters free speech and innovation because it was built in the image of the U.S.”