MixCollage-05-May-2025-03-51-PM-2979

Woman Charged For Racial Slur. Your Free Speech Rights Are Gone.

Free Speech

Hate Speech

Immigrants

Jail

Matt Walsh

Minnesota

Opinion

Somalia

As a clinical psychologist, I help people find the words to express what they’re feeling. For most of my career, this was a straightforward process — mostly supporting clients with anxiety and relationship or career issues. But over the past few years, I’ve noticed a shift. More and more, clients arrive not just with anxiety — but with speech anxiety. They’re not afraid of public speaking. They’re afraid that voicing a viewpoint could harm others — or be interpreted as harm itself. 
 
We’re living in a cultural moment where phrases like “words are violence” have moved from the margins into the mainstream. The instinct behind the idea is understandable. It’s rooted in compassion and a desire to protect others from emotional pain. But as someone who works with people in distress, I can say this: equating speech with physical violence doesn’t foster safety. It fosters fragility — and avoidance of the very emotional tools we need to thrive. 
 
Yes, words can hurt. They can be cruel, dismissive, even traumatizing but to label words as violent collapses a crucial distinction. Physical violence is something we’re biologically wired to avoid at all costs. It triggers a primal response — fight, flight, freeze — that can be lifesaving, in the right context. But when we teach people to respond to challenging conversations as if they’re being physically attacked, we inadvertently hijack that same physiological stress response. We turn everyday discomfort into a perceived emergency. 
 
This distinction isn’t just philosophical — it’s embedded in clinical ethics. As a licensed psychologist, I’m legally required to break confidentiality if a client discloses an imminent threat of physical violence. But if a client tells me they plan to say something rude, offensive, or even hateful, I’m not only permitted to keep that information confidential — I’m obligated to do so. That’s because speech and violence are fundamentally different categories of concern. One may call for a conversation. The other may call for an intervention. Blurring that boundary in everyday life creates confusion, not clarity. 
 
This can lead to serious emotional fallout. Clients tell me they’ve ended friendships, distanced themselves from family, or left jobs because of political or social disagreements that they once would have handled with a spirited discussion. They often say they feel “unsafe” around people with differing views — not because of any actual threat, but because of what those views might represent. That interpretation leads not to empowerment, but to chronic anxiety. 
 
Over time, this kind of hypervigilance doesn’t just shape relationships, it reshapes the self. In therapy, I see people move through the classic defense mechanisms we’re trained to watch for: suppression, repression, and denial. Suppression is when you’re aware of a thought or feeling but actively push it down. Repression is when the mind buries those thoughts so deeply that you’re no longer even conscious of them. Denial occurs when a person distorts their view of reality to avoid an uncomfortable truth. 
 
When people feel they must stifle their thoughts or language to remain socially acceptable, suppression is often the first step. But if suppression becomes a habit, it can slide into repression — people lose access to parts of themselves. Eventually, they may engage in denial: reframing a difficult relationship or viewpoint not as a difference of opinion, but as a danger to be avoided. From a mental health standpoint, this is where we start to see symptoms escalate — more anxiety, more relational conflict, and a diminished capacity to process emotions with nuance. 
 
This dynamic also connects to a broader societal trend. In 2023, the U.S. Surgeon General <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37792968/">declared loneliness</a> a public health epidemic. We are more digitally connected than ever — and yet we feel increasingly cut off. That’s partly because people are afraid to express themselves authentically. If you’re always editing what you say — or editing who you are — you’re not really connecting. You’re performing. And performance doesn’t build intimacy. 
 
The goal isn’t to dismiss emotional pain or encourage rudeness. Psychological abuse is real, and words can leave deep scars. But we must be careful not to overextend the concept of harm to the point where disagreement feels dangerous. When that happens, people don’t just walk away from conflict — they walk away from each other. 
 
We also risk missing the bigger picture: that open dialogue is one of the most effective tools we have for growth, both individually and socially. Research in conflict resolution shows that meaningful change often begins with conversation — not censorship. Even in extreme cases — such as hate group de-radicalization — studies repeatedly show that dialogue, not silence, is what moves people out of entrenched thinking. 
 
What we need now is a more balanced framework — one that acknowledges the emotional impact of speech without mistaking it for physical harm. We should be equipping people with emotional skills: the ability to tolerate discomfort, name their feelings, and respond with clarity instead of retreating in fear. These are the building blocks of psychological resilience and they’re far more protective than trying to sanitize the world of anything potentially upsetting. 
 
In my work, I’ve seen that when people stop fearing their own voices — and stop fearing others’ — they grow stronger. They communicate better. They form deeper, more authentic relationships. That doesn’t happen when we treat words like weapons. It happens when we remember what words are for: understanding, connection, and sometimes, respectful disagreement. 
 
