Americans Are Begging The Government And Corporations To End Free Speech

Authored by Carey Wedler, op-ed via,

This week, internet giants like Facebook, Youtube, Spotify and others banned the notorious Alex Jones and InfoWars from their platforms, and the purge is enjoying widespread support among the left, which has made a reputation for itself as intolerant of differing opinions (last year, for example, a group of Antifa protesters beat one of our own Anti-Media reporters and destroyed his camera equipment at a rally simply because he was filming).

In Jones’ case, Facebook cited hate speech, though this stance seems inconsistent considering the platform has caught flack for allowing anti-semitic content. This lack of principle doesn’t matter to many left-wing partisans, though, as long as someone they find reprehensible is silenced - even as others with far better reputations are banned from other platforms (to clarify, Anti-Media does not endorse Infowars in any way, nor do we consider them to be a legitimate news outlet).

At the same time, however, the right is proving equally open to banning speech and news outlets they dislike. A recent poll from Ipsos found  43 percent of Republicans advocate giving the president, and thereby the government, the power to shut news outlets down. The president, too, has fantasized about doing so:

Disdain for journalists is palpable at Trump rallies, and popular right-wing commentator Milo Yiannopoulos recently called for the assassination of journalists (before claiming the comment was just a joke).

Adherents to both sides of the false dichotomy are increasingly okay with silencing speech and ideas that conflict with their own. What this represents is a bipartisan war on free speech as both factions lust after control of the power institutions that create and perpetuate the divide and conquer struggle for that authority in the first place.

Worse still, companies like Facebook, Google, and Youtube, which is now owned by Google, are aligned with intrusive government agencies and policies that regulate speech and expression on the internet — whether it’s these platforms working with government to monitor speech, colluding to install backdoors for spy agencies to access users’ private data, or Google having roots with the CIA and NSA. Further, we may not know the extent of just how much shadowy levers of government dictate platform’s decisions to allow or ban users and pages, but it has happened and will likely continue.

At the same time, public opinion is creating demand for these kinds of crackdowns. It may be true that Facebook is a “private” platform, but the reality is that whether it’s Facebook banning Jones or Disney firing Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn, who was critical of conservatives, they are, at least in part, responding to the public’s intolerance of ideas and opinions that don’t align with their own — and this intolerance is directly linked to people’s views on government and politics.

Aside from ever-encroaching state and corporatist power, the biggest problem is that due to people’s dogmatic, programmed, and evidently fragile beliefs on both sides - views emboldened by government and “acceptable” media outlets - the people themselves are condoning the suppression of ideas and speech, and this further cements consent for government and corporatists to continue doing just that, fueling an ever-worsening cycle specific to neither left nor right.

This disdain for free expression is parallelled in government. American press freedom in the U.S. has been deteriorating for years, Obama and his cabinet had their own blatant war on journalism, and in 2012, Congress legalized government-funded propaganda. Democrats are currently looking to regulate speech on the internet in the name of fighting the Russians and fake news, and Senator Chris Murphy is eager to shut down more pages:

Meanwhile, “acceptable” outlets spew propaganda for bipartisan priorities, like war and the two-party system itself (in 2016, the Washington Post ran a story smearing independent anti-war outlets, including Anti-Media, as “useful idiots” for Russia, if not outright shills, and weeks later issued a clarification admitting that the “experts” they were citing were anonymous and many of the outlets they condemned objected to the designation).

The government and their corporate partners are objectively terrible, but the influence of the mainstream ideologies they espouse has made the public they’re supposed to be accountable to so blind with hysteria that they are voluntarily demanding suppression of speech. This inevitably requires more state power as both sides grapple for government control and battle each other instead of the institutions breathing down their necks.

We can blame the government and Big Tech all we want, but at some point, we’re going to have to take a look in the mirror and stop begging those suffocating our freedom for more power to regulate it.


DownWithYogaPants Condor_0000 Thu, 08/09/2018 - 11:38 Permalink

Again with the article that the author feels they have to include "the right" as being as sinful and the left. Sorry but the right does not want to end free speech. 

Only the left.  Whether the rable / mob is on the left or on the right during one of history's epochs is easy to tell.  The NAZI was supposedly "right wing" in spite of the fact NAZI == short for NATIONAL SOCIALIST.  But that's where the rabble and mob was.

Now days Antifa is supposedly lefty but whatever / where ever they are the mob / rabble. The left wants to end free speech.

