So-called hate speech has a wide and often political interpretation
April 18, 2014
Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, has introduced The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014 (S.2219) in the Senate.
“We have recently seen in Kansas the deadly destruction and loss of life that hate speech can fuel in the United States,” Markey said, “which is why it is critical to ensure the Internet, television and radio are not encouraging hate crimes or hate speech that is not outside the protection of the First Amendment.”
The legislation proposes updating a twenty year old report on the role the internet, radio and TV allegedly play “in encouraging hate crimes based on gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.” The report would then be submitted to respective committees in the House and Senate for action.
So-called hate speech has a wide interpretation. In addition to going after people who do not follow politically correct etiquette (for instance, Christians who oppose homosexuality), hate crime definitions often include political speech unacceptable to the establishment orthodoxy.
Liberals now routinely characterize patriot groups as part of the hate constellation that includes the Ku Klux Klan and white supremacists. For instance, media attention, according to Mother Jones, the George Soros funded magazine, put the Oath Keepers “on the radar of anti-hate groups. Last year, the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center both name-checked the group in their reports on rising anti-government extremism.” The group does not espouse hatred against racial minorities, homosexuals, or other government preferred groups. It was established to advocate members, who are current and former U.S. military and law enforcement, disobey orders given if they believe those orders violate the Constitution.
The Southern Poverty Law Center routinely conflates racial hatred with so-called anti-government extremism. For the SPLC and liberals in general, distrust and even hatred of the government is a crime on par with racism or homophobia. Many leftist libs insist tea party and patriot groups are “channeling the spirit of Timothy McVeigh,” thus conjuring dangerous hatred the government must address.
Beyond the rhetoric and boundless hyperbole espoused by people who defend government and are on a crusade in favor of minorities, there is a more practical objective to Sen. Markey’s proposed legislation – to deny their political enemies the right to practice the First Amendment and utilize broadcast and internet technology to disseminate it.
Markey’s legislation demonstrates how lovers of the state and the power it wields often capriciously over the individual never rest in their authoritarian quest to silence political enemies.