Words can hurt. But they can also heal. Let’s not confuse one for the other — because when we do, we risk losing the ability to use language as the powerful, human tool it’s meant to be.
* * *
Dr. Chloe Carmichael is a clinical psychologist, USA Today bestselling author of &#8220;Nervous Energy,&#8221; and a visiting fellow at Independent Women. Her <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/151078490X/ref=cm_sw_r_as_gl_apa_gl_i_BPB78R7NVWK0ZVAJQ088?linkCode=ml1&amp;tag=ivba-20">upcoming book</a> &#8220;Can I Say That? Why Free Speech Matters and How to Use It Fearlessly&#8221; (Skyhorse, Nov. 2025) explores the mental health benefits of open dialogue and the costs of self-censorship.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Medium shot of businessman discussing project with colleague

Words Are Not Violence And Here’s Why That Matters

Anxiety

Psychology

Violence

Woke Culture

Vice President JD Vance blasted a trio of German prosecutors who said during an interview with &#8220;60 Minutes&#8221; that insults — both in person and online — are <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/guest-on-60-minutes-claims-german-citizens-have-free-speech-but-there-are-limits" target="_blank" rel="noopener">illegal</a> in their country.
The &#8220;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bMzFDpfDwc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">60 Minutes</a>&#8221; segment that aired on Sunday reported on Germany&#8217;s enforcement of its &#8220;hate speech&#8221; law, which has been around since 2017, and showed police raiding German citizens&#8217; homes and confiscating electronics over social media posts. During the interview, all three German state prosecutors told host Sharyn Alfonsi that insulting someone in public and online is criminal. Those who break the law are usually punished with a stiff fine, but repeat offenders could be thrown in jail.
&#8220;The fine could be even higher if you insult someone in the internet,&#8221; said state prosecutor Dr. Matthäus Fink, adding, &#8220;Because in internet, it stays there. If we are talking face to face, you insult me, I insult you, okay. Finish. But if you&#8217;re in the internet, if I insult you or a politician &#8230;&#8221;
&#8220;It sticks around forever,&#8221; Alfonsi said to Fink&#8217;s agreement.
State prosecutor Svenja Meininghaus added that reposting a lie — which could include gossip or fake quotes — is also a criminal action in Germany &#8220;because the reader can&#8217;t distinguish whether you just invented this or just reposted it.&#8221;
Along with fining offenders of the hate speech law, judges sometimes confiscate their phones.
&#8220;How do they react when you take their phones from them?&#8221; Alfonsi asked.
<a href="http://dailywire.com/subscribe">PRESIDENTS’ DAY SALE! 40% Off DailyWire+ Annual Memberships With Code DW40</a>
&#8220;They are shocked,&#8221; replied Frank-Michael Laue as the prosecutors laughed.
Vance, who spoke in Munich last week and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-people-have-a-voice-vance-warns-europe-about-censorship-the-threat-from-within" target="_blank" rel="noopener">warned</a> Europe against censorship, blasted the &#8220;Orwellian&#8221; German hate speech law on Monday.
&#8220;Insulting someone is not a crime, and criminalizing speech is going to put real strain on European-US relationships,&#8221; the vice president posted on X. &#8220;This is Orwellian, and everyone in Europe and the US must reject this lunacy.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Insulting someone is not a crime, and criminalizing speech is going to put real strain on European-US relationships. 
This is Orwellian, and everyone in Europe and the US must reject this lunacy. <a href="https://t.co/WZSifyDWMr">https://t.co/WZSifyDWMr</a>
&mdash; JD Vance (@JDVance) <a href="https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/1891467842106630244?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 17, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
During his Friday speech at the Munich Security Conference, Vance ripped European countries that have cracked down on free speech.
“I believe deeply that there is no security if you’re afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people,” Vance said. “Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis, I believe we all face together, is one of our own making. If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you. Nor, for that matter, is there anything that you can do for the American people who elected me and elected President Trump.”

JD Vance

German Prosecutors Tell ’60 Minutes’ That An Insult Is A Crime. JD Vance Blasts ‘Orwellian’ Law.

