There are many ways to censor speech and expression. The government can do it. Big tech can do it. But there's no better way than by allowing us to do it to ourselves.
As a teacher, I operate within rather strict lines—boundaries that dictate where I may tread. This is exactly how it should not be. Instead, educators should be granted incredibly broad swaths of intellectual and social terrain, not merely permitted but actively encouraged to explore. Venturing into “dangerous” places keeps the adventure of learning alive, as it did when I began teaching in the early 1990s.
Today, teaching often resembles zoo-keeping: maintaining cages, limiting exposure by age (“kids this age may view the primates”), and confining unruly groups “for their own safety,” etc. This rigid structure draws from 19th- and early 20th-century influences, shaped by figures like Thomas Jefferson, who envisioned education for enlightened citizens; Horace Mann, the architect of common schools for moral and civic uplift; and John Dewey, who championed experiential learning for democracy. Over time, early Christian objectives of character and Biblical understanding evolved—amid industrialization—into emphases on obedience and technical competency. What began as critical thinking for a freer nation shifted toward frameworks like critical theory, transforming the goal of empowered individuals into producing a docile, well-controlled populace of workers who might have been seen as indentured servants two centuries prior.
Orwell nailed this dystopian slide in Animal Farm and 1984, where control over thought is paramount. Ideological forces prioritize restricting information in academia, media, and communication because a dangerous idea pales next to a dangerous question. And that is why teachers are graciously afforded Marxian bumpers, like so many bowling balls, lest future workers wind up in the gutters. It’s time we knock those bumpers down, and reclaim education’s exploratory spirit. Free minds and people by hating hate speech and once again freeing speech!
Martin Luther King was not pushing identity or conformity, but freedom when he said: “Let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania. Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California. Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.”
Among many other anecdotes to go along with your thoughts, I left a beloved 33 career of teaching in public schools in part because of this:
A student inquired about the swastika on the packaging of Asian mushroom powder I use to make a quick lunch bowl of faux pho. I explained that the Buddhist swastika pictured was the inspiration for the Nazi version which simply reversed it, that both indicated “rising sun” or “better world” to those who admire the symbols. I drew both versions on the board to ease the confusion, explaining, “We don’t all see improved world the same way.” In the eyes of my administrators, this was “too much” for the 10th graders, inappropriate and indefensible and cause for discipline.
Agreed. However these censorships are still just that. Bandaids that be ripped off and replaced. All the way up to it's fill recovery, it looks like a wilting rose, until is just a scar that you yourself can't remember obtaining. Lost in the past, covered up by present, and feared of what may come to be. It does however make the bo bo feel better temporarily. It's a permanent problem that's subject to insecurities. And as creatures of emotion before logic.. well, even im vulnerable.
(..) from a social point of view with regard to society (politics):
Threat to the free exchange of ideas: Self-censorship undermines the basis of a well-functioning society - the free exchange of ideas. It stifles the debate and hinders the development of thinking and hinders progress in all aspects of life, including politics.
Silence of dissent: The text silences the historical use of censorship in order to silence dissenting voices. This is particularly relevant in politics, where open criticism and alternative points of view are crucial in order to hold power accountable and promote a living democracy.
Effects on artistic expression: Art and literature often act as mirrors that reflect social problems and trigger important conversations. Self-censorship by artists weakens this role and hinders the research of potentially controversial but decisive political issues.
Echo chambers and conformity: Self-censorship promotes echo chambers in which people are only exposed to ideas with which they already agree. This weakens critical thinking and hinders the development of informed political opinions.
Balancing Act: The text recognizes the need for boundaries, especially with regard to hate speech and threats of violence. However, it emphasizes the importance of finding a delicate balance between protecting freedom of expression and addressing these legitimate concerns. This is a complex topic in political discourse, where a robust debate can become heated without resorting to harmful rhetoric.
Overall, the text offers a convincing argument from a social and political point of view. Self-censorship, if it is uncontrolled, can create a climate of fear and stifle exactly the dialogue that is necessary for a healthy democracy. (..)
