Liberal censorship refers to liberal attempts to mute all opposition to liberal beliefs. This has become a core tenet of liberalism, and is an almost exclusively liberal practice in modern times. Deceitful techniques of liberal censorship include:
- On college campuses, liberals censor a conservative speaker by claiming he somehow makes some feel "unsafe"
- Liberals exaggerate offhand remarks by sports players in an attempt to chill their speech, particularly if the comments are contrary to the homosexual agenda
- The Huffington Post censored 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, vandalizing conservative wikis on the Internet (particularly Conservapedia), or censoring by forcing the removal of conservative YouTube videos via frivolous and baseless "hate speech" claims
- Getting a legitimate contributor banned 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
- Censoring conservative speech on liberal-controlled comment forums while allowing liberal hate speech and attacks on conservatives to remain; any complaints to the site administrators or moderators regarding their behavior on the boards is often ignored
Liberals inevitably demand censorship of ideas that challenge and counter their views due to their fear of opposing views, ideas and facts, 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" which, despite its name, was anything but fair except to those in the liberal media. Revival of the "Fairness Doctrine" would have the chilling effect of censoring conservative talk radio and freedom of speech by requiring radio stations to air liberal content. Democrats would demand that talk stations air liberal content or their station license would be revoked. It's unfortunate that Democrats are willing to trample on our First Amendment rights for political gain. Fortunately, Ronald Reagan put an end to the forced inclusion of liberal content on talk stations with the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and, as expected under a free market, the liberal talk format faltered and largely collapsed (including the demise of the short-lived liberal Air America radio network).
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 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 by the site's few regular liberal-leaning editors. 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."
One can see liberal totalitarianism toward their attitudes toward religious liberty. Despite the fact that many people, particularly left-wingers, consider the West to be the "free world" due to leftist policies, Christians and others who espouse conservative or unpopular views (which interestingly were considered mainstream only a few generations prior) have experienced increasing levels of persecution in Western countries, whether socially or legally. Increasingly, it is considered "dangerous" or "evil" to hold legitimate biblical Christian or conservative views that (despite the fact they are completely legitimate and sincerely held) contradict the leftist "consensus" or to pass them on to the next generation.
Due to their belief in the "Idea of Progress", left-wingers and even establishment "conservatives" believe that humanity is advancing and improving. Since they consider theologically conservative and orthodox Christianity to be "outdated," "archaic," or "narrow-minded," they believe that wiping out biblical Christian beliefs will only enhance progress and remove an obstacle to the betterment of humanity. Thus, despite the total lack of evidence, biblical Christian beliefs thought in love are increasingly considered "hate speech" or a "hate crime."
Homeschooling and school choice
Liberals oppose the practices of homeschooling and school choice, preferring that all children be required to attend public schools, which indoctrinate students with left-wing and anti-Christian values.
- Hate Speech
- Hollywood values
- Liberal values
- San Francisco values
- Professor values
- Public school values
- Fourth generation warfare
- NRSC petition
- 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.