......or perhaps the author is mistaking the machinations of the UniParty Deep State Banking Complex's as exhibited by nominal republicans in congress as "the right".  That would be a very sloppy error.

In reply to by Condor_0000

True Blue DownWithYogaPants Thu, 08/09/2018 - 13:37 Permalink

Yeah, stopped reading this trite nonsense when this little gem appeared; "or Disney firing Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn, who was critical of conservatives,"

As if the pedo-tweeter's firing had anything to do with his alleged anti-conservative slant.

The turd was fired for a long and disgusting history of pedophiliac tweets and comments that established a pattern that should outrage any normal healthy person far and above any alleged misogyny which has ended other Hollywood shitbag's careers.

In reply to by DownWithYogaPants

Malleus Maleficarum DownWithYogaPants Thu, 08/09/2018 - 18:35 Permalink

I agree with the sentiment that the vast majority of the republican party aren't conservative. Yet, the same so-called "conservative" rabble continue to vote for those "nominal republicans," don't they? That's why the Republican Party controls the Presidency, the Senate and both houses of Congress. When they do something we like, they're "true conservatives, real heroes!" and when they do something we disapprove of, they're instantly disowned and written off as mere lackeys of the "UniParty Deep State Banking Complex." That's glaring hypocrisy, and I see it here quite often. I'm guilty of it, too. 

When it comes to "conservative" censorship, the The first thing I think of is the Zionist BDS movement with "conservative" republican champions like Nikki Haley, Greg Abbott, Allan Clemmons, among others. Likewise, I see people on here every day, foaming at the mouth about wanting to kill "liberals" because they uttered words they don't like.

It's basic group psychology - everyone wants to think they belong to the "good group" wearing white hats. We conveniently overlook our errors and hammer at our opponents' many flaws. In the end, if we continue down the present path toward civil war and ultimately genocide, both groups will share heavy blame and we will lose everything. NONE of us are immune to propaganda and the ongoing Divide and Conquer strategy. 


1. Classification: People are divided into "them and us".

2. Symbolization: When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups.

3. Dehumanization: One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects, or diseases.

4. Organization: Genocide is always organized. Special army/police units or militias are often trained and armed.

5. Polarization: Saturation with polarizing propaganda

6. Preparation: Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic, religious or political identity.

7. Extermination: It is 'extermination' to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human

8. Denial: The perpetrators deny that they committed any crimes.


Popehat's Ken White: 'Free Speech Is in Just as Much Danger from Conservatives'

The idea that "free speech is a conservative value and censorship is a liberal value" is "historically completely illiterate."

In reply to by DownWithYogaPants

el buitre Condor_0000 Thu, 08/09/2018 - 11:51 Permalink

Agreed.  We do have a plutocracy masquerading as a Republic.  And this they wish to devolve into a fascist, neofeudal Hunger Games society (if we let them).

As to the social media corporations including Google and its purchased subsidiary, youtube, they claim that they are private and thus exempt from the first amendment guarantees.  Under the Sherman AntiTrust Act they are obvious monopolies and would have been broken up in a heartbeat 70 years ago.  Additionally, Google and FaceBook were designed by "free technology" from the CIA and NSA and have responsibility for stealing taxpayer dollars without due compensation.

In reply to by Condor_0000

lock-stick Free This Thu, 08/09/2018 - 11:13 Permalink


•• Free This (ABOVE, in all his 7th grade glory - JACKASS  as new icon!)


•• Adolfsteinbergovitch ("I TORMENT THE WOMAN WHO SUCKS DICK!")

•• Cryptopithicus Homme (bitcoin spammer - imaginary "friend")


•• Leakanthrophy (PORN for Jesus!)


•• MoreSun (whacked, OH SO WHACKED!!)

•• Africoman

•• Sanctificado

•• beemasters

•• PrivetHedge

•• Cheolli

•• bobcatz

dozens and dozens and dozens of banned log-on's -- more than seven years!


....and all the while, the pathetic little SPAMMER sits in his leaky, moldy, smelly single wide in Western New York, surrounded by garbage and dirty clothes, trying to find his dick amidst rolls of fat, talking to his ACTION FIGURES and wondering where his life went.

In reply to by Free This

True Blue Free This Thu, 08/09/2018 - 13:43 Permalink

I thought you whined and cried about your period and took your sad little ball and went home with it yesterday, never to return.