RE: cultural, historical and art institutions: I am a retired museum curator and for 35 years investigated how history repeats itself through research, exhibitions and public programs. During the plandemic I could not set foot in one due to my refusal of the experimental injection. From what I can see there’s been an erosion of how exhibitions have taken on a woke narrative. For example the Vancouver Art Gallery exhibit called, Conceptions Of White claims “An exhibition that examines the myths and meanings behind the idea of a “White race” a relatively recent invention that helped shape the modern world. The exhibition examines the origins, travel and present reality of “Colonial Whiteness” as a concept and racial invention that classifies degrees of civility/humanity. According to them it’s really bad to be white! So shame us to no end.
El judeomessianisme fa gairebé dos mil anys que escampa entre nosaltres el seu missatge verinós. Els universalismes democràtics i comunistes són més recents, però només han reforçat la vella narrativa jueva. Són els mateixos ideals.
Els ideals transnacionals, transracials, transsexuals, transculturals que aquestes ideologies ens prediquen (més enllà dels pobles, races, cultures) i que són el sosteniment diari de les nostres escoles, als nostres mitjans de comunicació, a la nostra cultura popular, a les nostres universitats, i sobre al nostres els carrers han acabat reduint la nostra identitat biosimbòlica i el nostre orgull ètnic a la seva mínima expressió.
El judaisme, el cristianisme i l'islam són cultes a la mort originats a l'Orient Mitjà i totalment aliens a Europa i als seus pobles. De vegades ens preguntem per què l'esquerra europea es porta tan bé amb els musulmans. Per què un moviment sovint obertament antireligiós es posa del costat d'una religiositat ferotge que sembla oposar-se a gairebé tot allò que l'esquerra sempre ha pretès defensar? Part de l'explicació rau en el fet que l'islam i el marxisme tenen una arrel ideològica comuna: el judaisme.
Don Rumsfeld tenia raó quan va dir: "Europa s'ha desplaçat en el seu eix", va ser el bàndol equivocat que va guanyar la Segona Guerra Mundial, i es fa més clar cada dia . . . Què ha fet l'OTAN per defensar Europa? Absolutament res . . . Els meus enemics no són a Moscou, Damasc, Teheran, Riad o algun eteri bogeyman teutónic, els meus enemics són a Washington, Brusselles i Tel Aviv . . . Els nacionalsocialistes van venir a alliberar París, nosaltres no el vam destruir.
Cap país segueix el seu propi curs en aquesta invasió perquè és una agenda política liderada per l'ONU i impulsada pels jueus i els seus titelles (polítics). La majoria de la gent simplement no sap ni entén que aquesta és una agenda política. Tanmateix, alguns aconsegueixen entendre que els polítics estan treballant deliberadament per importar musulmans i substituir gent, però això és tot, són com un ordinador que no pot funcionar perquè el programa no ho permet.
Perhaps, for art to thrive and flourish, we MUST get to that point. Art needs a purpose, and the new counter-culture is the anti-establishment, anti-woke vanguard that is currently being bullied and threatened out of the established theatres and publishing houses.
Good, I say. Those comfortable places are not where real art can happen.
We are experiencing a psychological operation deployed by the government and perpetuated by our media. It’s an active and concerted effort to manage behavior thru speech. You did a great job of defining their technique with real examples. A wonderfully cathartic read. Thanks.
The root of the censorship is about racial differences. Our society is at war with reality, and speaking accurately about racial differences is the greatest taboo. Heather MacDonald's latest book documents the tremendous destruction of our society being caused by the stubborn refusal to face the plain facts.
Wonderful article. I leave in Canada but was born elsewhere in a French-speaking African country. I honestly get entirely the impacts of the controlled language and it's not fun at all. Happy to find a place where we can share these thoughts.
As a teacher, I operate within rather strict lines—boundaries that dictate where I may tread. This is exactly how it should not be. Instead, educators should be granted incredibly broad swaths of intellectual and social terrain, not merely permitted but actively encouraged to explore. Venturing into “dangerous” places keeps the adventure of learning alive, as it did when I began teaching in the early 1990s.
