By Frank Liberato
The Democrats’ habit of encouraging criminal lawlessness is not merely intended to terrorize the population. Instead, by removing any accountability for lawless or destructive acts, leftists are making it possible for them to erase both the First and Second Amendments. Thus, by creating an environment in which it appears that the First and Second Amendments are destructive, they can justify prohibiting those rights.
Elon Musk’s recent disclosure of the “Twitter papers” reveals little that we didn’t already know to be true about Twitter censoring conservatives and undermining elections at the behest of government agencies and officials. This behavior reveals unequivocally how leftists see the Constitution as an obstacle. The danger to their political power arises when people are free to express and protect themselves. Ultimately, what leftists perceive as the most serious “threat to democracy” is the Bill of Rights itself, especially the first two amendments (speech and the right to bear arms).
Leftist claims to the contrary, the right to speak freely and defend yourself is the essence of democracy. Voting is an act of free expression, and an armed population preserves that right. How liberals can justify their blatant inversion of this reality is anyone’s guess. So far, they haven’t had to.
The parroted phrase du jour is that “the First Amendment is not absolute.” Nothing could be further from the truth. If they were to tear down the country tomorrow, the rights enshrined by the Constitution would continue to flourish. We have now and forever codified the rights handed down to us by our Creator.
The individual’s supremacy over the state, like any new technology, can be restricted or banned, but it can never be eradicated from the public square. The Genie is out of the bottle, and it is now eternally alive in human affairs. Where people fight for their freedom, they often wave the American flag as the enduring symbol of those rights. Even without the flag, the country, or the document, the rights will live on.
We are told that the First Amendment must be restricted due to the prevalence of “misinformation” and “hate speech.” These are, however, the very things the First Amendment was intended to protect.
“Misinformation” is simply speech that those in power don’t like. People who disagree with the prevailing narrative have as much right to be heard as anyone else. Likewise, one person’s “hate speech” is another person’s love speech.
Without this context, the First Amendment is meaningless. We can’t allow only approved discourse and then call it freedom of speech. But that’s been the plan at Twitter and every other tech outlet since 2016—and it has largely been unopposed until Elon Musk stepped in and upended the Democrats’ reign of terror and lawlessness.
What part of “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech,” do they think is not absolute? Their primary defense is the old saw that “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater.”
In fact, you can falsely yell “fire” in a crowded theater. You have a constitutional right to do so. But if you do, you must understand that you are responsible for the consequences of your actions. If people get hurt, you are responsible. If there is property damage, you are responsible. If there’s a loss of any kind, you’re responsible.
The problem lies with our failure to hold the individual who “yells fire in a crowded theater” accountable for whatever damage that falsehood caused. If we did hold people accountable, no sane person would yell “fire.” Almost everyone would understand that they are responsible for their actions.
In the last two decades, our culture has drifted very far away from this basic principle. A great many people now believe (correctly) that they can do whatever they want with impunity. They do not have to take responsibility. They can rob stores in plain sight. They can commit acts of violence. They can burn down city blocks. None of it matters to the authorities and, if they are arrested, they are often released without posting bail. Recidivism is quick and costly.
Instead of prosecuting criminals, our governments (federal and state) prosecute and persecute those people who are exercising their First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The criminal walks away while the law-abiding citizen gets thrown in solitary confinement without constitutional rights.
Much that has changed for the worse in our society can be traced back to this one principle. The incremental loss of freedom and the rise of the nanny state have the same root cause. There is no responsibility. No one is held accountable.