60 Minutes

Censorship

Germany

Global Politics

Social Media Censorship

World

It’s one thing to hear the alarm go off … and another to roll out of bed and hit the ground running. After several years of increasing revelations about the growing complex of private enterprises, non-profit organizations, and governments — federal and state — that have been censoring Americans’ speech, it’s refreshing to see political leadership that throws back the covers and <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-the-weaponization-of-the-federal-government/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">confronts the danger head-on</a>.
Our newly re-elected president, to his credit, seems clear-eyed on what we’re facing. “If we don’t have free speech, then we just don’t have a free country — it’s as simple as that,” now President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNcLWKdyiOY&amp;t=403s" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told the nation</a> shortly after the November election. “If this most fundamental right is allowed to perish, then the rest of our rights and liberties will topple … like dominoes.”
Few people in the public eye have as much reason as the president to take seriously the blunt instrument of political censorship being wielded against all Americans by the <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/Biden-WH-Censorship-Report-final.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">federal government</a>, its <a href="https://www.standingforfreedom.com/2023/11/new-york-announces-it-will-take-citizen-surveillance-and-censorship-to-the-next-level/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blue state allies</a>, and their <a href="https://adflegal.org/article/free-speech-issue-our-generation-corporate-cancellations-threat-freedom/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">private enterprise proxies</a>. Even fewer are in so ideal a position to do something about that threat.
The mere fact that Trump is beginning his second term signals his remarkable personal triumph over the massive campaign of censorship hurled against him over the last 10 years. He was still serving his first term when he found himself removed from Facebook, invisible on Google, and locked out of what was then called Twitter.
“This censorship is unlawful, it’s unconstitutional, and it’s completely un-American,” he <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4d6jiGEXWU" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> in 2021, announcing a class-action lawsuit against the three platforms. “We’re demanding an end to the shadow-banning, a stop to the silencing, and a stop to the blacklisting, banishing, and canceling that you know so well.” Four years don’t seem to have assuaged his determination to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNcLWKdyiOY&amp;t=4s" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lay an axe</a> to the roots of the problem.
He won’t be swinging his axe alone. Another key member of the incoming administration, Elon Musk, has already taken some major initiatives, buying Twitter and rebranding it as “X,” after <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60979656" target="_blank" rel="noopener">raising his own questions</a> about political censorship on major social media platforms.
And Rep. Jim Jordan’s congressional subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government has released multiple reports—including <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/final-report-weaponization-federal-government" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one</a> last month detailing the Biden administration’s largely successful “monthslong campaign … to coerce large companies … to censor books, videos, posts, and other content online.” This campaign, the committee’s report concluded, “needlessly imposed harm and suffering on Americans across the country.”
Earlier this month, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg publicly <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPhY5ggQK08" target="_blank" rel="noopener">confirmed</a> those findings, describing how Biden administration officials angrily and aggressively demanded that Facebook remove Covid-related content, “even things that were facts, or memes and humor. When we refused, we found ourselves under investigation by several agencies.” His was one of many social media platforms, he admitted, that buckled under the government’s pressure.
In fact, these revelations are only the tip of a very large iceberg. In recent years, an illegal Cold War against unwelcome messaging and messengers has targeted <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNhGAWtzbTY" target="_blank" rel="noopener">schoolchildren</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qvt5IBRBQ8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">college students</a>, <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/ohio-school-district-coughs-450k-settle-free-speech-case-teacher?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">teachers</a>, <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/families-doctors-affirm-counseling-based-biological-reality-effective?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">counselors</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3vyja7NKrM">artists</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZE6KKpbj1U&amp;t=2s" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pregnancy care centers</a>, <a href="https://adfmedia.org/press-release/adf-court-church-speech-ban-must-go" target="_blank" rel="noopener">churches</a>, <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/de-banking-victim-steve-happ-indigenous-advance-ministries-bank-america-i-dont-want/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ministries</a>, and <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/babylon-bee-files-suit-against-humorless-california-censorship-laws/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped">humor websites</a> all over the country, intimidating ordinary Americans through everything from <a href="https://adflegal.org/article/educators-have-rights-too/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">job termination</a> to <a href="https://adflegal.org/support/debanking-video/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">de-banking</a>, and with threats of <a href="https://adflegal.org/press-release/virginia-photographer-now-free-government-coercion/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">costly fines</a> and even <a href="https://adflegal.org/client/brush-nib-studio/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped" target="_blank" rel="noopener">jail time</a>.
But recognizing the threat — like hearing the alarm — isn’t enough. Someone has to rise to challenges posed by this Censorship Industrial Complex to cut Americans off from news, information, and viewpoints that some in positions of power and authority don’t want them to have.
Fighting this good fight is going to require significant and concentrated effort by the executive and legislative branches to root out the offenders — even within the federal government itself. All records evidencing governmental attempts to censor speech should be made public — after all, those records belong to the American people. The officials who acted to infringe rights of free speech must be held accountable. And each leader in every government agency must make one thing abundantly clear: state power may never be used to censor, limit, or diminish protected speech — it’s that simple.
Thankfully, the incoming administration seems intent on pursuing all these actions — and keenly aware of the stakes. “The fight for free speech is a matter of victory or death for America,” Trump recently said, “and for the survival of Western Civilization itself.”
So the president himself has sounded the alarm, most recently through his executive orders. Here’s hoping the rest of this administration won’t be caught napping.
* * *
Philip A. Sechler is senior counsel and director of the Center for Free Speech at <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/?utm_source=dailywire&amp;utm_medium=oped">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris

Government Officials Who Engaged In Censorship Must Be Held Accountable

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Biden Administration

Donald Trump

Jim Jordan

Misinformation

Governor <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tim-walz" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tim Walz</a> (D-MN) says that there is &#8220;no guarantee to free speech&#8221; when it comes to &#8220;misinformation or hate speech,&#8221; and argued on MSNBC that there needed to be some &#8220;pushback&#8221; on those things.
Walz made the comments during a December 2022 appearance on MSNBC&#8217;s &#8220;The Reidout,&#8221; where he spoke about possible repercussions for spreading &#8220;misinformation&#8221; with regard to elections in the United States.
WATCH:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Walz Says &#039;There&#039;s No Guarantee to Free Speech&#039; for Misinformation, Hate Speech" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WxoH1fgEg9A?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&#8220;I think we need to push back on this. There&#8217;s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy,&#8221; Walz said in the clip that circulated on social media on Wednesday, just 24 hours after Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party&#8217;s 2024 presidential nominee, chose him to be her running mate.
Critics responded to Walz&#8217;s comment, noting that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution begged to differ.
&#8220;I&#8217;d probably die if a Democrat understood what our rights are and how they work,&#8221; Frank Fleming posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
I&#8217;d probably die if a Democrat understood what our rights are and how they work. <a href="https://t.co/JEZIecx7sU">https://t.co/JEZIecx7sU</a>
— Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1821234133672325455?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;There is, actually, it’s called the First Amendment,&#8221; another posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
There is, actually, it’s called the First Amendment. <a href="https://t.co/eJxLnCoSKi">https://t.co/eJxLnCoSKi</a>
— Ramesh Ponnuru (@RameshPonnuru) <a href="https://twitter.com/RameshPonnuru/status/1821251576914198588?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Uh, yeah there is. Misinformation and hate speech are literally protected by the First Amendment,&#8221; Noah Smith pointed out.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/scamala-kamala-harris-unmasked" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH BEN SHAPIRO’S ‘SCAMALA: KAMALA HARRIS UNMASKED’ ON DAILYWIRE+</a>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Uh, yeah there is. Misinformation and hate speech are literally protected by the First Amendment. <a href="https://t.co/YPhoG7ikXa">https://t.co/YPhoG7ikXa</a>
— Noah Smith 🐇🇺🇸🇺🇦 (@Noahpinion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1821247276800676328?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Dude’s a straight up communist. An actual communist,&#8221; Trump adviser Stephen Miller commented.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Dude’s a straight up communist. An actual communist. <a href="https://t.co/LHJ6HGqmBE">https://t.co/LHJ6HGqmBE</a>
— Stephen Miller (@StephenM) <a href="https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/1821226253388804191?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Walz couldn’t be more wrong in suggesting &#8216;there’s no guarantee to free speech&#8217; when it comes to anything progressive Democrats might label &#8216;misinformation&#8217; or &#8216;hate speech.&#8217; Don’t trust this man with power,&#8221; Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Walz couldn’t be more wrong in suggesting “there’s no guarantee to free speech” when it comes to anything progressive Democrats might label “misinformation” or “hate speech.”
Don’t trust this man with power. <a href="https://t.co/HWv5xdXKF9">https://t.co/HWv5xdXKF9</a>
— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) <a href="https://twitter.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1821231380443070590?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 7, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
During the same interview, Walz referenced previous instances in which &#8220;insidious&#8221; efforts at spreading &#8220;misinformation&#8221; had harmed the American people — namely during the COVID-19 pandemic and after January 6th — but he suggested that Democrats were fully engaged in stopping said &#8220;misinformation&#8221; rather than spreading it.
WATCH the full interview here:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Minnesota Gov. Walz Asks Fellow Democrats To ‘Think Big’ When It Comes To Fixing Voting Issues" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y8ns76RCmWs?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

US-VOTE-POLITICS-HARRIS-WALZ

Tim Walz Says ‘There’s No Guarantee To Free Speech,’ Wants Government ‘Pushback’ On ‘Hate Speech’

Tim Walz Says 'There's No Guarantee To Free Speech,' Wants Government 'Pushback' On 'Hate Speech'