Today, teaching often resembles zoo-keeping: maintaining cages, limiting exposure by age (“kids this age may view the primates”), and confining unruly groups “for their own safety,” etc. This rigid structure draws from 19th- and early 20th-century influences, shaped by figures like Thomas Jefferson, who envisioned education for enlightened citizens; Horace Mann, the architect of common schools for moral and civic uplift; and John Dewey, who championed experiential learning for democracy. Over time, early Christian objectives of character and Biblical understanding evolved—amid industrialization—into emphases on obedience and technical competency. What began as critical thinking for a freer nation shifted toward frameworks like critical theory, transforming the goal of empowered individuals into producing a docile, well-controlled populace of workers who might have been seen as indentured servants two centuries prior.
Orwell nailed this dystopian slide in Animal Farm and 1984, where control over thought is paramount. Ideological forces prioritize restricting information in academia, media, and communication because a dangerous idea pales next to a dangerous question. And that is why teachers are graciously afforded Marxian bumpers, like so many bowling balls, lest future workers wind up in the gutters. It’s time we knock those bumpers down, and reclaim education’s exploratory spirit. Free minds and people by hating hate speech and once again freeing speech!
Martin Luther King was not pushing identity or conformity, but freedom when he said: “Let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania. Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California. Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.”
Oof I love/hate this. THANK YOU!
Among many other anecdotes to go along with your thoughts, I left a beloved 33 career of teaching in public schools in part because of this:
A student inquired about the swastika on the packaging of Asian mushroom powder I use to make a quick lunch bowl of faux pho. I explained that the Buddhist swastika pictured was the inspiration for the Nazi version which simply reversed it, that both indicated “rising sun” or “better world” to those who admire the symbols. I drew both versions on the board to ease the confusion, explaining, “We don’t all see improved world the same way.” In the eyes of my administrators, this was “too much” for the 10th graders, inappropriate and indefensible and cause for discipline.
Once again, thank you for sharing. My apologies for taking so long to respond. Much appreciated.
"Free Speech as a Right and a Way of Life" (Sep 11, 2024) by Gregory Salmieri:
https://newideal.aynrand.org/free-speech-as-a-right-and-a-way-of-life-part-1/
Agreed. However these censorships are still just that. Bandaids that be ripped off and replaced. All the way up to it's fill recovery, it looks like a wilting rose, until is just a scar that you yourself can't remember obtaining. Lost in the past, covered up by present, and feared of what may come to be. It does however make the bo bo feel better temporarily. It's a permanent problem that's subject to insecurities. And as creatures of emotion before logic.. well, even im vulnerable.
(..) from a social point of view with regard to society (politics):
Threat to the free exchange of ideas: Self-censorship undermines the basis of a well-functioning society - the free exchange of ideas. It stifles the debate and hinders the development of thinking and hinders progress in all aspects of life, including politics.
Silence of dissent: The text silences the historical use of censorship in order to silence dissenting voices. This is particularly relevant in politics, where open criticism and alternative points of view are crucial in order to hold power accountable and promote a living democracy.
Effects on artistic expression: Art and literature often act as mirrors that reflect social problems and trigger important conversations. Self-censorship by artists weakens this role and hinders the research of potentially controversial but decisive political issues.
Echo chambers and conformity: Self-censorship promotes echo chambers in which people are only exposed to ideas with which they already agree. This weakens critical thinking and hinders the development of informed political opinions.
Balancing Act: The text recognizes the need for boundaries, especially with regard to hate speech and threats of violence. However, it emphasizes the importance of finding a delicate balance between protecting freedom of expression and addressing these legitimate concerns. This is a complex topic in political discourse, where a robust debate can become heated without resorting to harmful rhetoric.
Overall, the text offers a convincing argument from a social and political point of view. Self-censorship, if it is uncontrolled, can create a climate of fear and stifle exactly the dialogue that is necessary for a healthy democracy. (..)
RE: cultural, historical and art institutions: I am a retired museum curator and for 35 years investigated how history repeats itself through research, exhibitions and public programs. During the plandemic I could not set foot in one due to my refusal of the experimental injection. From what I can see there’s been an erosion of how exhibitions have taken on a woke narrative. For example the Vancouver Art Gallery exhibit called, Conceptions Of White claims “An exhibition that examines the myths and meanings behind the idea of a “White race” a relatively recent invention that helped shape the modern world. The exhibition examines the origins, travel and present reality of “Colonial Whiteness” as a concept and racial invention that classifies degrees of civility/humanity. According to them it’s really bad to be white! So shame us to no end.