But, hey! Just keep following the COINTELPRO guidelines for fucking up an internet forum there cupcake, I'm sure it makes your mommy proud to know what her precious little angel is doing in the basement all day, every day.

In reply to by Free This

zob2020 Free This Thu, 08/09/2018 - 11:14 Permalink

Some other funny details, freedom of speech is not just freedom to hatespeak.
Its also freedom to petition, ie protests.
Freedom to assemble. Like say snowflakes collecting to cry and whine together.
Freedom of the press, such as the continued existence of very fake news.
And freedom of religion. Such as a freedom to be a atheist. Freedom to not attend state church under threat of beatings, summary street executions and jail, while praying to saint Trump the son and Hitler the holy ghost along with Genghis Khan the Father.

Hell remove a right to a trial while at it, whether speedy or drawn out over decades while the accused is kept jailed. Along with the right to be judged by a jury of peers.

The leftist totalitarian collectivists have some very dangerous wishes....

In reply to by Free This

Buckaroo Banzai Brazen Heist II Thu, 08/09/2018 - 11:04 Permalink

"Disdain for journalists is palpable at Trump rallies, and popular right-wing commentator Milo Yiannopoulos recently called for the assassination of journalists (before claiming the comment was just a joke)."

The problem is, these so-called "journalists" are not engaging in free speech. What they are actually engaging in, is a seditious conspiracy to overthrow the duly-elected President of the United States.

Seditious conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384) is a crime under United States law. It is stated as follows:

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

In reply to by Brazen Heist II

DieselChadron Buckaroo Banzai Thu, 08/09/2018 - 11:17 Permalink


nobody wants to do away with free speech or free press.  it's just that people have gotten pissed off at constantly being lied to:

-media promoting war on false premise

-media inciting violence

-media reporting lies as fact

-media using mind manipulation techniques

these things should not be protected under free speech.  just like it's not legal to walk into a crowded movie theater and yell fire when there really is no fire, it should not be legal for media to use "free speech" in the way that they usually do. 

In reply to by Buckaroo Banzai

bobsmith5 Brazen Heist II Thu, 08/09/2018 - 13:29 Permalink

What is your definition of Dumocracy?  Don't you really mean socialism?  Democracy is simply the democratic process of voting where the majority elects those who represent them.  Then those elected vote democratically to enact the governing rules and laws by which they are governed.  Democracy simply means people rule from the Greek.  Tell me how you form a republic without the democratic process of voting to create it?  The majority, or as some call it mob rule, always decide who is going to rule in a democratic republic.  The question is, does that democratic republic have a constitution which protects the basic essential rights of each individual?

On the other hand, every form of socialism, be it communism or fascism, leads to massacres and authoritarian anti-democratic rule by the select few at the top.

In reply to by Brazen Heist II

Utopia Planitia looseal Thu, 08/09/2018 - 14:25 Permalink

Your experience may be different than mine.  The YewTuber app was automatically deleted from my Samsung SmartTV awhile ago.  There was a message displayed on the screen at that time stating something to the effect that there was a legal conflict between Samsung and Google, resulting in Google pulling the license allowing Samsung to use the Google YewTuber app.  An independent party could write an app for Samsung to access and play YewTuber content, but so far nobody has.

The disclaimer could have been crap or misleading.  I don't know. But you can always get a 3rd party device that provides access to YewTuber content for display on your TV.  I don't do it hardly ever, but I can access YewTuber on my laptop and stream it from there to the TV (via HDMI cable).

Maybe this is different than what you experienced but there is a work-around, clumsy though it may be.

In reply to by looseal

gaoptimize Free This Thu, 08/09/2018 - 12:30 Permalink

Yep.  It sickens me that writers like this try to equate libertarians and conservatives with "liberals"/socialist on this issue.  There is only one side calling for restrictions on speech.  What the establishment politicians on both sides do is beyond our control.  

In reply to by Free This

chubbar dirty fingernails Thu, 08/09/2018 - 12:11 Permalink

This is horseshit. The libtards are the ones shutting down free speech and they do it by using violence. The conservatives (as opposed to GOP) would like news outlets to go back to being news outlets with a requirement to either report the news in a balanced manner or forfeit the right to be called a news organization and have equal access to presidential briefings, etc. That isn't restricting free speech, that is restricting the definition of what a "news organization" really is.

You can't be a left wing propaganda outlet and reserve the right to constantly disrupt press briefings.

In reply to by dirty fingernails