First Amendment

Kamala Harris

Tim Walz

When college and university students — whose historical and constitutional obliviousness is matched only by their self-assured morality of outrage and entitlement — face no discipline from the adults who have abandoned education in favor of indoctrination, the barbaric antics now on display are the inevitable result. 
The worst, and perhaps only, lesson these students have learned is that speech is violence if they disagree with it, and violence is speech if it serves their cause. The Marxists’ “long march through the institutions” may be a pyrrhic victory ending in the destruction of the very institutions they sought to control, if university presidents fail their students again by not enforcing sane policies and the law. 
The purpose of education is to instill in the next generation the civic virtues necessary to live as free men among free men. On many university campuses today, we see the result of abandoning those fundamental precepts.
Free speech is an essential component of a free society. Such a statement is as self-evident a truth as those named in our Declaration of Independence. There is no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, nor should there be.
To revile another person, a fellow image bearer of God, for his ethnicity or religion is arguably the lowest form of human speech and indicative of a much deeper stain on the human condition.
“For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” So said the central figure in the history of the world, a Jewish carpenter, in His most famous sermon. The Judeo-Christian principles so prevalent in the minds and writings of the founding generation led to the establishment of our nation not as a theocracy, but a republic. One in which our Constitution is recognized as the highest civil law of the land, empowering government to protect the God-given rights of the people. 
Anti-Semitic speech, as ignorant and hateful as it is, remains protected speech. But that does not give the speakers free rein to incite violence, trespass on school property, damage or destroy university property, or physically harass and intimidate Jewish students or block them from entering campus, as we have seen at Columbia, UCLA, and elsewhere.
University presidents should use their authority to distinguish between simply despicable words and clearly illegal actions — and act accordingly. Some of the most valuable lessons in life are learned the hard way, and university presidents should be teaching some of their students a hard and valuable lesson right now.
The University of Chicago, and the University of Florida stand out as examples of rational leadership demonstrating the proper balance between respect for free speech and the rule of law. 
There is no right to a college education in our Constitution, or in the “laws of nature and of nature’s God.” To foster an environment of learning and peaceful interaction requires discipline of those who disrupt that environment.
Expulsion from the university is a necessary first step, while criminal penalties for criminal action can be left to local prosecutors. Anyone guilty of a crime while here as a guest of our nation through a student visa should lose the privilege immediately.
Aristotle once said, “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” Centuries later, our nation’s poet laureate, Robert Frost, would echo Aristotle when he stated, “Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or self-confidence.”
Judging by this standard, many of our universities have failed to truly educate our youth. Trigger warnings, safe spaces, and speech codes have sprung up like weeds to choke out free expression and civil discourse.
What we are witnessing on college campuses across our nation is the fundamental misunderstanding of the right to free speech and its accompanying duties and limits. Worse, we’re seeing that combined with indoctrination into the toxic, Marxist ideology incompatible with a free, civil society and a constitutional republic. Those who have sewn to the wind for decades are now reaping the inevitable whirlwind.
Yet, even amidst this chaos, there is a teachable moment to restore ordered liberty and return to the classical liberal tradition. These principles, deeply rooted in American soil, are not dormant. If we muster the moral courage and clarity to cultivate them, our nation can renew the bloom of Western Civilization and human flourishing once again.
 * * * 
Lathan Watts is vice president of public affairs for <a href="http://www.adflegal.org/">Alliance Defending Freedom</a> (<a href="https://twitter.com/ADFLegal">@ADFLegal</a>).
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

US-POLITICS-EDUCATION-COLUMBIA-ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS-CONFLICT

A Teachable Moment For Our Universities And Their Students

American Universities

Anti-Semitism

Columbia University

Education

Freedom of Speech

Protests

Readers Pass

Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf is a vocal proponent of his nation&#8217;s new hate crime law — which has placed &#8220;Harry Potter&#8221; author <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jk-rowling" target="_blank" rel="noopener">J.K. Rowling</a> in the crosshairs — but that didn&#8217;t stop citizens from using its provisions to report him for hate speech.
According to the BBC, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68721208" target="_blank" rel="noopener">thousands of complaints</a> had been made under the new law&#8217;s provisions — namely one aimed to stop people from &#8220;stirring up hatred&#8221; based on certain protected classes — within hours of it taking effect. The news outlet also reported that a large number of the complaints were against Yousaf himself, mostly relating to a 2020 speech he gave while serving as Justice Secretary.
In that speech, Yousaf complained about the number of white leaders across the nation of Scotland and advocated for more diversity in leadership roles — but he did so in a fashion that was widely criticized as &#8220;racist&#8221; and &#8220;anti-white.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf described <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@jk_rowling</a>’s tweets as “offensive and upsetting.”
Scotland passed a “hate speech” bill and on the first day received over 4,000 complaints. 
The majority of them were reportedly about Humza’s anti-white racist comments.
Is this… <a href="https://t.co/86my178ffT">pic.twitter.com/86my178ffT</a>
&mdash; Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1775888412798517472?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 4, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Scottish police responded to the large number of complaints, telling the BBC that they had already looked into Yousaf&#8217;s comments back in 2020 and had determined that there was nothing criminal about what he said. They also confirmed that the new law would not be implemented retroactively.
Community Safety Siobhian Brown weighed in on the complaints that overwhelmed police in the early hours of the law&#8217;s implementation, worrying that a good portion of them could be classified as &#8220;fake and vexatious.&#8221;
Brown blamed &#8220;misinformation&#8221; for the influx, but said that police were equipped to deal with the situation. She went on to reassure the public that there would be a high standard set for what would actually be considered criminal: &#8220;We&#8217;ve been very clear within the act this is not about restricting freedom of expression, it is to protect.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
According to Brown, the statement must &#8220;be threatening or abusive with the intent to a stir up hatred towards an individual&#8221; to the point that it causes the person to fear for his or her safety.
A number of complaints were also directed at Rowling, who openly criticized the law and said that she would not comply if told she must refer to trans-identifying men as &#8220;women.&#8221;
She doubled down on April 1, even as the law went into effect, and laid out a series of posts labeling trans-identifying men as men — prompting a public complaint from Yousaf calling her words &#8220;offensive and upsetting.&#8221;
Rowling fired right back via X, saying, &#8220;Most of Scotland is upset and offended by Yousaf&#8217;s bumbling incompetence and illiberal authoritarianism, but we aren&#8217;t lobbying to have him locked up for it.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Most of Scotland is upset and offended by Yousaf’s bumbling incompetence and illiberal authoritarianism, but we aren’t lobbying to have him locked up for it. <a href="https://t.co/dTXKXORlGp">https://t.co/dTXKXORlGp</a>
&mdash; J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1775886785849045478?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 4, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Scottish Daily Politics 2024