El judeomessianisme fa gairebé dos mil anys que escampa entre nosaltres el seu missatge verinós. Els universalismes democràtics i comunistes són més recents, però només han reforçat la vella narrativa jueva. Són els mateixos ideals.
Els ideals transnacionals, transracials, transsexuals, transculturals que aquestes ideologies ens prediquen (més enllà dels pobles, races, cultures) i que són el sosteniment diari de les nostres escoles, als nostres mitjans de comunicació, a la nostra cultura popular, a les nostres universitats, i sobre al nostres els carrers han acabat reduint la nostra identitat biosimbòlica i el nostre orgull ètnic a la seva mínima expressió.
El judaisme, el cristianisme i l'islam són cultes a la mort originats a l'Orient Mitjà i totalment aliens a Europa i als seus pobles. De vegades ens preguntem per què l'esquerra europea es porta tan bé amb els musulmans. Per què un moviment sovint obertament antireligiós es posa del costat d'una religiositat ferotge que sembla oposar-se a gairebé tot allò que l'esquerra sempre ha pretès defensar? Part de l'explicació rau en el fet que l'islam i el marxisme tenen una arrel ideològica comuna: el judaisme.
Don Rumsfeld tenia raó quan va dir: "Europa s'ha desplaçat en el seu eix", va ser el bàndol equivocat que va guanyar la Segona Guerra Mundial, i es fa més clar cada dia . . . Què ha fet l'OTAN per defensar Europa? Absolutament res . . . Els meus enemics no són a Moscou, Damasc, Teheran, Riad o algun eteri bogeyman teutónic, els meus enemics són a Washington, Brusselles i Tel Aviv . . . Els nacionalsocialistes van venir a alliberar París, nosaltres no el vam destruir.
Cap país segueix el seu propi curs en aquesta invasió perquè és una agenda política liderada per l'ONU i impulsada pels jueus i els seus titelles (polítics). La majoria de la gent simplement no sap ni entén que aquesta és una agenda política. Tanmateix, alguns aconsegueixen entendre que els polítics estan treballant deliberadament per importar musulmans i substituir gent, però això és tot, són com un ordinador que no pot funcionar perquè el programa no ho permet.
https://cwspangle.substack.com/p/pardonne-mon-francais-va-te-faire
Wait, this is in Catalan!
And now I'm permaband from Twitter because I refused to censor myself anymore. I guess moderation is for the weak👍🏽
I called Melanie Joly a bimbo and had to delete that post to be let back in.
Twitter didn't even give me that option, so it most have been bad but I don't remember what I could have written.
Perhaps, for art to thrive and flourish, we MUST get to that point. Art needs a purpose, and the new counter-culture is the anti-establishment, anti-woke vanguard that is currently being bullied and threatened out of the established theatres and publishing houses.
Good, I say. Those comfortable places are not where real art can happen.
Truthfulness begins with the self. Thank you for this article.
We are experiencing a psychological operation deployed by the government and perpetuated by our media. It’s an active and concerted effort to manage behavior thru speech. You did a great job of defining their technique with real examples. A wonderfully cathartic read. Thanks.
The root of the censorship is about racial differences. Our society is at war with reality, and speaking accurately about racial differences is the greatest taboo. Heather MacDonald's latest book documents the tremendous destruction of our society being caused by the stubborn refusal to face the plain facts.
Wonderful article. I leave in Canada but was born elsewhere in a French-speaking African country. I honestly get entirely the impacts of the controlled language and it's not fun at all. Happy to find a place where we can share these thoughts.
Thank you,
Kind of funny to hear that considering you're at the same time bitching and moaning about nudity on twitter
You mean sexually explicit content being spammed in my replies. Which is relevant because...?
That last bit in your essay: "there is no right, left, or middle" I appreciate that tremendously!