Liberal censorship refers to liberal attempts to mute all opposition to liberal beliefs, is one of the core tenets of liberalism, and is an almost exclusively liberal practice in modern times. Deceitful techniques of liberal censorship include:
- The Huffington Post censured an article on the possible relationship between school shootings and violent video games
- Ben Carson was forced to withdraw as commencement speaker of his own school, Johns Hopkins University, because of his criticism of same-sex marriage
- Liberal opposition to free speech forced Tim Tebow to cancel a speaking event at a large church because its pastor has opposed the homosexual agenda
- opposing information for women that would let them know that abortion increases their risk of breast cancer, as confirmed by numerous studies
- Expelling a young athlete from the 2012 Summer Olympics because she tweeted a joke about immigration, despite her apology, thereby destroying her dream and years of hard work
- Monopolizing discussions and repeatedly talking more than the other side, despite saying nothing coherent
- Censoring readership of the Bible by deceptively pulling people from it, as in their formative years
- Feigning offense in order to censor classroom prayer and religious symbols
- Branding statements as "hate speech," with the ultimate goal of marginalizing the Bible in that way
- Intimidating sponsors of conservative speaking events by harassing them
- Seeking information about donors to traditional marriage referenda in order to harass them
- Engaging in violent protests at conservative events, or vandalizing conservative wikis on the Internet
- Banning a legitimate contributor from all or part of a website because of remarks he made on a different website
- Censoring quotations from the Bible that contradict their personal opinions of what God meant to say
Liberals inevitably demand censorship of ideas that challenge their views, and thus attempt to silence all criticism of their ideology by slandering conservatives and other opponents as "racist" and "reactionary", legally enforce political correctness, and establish legislation making many forms of religious speech illegal under misnamed "hate speech" laws. This is especially true in its most extreme political manifestation, Communism.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee makes this claim:
- Realizing that their ideas couldn't compete in the Free Market, Democrats schemed for ways to crush conservative talk radio's success. Their answer? The so-called "Fairness Doctrine". Revival of the "Fairness Doctrine" would have the chilling effect of censoring conservative talk radio by requiring radio stations to air liberal content. Air liberal content or your station license will be revoked. It's unfortunate that Democrats are willing to trample on our First Amendment rights for political gain.
In an attempt to divert attention from this demand, liberals charge that conservatives also censor when they can. An example some give is Conservapedia. They claim that edits that disagree with the prevailing conservative viewpoint here regularly lead to a block, even though Conservapedia says it does not block for ideological reasons .
Unlike liberals, Conservapedia does not censor on ideological grounds. Occasionally it is necessary to take action to prevent liberals from abusing its hospitality to ideas by seeking to damage or destroy the project through waves of vandalism from outside and deep cover subversion from within. Such action is necessary to protect and defend freedom of expression.
The result of pervasive and institutionalized liberal censorship is termed liberal totalitarianism.
Such attempts to remove first amendment rights (see Fairness Doctrine), along with gun control and the outlawing of creation science and even homeschooling, have led many critics to note the parallel between the modern liberal movement and 20th century totalitarian regimes. The censorship of school prayer is consistent with Fascist beliefs.
The term Liberal Totalitarianism extends to liberals' attempts to breach the Second Amendment by banning weapons. By removing guns, a government can remove citizens' ability to resist totalitarianism, as occurred in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. As Thomas Jefferson stated, "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
- NRSC petition
- For example, a Conservapedia administrator makes the charge here and a previous administrator admits that he and the site owner engaged in ideological blocking here
- Jonah Goldberg, "Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning"
- Edmund Burke Institute 
- The Nazification of the American Left, Paul R. Hollrah, New Media Journal, June 26, 2007.