Scottish First Minister Defends Hate Crime Law. Citizens Use It To Report Him.

Harry Potter

Hate Crime

JK Rowling

Racism

Scotland

Social Issues

Transgender

Bad ideas that start in Europe eventually end up in the United States. The most recent bad idea in Europe is that hate speech should be criminalized.
The European Union has pushed this, and now, Scotland is pushing it. Scotland has a brand new hate crime law which has come into force.
The BBC <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> on this, saying:
<blockquote>The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 creates a new crime of &#8220;stirring up hatred&#8221; relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex. &#8230; The maximum penalty under the new act in Scotland is a jail sentence of seven years. A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, &#8220;that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive,&#8221; with the intention of stirring up hatred based on protected characteristics.</blockquote>
The claim of the Scottish government is that this does not infringe on free speech because Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects ideas that offend, shock, or disturb.
Proponents of the law <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68703684" target="_blank" rel="noopener">say</a>, “You have to be really threatening and really abusive, and there has to be a reasonable assumption from others that that is the case.”
The problem is that when it comes to things like gender identity, the entire case advocates make for transgender nonsense is that simply saying “a man is not a woman” is not only harassment, but deadly harassment. It is a threat, a form of abuse, because that transgender person is going to kill themselves if that person is called by their original sex or their original name.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1938-why-cultural-christianity-isn-t-enough-member-exclusive">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h4>
This is obviously incredibly dangerous. The fact that Scotland has gone forth in this manner is astonishing.
The oversensitivity and desire for victimhood is so strong these days that, obviously, anybody could use this law and file a police report.
And that is the problem: All of this becomes discretionary when a law or the terms of a law are so broadly defined that they are basically at the discretion of the government. You have no protections in terms of rights at all.
Why should we be worried about this coming across the border to the United States? After all, we have a First Amendment, don&#8217;t we?
The answer is that if there were a Left-wing majority on the Supreme Court, there is very little doubt that “anti-discrimination” law, which applies in a wide variety of jurisdictions across the United States, would be applied to crack down on free speech.
It would not be considered free speech to engage in “discrimination” in a place of business. And by “discrimination,” that might mean you said a man was a man. That would be verboten under anti-discrimination law in places like New York and California.
The Supreme Court currently has a majority of conservatives. But if there were an activist Supreme Court Left-wing majority, they would undoubtedly curb the First Amendment so as to mirror the law in places not only like Scotland, but also in places like Canada. The entire West has decided the First Amendment and free speech principles not only are in play, but absolutely should also be thrown out in favor of the sensitivities of “victimized groups.”
All of this is the wages of a new paganism, of a new pagan ideology, that has decided basic Western values — like free speech, freedom of religion, property rights, all things the West has been characterized by for centuries — are inherently bad and discriminatory, and that pagan ideology has gained root.
Why? Because free speech and freedom of religion are rooted originally in Judeo-Christian values. The idea of freedom of religion is rooted in the Peace of Westphalia, which arose from conflict between Protestants and Roman Catholics during the Thirty Years’ War. The idea of freedom of speech is an Enlightenment concept that relies on the idea of freedom of mind, which is reliant on a notion that as human beings, we have a core obligation to seek a higher truth.
That core obligation to seek a higher truth requires us to have discussions with one another, to investigate and to pursue. That is a religious concept, and all of these things are outgrowths of Judeo-Christianity.
The problem is that the West has cut itself off from the roots of its own ideology. A philosopher named Will Herberg wrote about Judaism (and his words also apply to Christianity) in a book titled, “Judaism and Modern Man.” This is what <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/690247-the-attempt-made-in-recent-decades-by-secularist-thinkers-to">he wrote</a>:
<blockquote>The attempt made in recent decades by secularist thinkers to disengage the moral principles of Western civilization from their scripturally based religious context, in the assurance that they could live a life of their own as &#8220;humanistic&#8221; ethics, has resulted in our &#8220;cut flower culture.&#8221; Cut flowers retain their original beauty and fragrance, but only so long as they retain the vitality that they have drawn from their now-severed roots; after that is exhausted, they wither and die.
So with freedom, brotherhood, justice, and personal dignity — the values that form the moral foundation of our civilization. Without the life-giving power of the faith out of which they have sprung, they possess neither meaning nor vitality.</blockquote>
This is exactly right. We live in a cut-flower culture. We live in a culture that is living off of the exhaust of the fumes that are left in the tank from millennia of Christian civilization, and before that, Judaic civilization.
As we have cut ourselves off from those roots, we are flowers that are still in the vase, but the flowers are withering.
And they are withering quite quickly.

