This is how we fall to tyranny

by Tom Knighton

The Founding Fathers were smart men. They weren’t perfect, but they did recognize what a pathway to tyranny would look like. They enshrined certain liberties in the Bill of Rights as a way to protect this nation from that tyranny.

The First Amendment is a key part of that effort. You need a free press that is independent from the government—we only have that now if Republicans are in power, but it could, hypothetically get better—and you need people to be free to speak their minds.

The Second Amendment is for when the First fails.

But so far, the First Amendment hasn’t, and it seems that a lot of people aren’t really thrilled with that fact.

More than half of Americans believe the First Amendment can go too far in the rights it guarantees, according to a new survey from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment–focused nonprofit.

The survey, released on Thursday, asked 1,000 American adults a range of questions about the First Amendment, free speech, and the security of those rights. Fifty-three percent of respondents agreed with the statement “The First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees” to at least some degree, with 28 percent reporting that it “mostly” or “completely” describes their thoughts.

Americans were further divided along partisan lines. Over 60 percent of Democrats thought the First Amendment could go too far, compared to 52 percent of Republicans.

“Evidently, one out of every two Americans wishes they had fewer civil liberties,” Sean Stevens, FIRE’s chief research adviser, said on Thursday. “Many of them reject the right to assemble, to have a free press, and to petition the government. This is a dictator’s fantasy.”

Further, 1 in 5 respondents said they were “somewhat” or “very” worried about losing their job if someone complains about something they said. Eighty-three percent reported self-censoring in the past month, with 23 percent doing so “fairly” or “very” often.

Just 22 percent of respondents said they believed the right to free speech was “very” or “completely” secure. But despite these concerns, over a third said they trusted the government “somewhat,” “very much,” or “completely” to make fair decisions about what speech is deemed “intimidating,” “threatening,” “harassing,” and “indecent,” among other labels.

The fact that a third of the people trust the government at anything is troubling, but especially with regard to speech.

If the government has the authority to restrict “intimidating,” or “threatening” speech, how long before they decided criticism of the government or certain approved parties counts regardless of what that speech actually is? We’ve seen plenty of people refer to being bullied, threatened, attacked, and a host of other things because they spoke publicly and were criticized for it.

Giving the government power over who can say what to any degree is a recipe for disaster.

But these people actually want this.

Granted, it’s a third as opposed to two-thirds or anything like that, but anything more than three people is alarming. And the idea that more than half think the First Amendment goes too far in any manner is even more disturbing.

Yes, people are going to use their freedom of speech to do things I dislike and disagree with. I don’t have to approve of it and, frankly, I’m not going to.

But disapproval isn’t the same as wanting to stamp it out with the force of law, and the reason for that is in my understanding that any authority handed to the government that could be used to smite my enemies could well be used to smite me.

Governments aren’t composed of saints. If you’re very lucky, they’re composed of regular people, which means some are good people and some aren’t, and if those who aren’t are the ones with the authority to shut down your speech, we have a problem.

Read more