Black Lives Matter co-founder and race-baiting huckster Patrisse Cullors is out and about, taking advantage of favorable press coverage to talk about “hate speech” not being protected under the U.S. Constitution.
She claimed the following on MSNBC:
“David Duke and the white supremacists who showed up to Charlottesville, that is Trump’s base. And that base is not isolated. It’s not — it’s directly related to Trump’s policies and the policies that have continued to harm and kill black people and our allies. I think we’re seeing a movement of white nationalists rising up because they’ve been emboldened by Trump and his government. And I really want to invite people to be on the right side of history right now…I think what’s important in this moment is white nationalists are actually fighting to take away people’s rights. Black Lives Matter and groups like Black Lives Matter are fighting for equality. And hate speech, which is what we’re seeing coming out of white nationalist groups, is not protected under the First Amendment rights.”
This is a prime example of the pile of manure the Left promotes and is never called to account for. These haranguers employ baseless generalizations, false attributions, fabricated outcomes and malicious suspicions to denigrate and slander others while seeking to gain new adherents, many of whom are easily moved by an appeal to their passions and baser instincts.
Can she verify that the entirety of Trump’s base are racists? When has Trump called for the oppression of minorities in the US? When has he stated that whites are wholly superior to other ethnicities? How are Trump’s policies harming blacks and causing their deaths? Leave it to Marxists to claim ownership over the truth, yet, without ever feeling the need to corroborate those assertions. It’s demagoguery at its Hitlerian levels.
Furthermore, consider that Cullors wasn’t rebuked for the most blatant of contradictions within her vexing and equally destructive diatribe: she supports a curtailing of free speech rights under the auspices of a misnomer, “hate speech”, while scolding white nationalists for attempting to “take away people’s rights”. In essence, Cullors is arguing that what she and other rabid Marxists arbitrarily consider to be intolerable speech ought to be criminalized, thus endorsing the same restriction of rights she claims white nationalists are advancing.
This is a prime example of what it is like to be a conservative in America today. One can be defamed by being falsely linked with fringe groups, attributed malicious intent and wholly slandered, while those who falsely accuse you also argue that your rights ought to be discounted.
I am not claiming neo-Nazis, white supremacists and Donald Trump are Burkean conservatives who are unfairly maligned (although Trump has instituted a few policies which can be considered more conservative in inclination than Reagan’s and has been consistently smeared due to his nationalist leanings). The point I desire to make is that Marxists tend to caricature conservatives as extremists in order to silence us via a tide of negative perception and political repression while they cloak the fact that they are the true insurrectionists under arguments that give the appearance of piety.
Think upon it; isn’t Black Lives Matter a domestic terror group? Don’t they continue to deify slayers of police officers, called for the mutilation of local law enforcement, demanded anarchy and even lynching of whites? Yet, Patrisse Cullors, a treasonous agitator and racist, continues to receive air time to spew her contemptable propaganda and celebrity treatment through mainstream media circles. Let us not forget that she seemed to appeal to Obama’s proclivity for associating with domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers, as she was promptly invited to the White House in 2015 as BLM became a household name, receiving an implicit endorsement from Barry himself.
As readers can discern, it appears as if Marxist revolutionaries are the only ones who deserve the right to speak about their authoritarian ways while the rest are sadistically repressed for denouncing their subversive and vile ideology.
Relevant Side Note: The growing chorus of voices favoring the outlawing of so-called hate speech is troubling, considering that the First Amendment’s text strictly prohibits the government from illegalizing any form of speech. However, charlatans like Cullors know that in a democracy – which the US has deteriorated into – majority opinion can be inclined towards dangerous and tyrannical ends. Hence, the usage and even misusage of the term “hate” within the phrase “hate speech” (for example, in the manner it is used against Christians objecting to the normalization of homosexuality).
It is and should be perfectly legal for a person to orally express their contempt and hatred, just as it is and should be perfectly legal to verbally rebuke said abhorrence and defeat immoral arguments through a better argument. For the sake of the dissemination of truth, free speech should be wholly upheld and respected. Yet, therein lies the problem for Marxists. Since their doctrine is philosophically weak and evil, they prefer to stifle the exchange of ideas so as to leave Communism’s fight for minds and hearts unchallenged.
And what about ideas that aren’t immoral but run contrary to majority opinion? What if that speech is not protected? What would have happened to the abolitionist movement in the US if their free speech rights were not recognized due to others considering it to be objectionable?