Demonstrators Rally Outside Holyrood Against SNP’s Hate Crime Bill

The West Is Becoming A Cut-Flower Culture As Its Principles Wither Away

Ben Shapiro

Christianity

Judaism

If you were running the government of Scotland right now, you&#8217;d have no shortage of serious, potentially civilization-ending social problems to contend with. Chief among them would be that, before long, there might not be very many Scottish people left.
Since 2011, Scotland&#8217;s <a href="https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/2022-results/scotland-s-census-2022-rounded-population-estimates/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">birth rate</a> has been well below replacement level, meaning far more people are dying than being born. There were more than 630,000 deaths, and only 580,000 or so births. And yet, despite those numbers, Scotland <a href="https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/2022-results/scotland-s-census-2022-rounded-population-estimates/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recorded</a> its largest population in history as recently as 2022.
How could that be? You can probably guess. 
Like many other nations all over the world, including the United States, Scotland is importing boatloads of poor foreigners to make up the difference. The result has been exactly what you&#8217;d expect. Scotland&#8217;s economy is now in a death spiral, with more than one million of its five-and-a-half million residents <a href="https://www.jrf.org.uk/poverty-in-scotland-2023" target="_blank" rel="noopener">living</a> in poverty and no clear solution to the problem. The number of people aged 65 and over is projected to grow by nearly 30% by 2045, while the number of children is projected to drop by roughly 20%. Unless something changes very soon, Scotland may be completely unrecognizable by the time its next census rolls around.
In political terms, this is what&#8217;s commonly called an &#8220;existential threat.&#8221; A serious country would enact policies to reverse this trend immediately, starting with turning away the so-called refugees and migrants that Scotland can&#8217;t tolerate, much less accommodate. But Scotland has decided on a very different course of action. Instead of, say, encouraging more Scottish citizens to have families, the government of Scotland has decided to suspend the right of freedom of speech. And they&#8217;ve suspended the freedom of speech with the express purpose of endorsing and protecting transgenderism — an ideology that&#8217;s antithetical to reproduction, and which openly calls for the sterilization and castration of children.
This is precisely the sort of thing that self-loathing societies do when they decide they don&#8217;t want to exist anymore. It&#8217;s the path Scotland is on and, as I&#8217;ll explain in a second, it&#8217;s exactly the same plan our leaders are following in this country.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1338-the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
The specific law I&#8217;m talking about is called the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hate Crime and Public Order Act</a>, and Scotland formally enacted it on Monday. It <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">criminalizes</a> the act of , &#8220;behav[ing] in a manner that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive,&#8221; if in doing so, &#8220;the person intends to stir up hatred against a group of persons&#8221; based on one of the following characteristics: &#8220;age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity, or variations in sex characteristics.&#8221;
Anyone found guilty under this law can be sentenced to prison for up to seven years. Let me restate that: If you say something that a &#8220;reasonable person&#8221; in Scotland considers abusive, then the government can throw you in prison for seven years.
There are sites springing up all over Scotland where you can report wrong-think if you notice it, including, for some reason, sex shops in Glasgow. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 Scotland Hate Speech Laws" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bWu6PLgawvs?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
Of course it&#8217;s a woman with big glasses defending this transgender &#8220;hate crimes&#8221; legislation. She reassures us that &#8220;freedom of expression&#8221; is &#8220;really important,&#8221; except when it&#8217;s &#8220;abusive.&#8221; But who defines what&#8217;s abusive? The bill doesn&#8217;t say. I checked. The only limiting principle is that this legislation says it doesn&#8217;t outlaw &#8220;discussion or criticism,&#8221; whatever that means. But once discussion or criticism becomes &#8220;abusive,&#8221; according to &#8220;reasonable people,&#8221; then it&#8217;s a serious crime and you&#8217;ll spend the better part of a decade in prison.
The problem is that, by the bill&#8217;s own terms, the people determining what&#8217;s &#8220;reasonable&#8221; and what&#8217;s &#8220;hateful&#8221; are people who believe that biology isn&#8217;t real.
