Top 12 reasons for eliminating free speech
March 2, 2017 NoMoreFakeNews.com
“Badges? We don’t need no stinking badges.” (Blazing Saddles, 1974)
Free speech? We don’t need no stinking free speech.
In the wake of the economic and political censorship imposed on InfoWars and Natural News (Google’s delisting of Natural News has now been lifted), it’s become apparent that free speech is passe. Why did we ever need it? Let’s get rid of that illusion.
Let’s embrace, instead, the consensus of virtue-signaling heroes.
If something is offensive, rub it out.
In Alex Jones’ case, a large company that places ads, adroll, decided to drop Jones’ site, infowars, as a client. The decision still stands. The loss of revenue for infowars is estimated at $3 million.
Here are the top 12 reasons for eliminating free speech.
ONE: “I’m triggered by what you just said. Stop talking.”
TWO: People who say certain things could give other people the wrong ideas.
THREE: People can’t be allowed to make up their own minds about what other people say.
FOUR: If you don’t like what people are going to say, it’s more effective to shut them up, rather than letting them say it.
FIVE: It’s fun to shut people up when you don’t like them.
SIX: It’s virtuous to shut people up when their ideas are harmful.
SEVEN: If you’re too ignorant to be able to debate another person, your only sensible option is to shut him up.
EIGHT: Rational debate is useless. People don’t have time for it, and they don’t base their actions on it. Therefore, take a short cut and shut people up when they say what you don’t want them to say.
NINE: Sometimes people will pay you to shut other people up. This is a way to make a living.
TEN: The Constitution is just a piece of paper. Basing your actions on it is a fool’s errand. The Constitution is old. Nothing old is good.
ELEVEN: Fake news is misleading and dangerous. Ban fake news. Let the government and corporations decide what is fake.
TWELVE: Eventually, if enough free speech is shut down, only a few hundred people would speak or write. This would be good. The rest of the people would only shout, scream, and throw rocks through store windows.
Obviously, we need Congress to pass new laws, so we can somehow draft these twelve elements of a New Society and enforce them.
Alex Jones and Mike Adams are prime examples of the dangers of free speech. Both men, in their own way, go against the grain. They expose political, economic, social, medical, military crimes. Who gave them the right to do that? Who allowed this to happen?
Perhaps there is a thirteenth reason to ban free speech lurking in the shadows: Those who speak or write dangerously are obviously mentally ill. They need treatment. They must have treatment. In this way, they can be rehabilitated. It would be the humanitarian thing to do. Then, some day, you would see Mike and Alex speaking on behalf of the Deep State. They would urge all citizens to adopt conformist attitudes and practices. They would praise the coming utopia. They would profess love for collectivism. They would promote Globalist Central Planning and Distribution for all goods and services on planet Earth. Tensions would relax. Smiles would abound. A culture of Nice would triumph. Mike and Alex could form The Universal Church of Polite.
Isn’t that what we all want?