Theresa May: “The fight against terrorism and hate speech has to be a joint one”, by Robert Spencer.
By this May means … that “the fight against jihad and those who oppose jihad is a joint one.”
This is because opposition to jihad terror is routinely characterized by Theresa May and her colleagues as “hate speech.”
It has been a years-long chess game: first came the charge, ridiculous on its face but relentlessly and indefatigably repeated, that to speak honestly about how jihad terrorists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and make recruits among peaceful Muslims constituted “hate.”
Then came the likewise specious charge that “hate speech” was not “free speech,” and was capable of being identified by neutral, impartial observers, and that it did not deserve the protection that various governments gave to the freedom of speech.
None of that is true. In reality, hate speech is a subjective judgment based on the political perspectives of the one doing the evaluating, and freedom of speech protections were first instituted in order to ensure that speech that was hated by the party in power could still be aired: the freedom of speech is our fundamental bulwark against tyranny, and prevents tyrants from declaring opposition to their will to be “hate speech” and thereby outlaw it.
Our global elite, even when on the right like Theresa May, are much too prone to censoring free speech. The remedy for bad speech is good speech, not endless and ultimately fairly fruitless attempts to police what people can say and think.
Facebook and Twitter have blocked 90% of their daily referrals from Jihad Watch, and the site is blocked by many Internet service providers in the UK and Europe. Soon, apparently, Google will follow suit.
Westminster attacker acted alone and motive may never be known, say police, say the Guardian. This is an example of the extreme cluelessness of the global elite, where they won’t face up to the reality. They regard much of reality as “hate speech,” and wish only to censor it. Industrial-scale denialism.
Britain’s Mainstream Media Blames ‘Racism’ for Westminster Attack, by Oliver Lane.
In their reporting and social media coverage, Britain’s Daily Telegraph has strongly implied Islamist Khalid Masood went on a killing spree in central London because he’d once been a victim of racism in the past.
If the PC elite didn’t censor information about Jihad and the nature of Islam, everyone would know this was complete bollocks.
The Telegraph are falling for the leftist thought-trap of Structuralism, that societal forces can push people into crime and this is something ‘victims’ of these forces have no control over. This logic denies individuals — like Masood — their agency by absolving them for personal responsibility for actions.
hat-tip Stephen Neil