Tag Archives: free speech

Op-Eds

Hey Antifa: Free Speech is Not Negotiable

1 Comment
Antifa Graffiti
Antifa Graffiti (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On February 1, a gang of violent thugs managed to shut down a speech scheduled to take place at the University of California at Berkeley, metaphorically making the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement of the 1960s  into that movement’s grave site.

The scheduled speaker, sponsored by the campus’s student Republican group, was “alt-right” clown cum agitator Milo Yiannopoulos.

The gang of rock-throwing arsonists identified themselves as “Antifa” activists.

“Antifa” is short for “anti-fascist,” but the actions of those identifying with the Antifa movement falsify the implied claim. Antifa activists tend to show up whenever and wherever they sense an opportunity to use violence to silence speech they disagree with.

Not to fight fascism, to silence speech. Not just fascist speech, but any speech they happen to disagree with or that they just think they might bring attention to themselves by attacking.

They also frequently pretend to be anarchists.

Let’s be very clear about this:

Antifa is not an anti-fascist movement. It is a violent authoritarian movement that creatively brands and markets itself as anti-fascist.

Nor is Antifa an anarchist movement. Violent authoritarianism which attempts to suppress the dissemination of ideas through speech — to rule the minds and mouths of others through force — is not anarchism even if it formally eschews the state as its instrument of coercion.

An anarchist acquaintance of mine considers my free speech fundamentalism to constitute evidence that I’m a “liberal” (in the classical sense, emphasis on civil liberties) rather than a libertarian and, yes, an anarchist. I disagree, but if that’s the case I guess I’ll just have to live with whatever designation my beliefs imply.

To my mind, a free society must necessarily be composed of free people. People who don’t enjoy freedom of thought and speech are not free. No free speech, no free people. No free people, no free society. It’s really just that simple.

I’m not a pacifist, mind you. I’ve spent plenty of time in protests and have done at least my share of facing down klansmen and other fascists, not to mention riot police. If it comes down to combat, it does. But I’m not going to be the one to start it. People who are confident that their ideas are better than the other guys’ ideas don’t need to throw the first punch.

If you violently oppose free speech, you’re humanity’s enemy. And humanity should treat you as such.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION HISTORY

Op-Eds

The Virtue of Selfies-ness: Libertarians Fight for Free Speech at the Ballot Box

Leave a comment
Caryn Ann Harlos
Caryn Ann Harlos

It’s finally election time — as I write this, early voting is already under way in many states. You may have already voted. Even if haven’t, you probably know who you’re voting for. But if you live in Colorado, it’s illegal to tell anyone who you voted for, or who you think someone else might have voted for.

Yes, really. It’s right there in black and white in Colorado Revised Statute  §1-13-712, section 3: “No election official, watcher, or person shall reveal to any other person the name of any candidate for whom a voter has voted or communicate to another his opinion, belief, or impression as to how or for whom a voter has voted.”

Caryn Ann Harlos objects. Strenuously. She’s the communications director of the Libertarian Party of Colorado and sits on the party’s national committee, so you can probably guess how she’s voting. But she’s not allowed to tell you, even though “communications” is right there in her job title.

Oh, and according to section 2 of the same law, you can’t ask her, either: “No person shall endeavor to induce any voter to show how he marked his ballot.”

Harlos petitioned Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman and Denver District Attorney Mich Morrissey to publicly recognize the blatant unconstitutionality of this law. They declined. So, in concert with two other plaintiffs and the aid of the libertarian Our America Initiative, Harlos filed suit  in US District Court. They’re asking, for among other things, a preliminary injunction and restraining order to protect voters, pollsters, journalists, and neighborhood gossips from arrest. The first hearing is scheduled for November 2nd.

Federal judges in New Hampshire and Michigan have already ruled against “ballot selfie” laws, as well they should have. It’s pretty much a constitutional slam-dunk. The act of voting doesn’t create an exception to your free speech rights. The scope of the Colorado law is particularly egregious. Coffman and Morrissey are wasting tax money — and disrespecting Colorado’s voters — by defending it.

The Libertarian Party’s candidates don’t win many elections. In fact, they usually come in a distant third in any three-way race. But Libertarian Party and libertarian movement activists are stepping up to defend your rights. If Caryn Ann Harlos has her way, you’ll be free not just to vote for a Democrat or Republican, but to publicly say you did so. Think about that when you enter the voting booth.

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY

Op-Eds

Unacceptable Speech at Old Dominion

1 Comment

Ban Censorship (RGBStock)

With the fall semester beginning at colleges and universities around the US, it’s time for a new round of controversy over student speech. Right out of the gate, Virginia’s Old Dominion University takes an early lead: WTKR News Channel 3 reports that ODU “officials took time from their weekend to respond to some banners hung up at an off-campus home that are upsetting many.”

The banners: “Rowdy And Fun: Hope Your Baby Girl is Ready for a Good Time.” “Freshman Daughter Drop Off.” “Go Ahead and Drop Off Mom Too …”

Offensive? Yeah, I can buy that. Certainly not very respectful of women. But, on the other hand, also very informative and likely self-correcting. If I lived in that house, I wouldn’t bet money on me being able to get dates with any ODU co-eds this semester. Just sayin’.

But when it comes to truly offensive, sickening speech, let’s talk about this, from an official statement issued by ODU:

“Messages like the ones displayed yesterday by a few students on the balcony of their private residence are not and will not be tolerated.”

Old Dominion is a “public” — by which I mean tax-funded — university. And as the statement makes clear, the banners were displayed at a private residence, not on campus.

Public universities don’t get to decide to “not tolerate” student speech. Especially speech that takes place off-campus at a private residence.

ODU’s administrators, of all people, should be well aware of that fact. Old Dominion originated as part of the College of William and Mary, the institution where Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe and John Tyler  studied, and where George Washington got his surveyor’s credentials. The idea that the First Amendment has thus far escaped notice at ODU just isn’t plausible.

In a message to faculty, staff and students, Old Dominion president John R. Broderick claims to have spoken with a young female student who “described the true meaning of the hurt this caused.” The student, writes Broderick, “thought seriously about going home.” Broderick closes his message with dire threats of disciplinary action against those displaying the banners.

Broderick should have spent more time talking with the young student, explaining to her that if a few stupid signs hung on a private residence have her thinking about quitting school, she probably should. ODU is allegedly a university, not a daycare center, and she’s clearly neither intellectually nor emotionally mature enough to handle living on her own as a semi-autonomous adult.

Unfortunately, the teacup tempest at Old Dominion isn’t an isolated incident. America’s colleges and universities seem to be collectively sliding into daycare center mode, where the mission is to offer students four additional years of insulated, isolated childhood instead of educations to fit them for adult life in the real world.

The danger to free speech in this case may seem slight, but it isn’t and can’t be. Speech is free or it isn’t. To compromise that value at Old Dominion now is to cultivate future tyranny everywhere.

Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY