A party that bans books is not a champion of free speech. It's just that simple. That one man can get hundreds of books banned by himself is a statement about cowardice on the part of school and library boards.
Deep thinking threatens fascism. It's that simple. Teach children how to analyze what they read and there's nothing to stop them from applying that skill to other areas of experience in their lives. It could be the reason that college educated people didn't vote for Trump. (I am curious however if that also applies to people who graduate from certain conservative religiously based colleges.)
FREE SPEECH? Trump, Musk, DeSantis, and their bleating sheep claim to be for what in truth they are trying to squelch. They prove that they have no appreciation for fine literature, deep thinking, or the sacred joys of creativity. Judd, you ask, "Who Really Supports Free Speech?"--Hey, Everybody! That is up to us! People like Judd Legum, Joyce Vance, Thom Hartmann, and Heather Cox Wilkinson contribute to us magnificently, but we as well are responsible for these rights we cherish.
Well, certainly not the book itself! That would surely be banned (if they understood what it was about.) However, they are certainly enjoying living out the premise. "Animal Farm" is the book that I see being the ultimate playbook for today's fascists: "All pigs are created equal, except some pigs are more equal than other pigs."
I (very liberal) was banned from Twitter before Elon bought it. Part of me was excited when I had heard he was planning to reinstate banned accounts. My account was still banned. He let Nazis and Trump back on. My account was still banned. Free speech absolutist at work.
Apparently the Right hasn’t figured out that humans have been having sex since the dawn of time, and banning books about it won’t change that fact. I had older parents, and they let me read whatever I wanted. As someone said, if you’re banning books, you’re not afraid of books, you’re afraid of ideas. And facts.
Thank you, Judd. I would only add that free speech to Trump means freedom to falsify or exaggerate while free speech to the rest of us means freedom to explore discuss any variety of topics, sometimes with a critical eye.
We have successfully been BLITZED by a concerted effort with Putin and other foreign enemy leaders (trump’s “friends”) In 2004, Al Franken ran for US Senator. I was at a campaign party for him at a home. I was able to talk to him and asked, What can we do about the media? There is so much out- of-control right wing screeching. He acknowledged it but had no answers to address it. That was 20 years ago! And now the fact that we refuse to take action against presidential criminals & monopolies when we could have, is having shock-wave results. Although, I am one of a few people who does not believe for a minute that Harris/Walz lost EVERY swing state with the phenomenal crowds she had. The Harris/Walz team was one of the best we could have hoped for.
What kills critical thinking? Is it lack of education, brainwashed fear of change and/or different ideas, or lack of motivation? Democrats push progressing forward; Republicans champion reverting to a glorious mythological past.
Every accusation against actions of the so-called Deep State are just more projection from the Gaslighters. On a related freedom of speech issue, when will we see the video of the thugs at Arlington National Cemetery? The Pentagon was ordered to release the details about 3 weeks ago.
“The Thought Police are a physical representation of monitoring and controlling the beliefs of citizens. Similarly, media censorship provides an avenue for restriction of information.“ - Kayla Ashbrooks, S. Arkansas U. “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in shapes of your own choosing.” - George Orwell
This comment is not specifically about the Judd post today but it is about the notion of getting lost in the weeds vs coming out of the details and thinking broadly. Also, come on, yes they are going to ban books, censor and generally behave as bad liars. Our strategy against that has to improve because just pointing it out to ourselves doesn't have legs.
One of the things I noticed about this election cycle is how the word ‘Liberal’ is used so generally and with no real definition. What is it to be a ‘Liberal’. For that matter what is it to be a conservative.
It appeared to me that the word Liberal is used poorly and to the detriment of of those of us who love freedom. It is also used as a banner word for a whole host of people with special interests. Now, I understand special interests are important, like climate change. I read posts, and articles claiming liberal origins about climate issues all through the election cycle and I witnessed the ease that these articles were put aside by simply naming them as liberal.
So it seems to me that it would help ‘us’ to make a definition of that word, that after all is not a bad word and it does mean something. But, we have to be consistent and stop letting it be something we get beat up for.
This is also an 80,000 feet vs ground level issue. I do understand how and why people like to stay near the ground. ‘All politics is local’, ‘I have to stay focused on an issue I understand’ all that sort of sentiment which isn’t wrong, it is just diluting and takes up energy without acknowledging that things come in an order. That is, the best move for climate would have been to elect Harris. Likely the worst move is the election of Trump. We all knew this of course and the fact didn’t sit completely silent but it did muddy the waters of the choice as climate became an undefined ‘weak’ ‘liberal’ issue while ‘drill baby drill’ became the ‘strong’ mantra of many. Do you care if we have climate stability but no democracy? Do you think that the super wealthy of the world will suffer equally or at all as climate disasters become increasingly common?
But what does this have to do with having a definition for the word Liberal? Well the word got used not just for climate issues but also in association with pipelines, gender, wars in Ukraine and Israel, animals facing extinction; basically way too many things. In other words it is a polyglot word used by a wide variety of people meaning really very different things and yet it is a good word if we could just own it.
Therefore, from my lowly position in Yertle the turtle’s stack I’m going to burp.
Liberal simply means, those who, while they have opinions, beliefs and what they consider to be facts, they do not use or aspire to use, these positions to control the thoughts or behavior’s of others.
Conservative simply means those who do believe they have the right and even obligation to control and proscribe the thoughts and actions of others.
The definitions of Conservative and Liberal are exactly opposite each other and do not refer to any specific policy or belief.
I don’t expect this burp to topple the pile (read: rearrange the world order) and yet it could be a first step.
Consider this: Why, even now, is Trump considered to be a strong man? And Contrastingly why are Biden and Harris considered to be weak? Yes the propaganda around this issue was huge but also It was simply the ease of the rhetoric around ‘conservatism’, which was tightly focused, and the difficulty of the rhetoric around ‘liberal’ which is not well focused.
Or stated more baldly: Trump et MAGA are happy to tell you what to do while the best Harris could say is ‘we will work together’. Now, in my world the willingness to listen and compromise is strength while the desire to control and force is weak but you see how that worked out.
I’m sure almost no one will agree with me because we all have some cherished relationship with these words. But, in the light of elections being an exercise, first and foremost, in communication we have to admit that if we are to be labeled ‘liberals’ we should all share in a definition of that word that works for us not against us. In the coming wars, hopefully but not necessarily wars of words not guns in the street, we are going to need to be very focused and determined. in order to maintain those qualities we are going to know who we are and to unify around a single concept. Under the above definitions I’m a “liberal” and proud to say so.
And yes, I know and acknowledge in advance that conservatives will not like this definition of conservatism but regardless it does underpin the policy measures, promises and future history that has been laid out for us by our, now, leader and his entourage including the authors and proponents of project 2025. And Why can I be so certain about that reaction in conservatives? Because I know, deeply know, that conservatives understand the policies, wishes and the future history conservatives want is not popular, not wanted by most and only in play because of the complex web of lies told and the power of the ultra wealthy in our system of government.
Therefore and likewise, Liberals do outnumber conservatives. The rest is simply truth vs. lies.
While we’re at it, can we please define woke? I keep reading that “woke” is one of the reasons the Democrats lost but what does that mean? Republicans seem to use it as a sledgehammer in the place of “liberal ideology “. But what are they really talking about?
They use the word "woke" like a child may use to the word "stinky" to describe that which they do not like. For example, they eschew: actual facts, history, art, free speech, different races, languages and the like.
From my perspective as a Black man, the old blues players who orginally coined the term "woke" meant; to be awake, aware of your surroundings AND who populates them, keeping in mind to whom/what their allegiance may be bound.
In other words, when you are "woke" you are paying strict attention, not sleeping!
The DJT administration will stifle as much free speech as it can if that speech is critical of DJT and his peeps. Journalists, like Judd Legum, will be targeted for publishing the truth. This nightmare is just beginning.
The freedom they want is to replace truth with fiction. If you refuse to propagate it, because what they are saying is not true, that is what they call censorship. The followers are offended if you call them a liar, because they truly believe the fiction. The conmen who create the fiction to manipulate followers are liars because they know it is not true. alex jones (Sandy Hook lawsuit), tucker carlson (Dominion lawsuit) are proven liars. Not equating truth to fiction is what they censorship.
Truth.... trump & elon are free to say & do whatever they want ..anyone else? just look at his mentor, putin , to know what happens to "anyone else" .... I refuse to capitalize their names
A party that bans books is not a champion of free speech. It's just that simple. That one man can get hundreds of books banned by himself is a statement about cowardice on the part of school and library boards.
Peter..first sentence says it ALL! 🎯
Precisely! Let's remember your first sentence.
So so true! May I borrow your first sentence?
Deep thinking threatens fascism. It's that simple. Teach children how to analyze what they read and there's nothing to stop them from applying that skill to other areas of experience in their lives. It could be the reason that college educated people didn't vote for Trump. (I am curious however if that also applies to people who graduate from certain conservative religiously based colleges.)
Great point Therese. This is also why public money should never ever sponsor religion in any form, including tax breaks when they build mega churches.
FREE SPEECH? Trump, Musk, DeSantis, and their bleating sheep claim to be for what in truth they are trying to squelch. They prove that they have no appreciation for fine literature, deep thinking, or the sacred joys of creativity. Judd, you ask, "Who Really Supports Free Speech?"--Hey, Everybody! That is up to us! People like Judd Legum, Joyce Vance, Thom Hartmann, and Heather Cox Wilkinson contribute to us magnificently, but we as well are responsible for these rights we cherish.
Her name is Heather Cox Richardson.
Thanks, I knew it wasn't the name but glad it got through.
They do seem to appreciate George Orwell's 1984.
Well, certainly not the book itself! That would surely be banned (if they understood what it was about.) However, they are certainly enjoying living out the premise. "Animal Farm" is the book that I see being the ultimate playbook for today's fascists: "All pigs are created equal, except some pigs are more equal than other pigs."
...more equal if bigger, fatter, and louder!
You got it.
Freedom to lie with intent to harm; regardless of who is harmed...apparently, this is the intent First Amendment in the minds of the GOP.
I feel so badly for Hunter Biden and his family. He never held any position of service or power in government; was just unlucky that his father did.
I will consider Biden to be a fool unless he pardons his son and numerous others, including Snowden, Manning etc
All things considered, you may be right about that
And, all those on Death Row--commute their sentences to Life. Then if they are discovered to be innocent they'll still be alive.
Very interesting thought.
I (very liberal) was banned from Twitter before Elon bought it. Part of me was excited when I had heard he was planning to reinstate banned accounts. My account was still banned. He let Nazis and Trump back on. My account was still banned. Free speech absolutist at work.
Why would anyone want to stay on Xitter?! It’s nothing but a cesspool of disinformation that enriches Musk.
Apparently the Right hasn’t figured out that humans have been having sex since the dawn of time, and banning books about it won’t change that fact. I had older parents, and they let me read whatever I wanted. As someone said, if you’re banning books, you’re not afraid of books, you’re afraid of ideas. And facts.
Thank you, Judd. I would only add that free speech to Trump means freedom to falsify or exaggerate while free speech to the rest of us means freedom to explore discuss any variety of topics, sometimes with a critical eye.
We have successfully been BLITZED by a concerted effort with Putin and other foreign enemy leaders (trump’s “friends”) In 2004, Al Franken ran for US Senator. I was at a campaign party for him at a home. I was able to talk to him and asked, What can we do about the media? There is so much out- of-control right wing screeching. He acknowledged it but had no answers to address it. That was 20 years ago! And now the fact that we refuse to take action against presidential criminals & monopolies when we could have, is having shock-wave results. Although, I am one of a few people who does not believe for a minute that Harris/Walz lost EVERY swing state with the phenomenal crowds she had. The Harris/Walz team was one of the best we could have hoped for.
What kills critical thinking? Is it lack of education, brainwashed fear of change and/or different ideas, or lack of motivation? Democrats push progressing forward; Republicans champion reverting to a glorious mythological past.
Every accusation against actions of the so-called Deep State are just more projection from the Gaslighters. On a related freedom of speech issue, when will we see the video of the thugs at Arlington National Cemetery? The Pentagon was ordered to release the details about 3 weeks ago.
“The Thought Police are a physical representation of monitoring and controlling the beliefs of citizens. Similarly, media censorship provides an avenue for restriction of information.“ - Kayla Ashbrooks, S. Arkansas U. “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in shapes of your own choosing.” - George Orwell
State level censorship will be the fascist path. For the time being.
This comment is not specifically about the Judd post today but it is about the notion of getting lost in the weeds vs coming out of the details and thinking broadly. Also, come on, yes they are going to ban books, censor and generally behave as bad liars. Our strategy against that has to improve because just pointing it out to ourselves doesn't have legs.
One of the things I noticed about this election cycle is how the word ‘Liberal’ is used so generally and with no real definition. What is it to be a ‘Liberal’. For that matter what is it to be a conservative.
It appeared to me that the word Liberal is used poorly and to the detriment of of those of us who love freedom. It is also used as a banner word for a whole host of people with special interests. Now, I understand special interests are important, like climate change. I read posts, and articles claiming liberal origins about climate issues all through the election cycle and I witnessed the ease that these articles were put aside by simply naming them as liberal.
So it seems to me that it would help ‘us’ to make a definition of that word, that after all is not a bad word and it does mean something. But, we have to be consistent and stop letting it be something we get beat up for.
This is also an 80,000 feet vs ground level issue. I do understand how and why people like to stay near the ground. ‘All politics is local’, ‘I have to stay focused on an issue I understand’ all that sort of sentiment which isn’t wrong, it is just diluting and takes up energy without acknowledging that things come in an order. That is, the best move for climate would have been to elect Harris. Likely the worst move is the election of Trump. We all knew this of course and the fact didn’t sit completely silent but it did muddy the waters of the choice as climate became an undefined ‘weak’ ‘liberal’ issue while ‘drill baby drill’ became the ‘strong’ mantra of many. Do you care if we have climate stability but no democracy? Do you think that the super wealthy of the world will suffer equally or at all as climate disasters become increasingly common?
But what does this have to do with having a definition for the word Liberal? Well the word got used not just for climate issues but also in association with pipelines, gender, wars in Ukraine and Israel, animals facing extinction; basically way too many things. In other words it is a polyglot word used by a wide variety of people meaning really very different things and yet it is a good word if we could just own it.
Therefore, from my lowly position in Yertle the turtle’s stack I’m going to burp.
Liberal simply means, those who, while they have opinions, beliefs and what they consider to be facts, they do not use or aspire to use, these positions to control the thoughts or behavior’s of others.
Conservative simply means those who do believe they have the right and even obligation to control and proscribe the thoughts and actions of others.
The definitions of Conservative and Liberal are exactly opposite each other and do not refer to any specific policy or belief.
I don’t expect this burp to topple the pile (read: rearrange the world order) and yet it could be a first step.
Consider this: Why, even now, is Trump considered to be a strong man? And Contrastingly why are Biden and Harris considered to be weak? Yes the propaganda around this issue was huge but also It was simply the ease of the rhetoric around ‘conservatism’, which was tightly focused, and the difficulty of the rhetoric around ‘liberal’ which is not well focused.
Or stated more baldly: Trump et MAGA are happy to tell you what to do while the best Harris could say is ‘we will work together’. Now, in my world the willingness to listen and compromise is strength while the desire to control and force is weak but you see how that worked out.
I’m sure almost no one will agree with me because we all have some cherished relationship with these words. But, in the light of elections being an exercise, first and foremost, in communication we have to admit that if we are to be labeled ‘liberals’ we should all share in a definition of that word that works for us not against us. In the coming wars, hopefully but not necessarily wars of words not guns in the street, we are going to need to be very focused and determined. in order to maintain those qualities we are going to know who we are and to unify around a single concept. Under the above definitions I’m a “liberal” and proud to say so.
And yes, I know and acknowledge in advance that conservatives will not like this definition of conservatism but regardless it does underpin the policy measures, promises and future history that has been laid out for us by our, now, leader and his entourage including the authors and proponents of project 2025. And Why can I be so certain about that reaction in conservatives? Because I know, deeply know, that conservatives understand the policies, wishes and the future history conservatives want is not popular, not wanted by most and only in play because of the complex web of lies told and the power of the ultra wealthy in our system of government.
Therefore and likewise, Liberals do outnumber conservatives. The rest is simply truth vs. lies.
I agree with your sentiments wholeheartedly.
While we’re at it, can we please define woke? I keep reading that “woke” is one of the reasons the Democrats lost but what does that mean? Republicans seem to use it as a sledgehammer in the place of “liberal ideology “. But what are they really talking about?
They use the word "woke" like a child may use to the word "stinky" to describe that which they do not like. For example, they eschew: actual facts, history, art, free speech, different races, languages and the like.
From my perspective as a Black man, the old blues players who orginally coined the term "woke" meant; to be awake, aware of your surroundings AND who populates them, keeping in mind to whom/what their allegiance may be bound.
In other words, when you are "woke" you are paying strict attention, not sleeping!
They are using it as a cudgel to hurt people. I just wish Trump’s followers and pundits would define what they mean! It’s just being used as an insult
The DJT administration will stifle as much free speech as it can if that speech is critical of DJT and his peeps. Journalists, like Judd Legum, will be targeted for publishing the truth. This nightmare is just beginning.
The freedom they want is to replace truth with fiction. If you refuse to propagate it, because what they are saying is not true, that is what they call censorship. The followers are offended if you call them a liar, because they truly believe the fiction. The conmen who create the fiction to manipulate followers are liars because they know it is not true. alex jones (Sandy Hook lawsuit), tucker carlson (Dominion lawsuit) are proven liars. Not equating truth to fiction is what they censorship.
Truth.... trump & elon are free to say & do whatever they want ..anyone else? just look at his mentor, putin , to know what happens to "anyone else" .... I refuse to capitalize their names