Commentary: Freedom of speech is endangered, but not only because of Mr. Trump.
He attacks journalists verbally. He encourages folks to body-slam reporters. When CNN gets a pipe bomb, Trump blames CNN.
Divisiveness, discord and incivility are encouraged and utilized by politicians – on both sides of the aisle, though most dangerously from one. We got angry when ISIS beheaded a journalist; but now it's acceptable if the killers buy weapons from us. And murder a mere Muslim.
If we manage to save our country, history will mention this period as it does McCarthyism — or the Red Scare, with its Palmer Raids, soon after the Great War.
This moment seems different. In earlier difficult times, people disagreed passionately, even violently; but we shared a reverence for our country's ideals. Both sides wanted to do right and thought they were; and at some point, as more and more members of the public began to learn that McCarthy was a con artist or the Vietnam war was unjustified and counterproductive, opinion shifted. Based largely on facts.
Now, it's less clear that many of us are just missing some facts and could change our minds if we learned more. Imagine trying to use facts and logic to convince a passionate Michigan fan to root for Ohio State. Besides, in the midst of this information explosion, we can find “support” for any position.
Free speech also faces new and subtler challenges. Its venues and enemies have changed.
We can speak our minds at City Council meetings, but much of our so-called political discourse occurs online, in privately owned “town halls” – out of reach of the First Amendment. Billionaire owners of those fora don't like to be taxed and don't want economic equality.
Meanwhile, the natural allies of free expression, the weak, are trampling on it. Progressives, including many women and ethnic minorities, are threatening free speech rights. It's not just politicians and evil capitalists. People with excellent motives, such as protecting the vulnerable from hate speech and verbal harassment, argue, quite reasonably, that we must protect people we’ve wronged.
But vetoing a moot court topic because it involves racists burning crosses is absurd. Yeah, our past and aspects of our present are painful to contemplate; but you don't make real change by pretending racism and violence against women are ghosts under a kid's bed. Strengthening young minds to confront this world's madness makes more sense.
I favor universities imposing rules to prevent people from being targeted by hate speech or bullying; but when it comes to more general public speech, I stand with free speech. Not merely because I'm old, and have said and written unpopular things; but because booting Alex Jones from major Internet communication sites or keeping Richard Spencer from speaking this week could mean banning you or me next week. Yeah, some incredibly hateful and ridiculous things are getting said; but 50 years ago many thought that demanding ethnic equality or opposing the wanton destruction of Vietnam was loony and dangerous.
At the same time, let no one discredit the important concerns motivating these folks. Curtailing free speech is the wrong remedy, but their complaints are real.
Today's brand of censorship by progressives and the legalities of cyber-speech are complex matters reasonable folks could disagree on.
Trumpitis is an acute illness we can heal – if we begin treatment by voting his enablers and sycophants out of office.