In America, free speech is a sacred right. That is, until it threatens corporate interests. We’ve seen the scenario repeated. Someone says something offensive. Interest groups become aware and threaten sponsors of the speaker’s platform with boycott. Sponsors relent to protect their corporate image, and, ultimately, the speaker loses the platform. Continue Reading
Donald Trump’s election as President was, in part, a reaction to PC culture; a culture which regards the utterance of certain speech as worse than the offense of violent crimes. Unfortunately, the election of Trump has not eliminated this culture. Instead, it has evolved. Some of those who spoke out against PC culture before Trump’s election now enforce their own version of it. Take a look at a couple recent examples: Continue Reading
Earlier this month, a new threat to liberty emerged as originalist Justice Antonin Scalia died in Texas, vacating his seat on the Supreme Court. On that day, the stakes of the 2016 presidential election grew exponentially. Now, whoever gets elected will either maintain the status quo in the Court or create a new, more dangerous majority. Continue Reading
This past week, shortly after he announced he was mounting a second run for the presidency, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s 2012 presidential nominee, shocked libertarians with his declaration (to at least three news sources) that the face covering worn by many Muslim women, the burqa, should be banned from public places. Though Johnson later retracted the comment (after much condemnation from libertarians), it provides evidence that his instincts on free expression, particularly of unpopular views, swing statist rather than libertarian. Continue Reading
In an American Third Party Report exclusive, Bob Whitaker, the 2016 presidential nominee of the American Freedom Party, answers questions about his background, political views, and presidential campaign. Below is the transcript and audio of the interview.
The US government is inching closer to banning so-called hate speech. The Washington Free Beacon reports, the National Science Foundation (NSF), a federal agency, will spend nearly $1 million in taxpayer money to create an internet database targeting “false and misleading ideas,” “suspicious memes,” and “hate speech” on Twitter. Though the database will have no authority immediately, it reflects the federal government’s priority and foreshadows passage of a hate speech ban similar to the UK’s Public Order Act 1986.
On May 21, 49 members of the United States Senate signed on to a letter urging National Football League (NFL) commissioner Roger Goodell to force the Washington Redskins to change their nickname. The letter attempted to circumvent Redskins majority owner Daniel Snyder, who has repeatedly affirmed he would “never” change the name. According to the Senators, “Redskins” is a racial slur for Native Americans. They argued the NFL should send the message that “racism and bigotry have no place in professional sports.” This, they say, is the message reflected in the NBA’s recent decision to ban Clippers’ owner Donald Sterling over the content of an illegally taped personal discussion with his girlfriend about racial association. All 49 Senators who signed on to the letter belong to the Democratic Party. Continue Reading