The whole bill is established with the express understanding that it&#8217;s &#8220;reasonable,&#8221; by default, to believe that anyone can change their gender in an instant. That is what the bill is saying is the reasonable position. It literally says that &#8220;transgender identity&#8221; is something the law needs to recognize and protect. And as we&#8217;ve seen, trans activists are willing to cry about &#8220;genocide&#8221; if you use a pronoun they don&#8217;t like. These are the “reasonable” people who get to set the boundaries of what&#8217;s &#8220;abusive&#8221; and what&#8217;s not.
In effect, what this means is that the truth has just been outlawed in Scotland.
Tell the truth about transgenderism, and you can go to prison for longer than a serial rapist. That&#8217;s not an exaggeration, by the way. Late last year, a man who <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/rapist-given-lighter-sentence-due-to-immaturity-at-time-of-assaults-13012994#:~:text=A%20teenage%20rapist%20has%20been,15%2Dyear%2Dold%20girl." target="_blank" rel="noopener">raped</a> three schoolgirls — ages 14 and 15 — in the Scottish town of Falkirk received a sentence of just six years in prison. If he had &#8220;misgendered&#8221; them instead, he&#8217;d have gotten a tougher sentence.
To be clear, this isn&#8217;t insanity, although that&#8217;s certainly what it looks like. It is, instead, a declaration of war by the government of Scotland against its own people. At every turn, they are working towards the destruction of future generations. And now they&#8217;re making it illegal to talk about it.
As a result, there is now a non-zero chance that bestselling children&#8217;s author J.K. Rowling could soon be arrested. When this law took effect, Rowling posted a lengthy <a href="https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1774747068944265615?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">thread</a> on social media, listing various men who identify as women in the UK — including men who have raped small children.
&#8220;Obviously, the people mentioned in the above tweets aren&#8217;t women at all, but men, every last one of them,&#8221; Rowling <a href="https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749954629652873?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote.</a> She continued: &#8220;In passing the Scottish Hate Crime Act, Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls. &#8230; It is impossible to accurately describe or tackle the reality of violence and sexual violence committed against women and girls, or address the current assault on women’s and girls’ rights, unless we are allowed to call a man a man. Freedom of speech and belief are at an end in Scotland if the accurate description of biological sex is deemed criminal. I&#8217;m currently out of the country, but if what I&#8217;ve written here qualifies as an offence under the terms of the new act, I look forward to being arrested when I return to the birthplace of the Scottish Enlightenment.&#8221;
Already, as you&#8217;ve probably guessed, many people in the UK are calling for Rowling&#8217;s arrest. A lawyer named Rajan Barot, for example, <a href="https://x.com/RajanBarot24/status/1774846191764652523?s=20">wrote</a> that Rowling had engaged in a &#8220;deliberate act of defiance,&#8221; and that the police &#8220;must mount a full investigation.&#8221; And by the letter of the law that was just enacted in Scotland, the police are obligated to do that. For offending the cult of transgenderism, J.K. Rowling could soon be imprisoned for up to seven years.
This is the new definition of blasphemy in the UK. Transgenderism is the new state religion. And just to underscore that point even further, this same law — this same Hate Crimes bill that bans anyone from criticizing transgenderism — also repeals the <a href="https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/factsheet/2020/04/hate-crime-bill-what-it-will-do/documents/hate-crime-bill-information-note-blasphemy/hate-crime-bill-information-note-blasphemy/govscot%3Adocument/Hate%2BCrime%2BBill%2B-%2BInformation%2BNote%2BPdf%2B-%2BBlasphemy%2B-%2BRevised%2BAugust%2B2020.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">existing blasphemy law</a> on the books in Scotland. That had been in effect since the common law was created, but it&#8217;s gone now. Again, I&#8217;m not exaggerating for effect here.
This is literally a line from the same bill: &#8220;The common law offence of blasphemy is abolished.&#8221; And really, it makes sense. After all, you have to destroy the old religion to enact the new one. The Scottish government understands that as well as Mao did. They understand it as well as Joe Biden&#8217;s administration did on Easter Sunday.
But this is not a story about the internal affairs of Scotland. What&#8217;s happening in Scotland is not some kind of aberrant, overly extremist application of Leftist doctrine, rather, it&#8217;s the logical end result. When you value feelings over truth, and define untruth as truth, what follows next is inevitable.
Anyone who really believes that men can become women, and that affirming biological reality is tantamount to genocide, is eventually going to throw you in prison. That&#8217;s why they use terms like &#8220;genocide.&#8221; It&#8217;s not to accurately describe what you&#8217;re doing, it&#8217;s to justify destroying your life by force, through any means necessary.
You might be thinking to yourself — “Well, that can&#8217;t happen here, at least not to the extent it&#8217;s happening in a place like Scotland. After all, we have a much more robust Constitution here, and our First Amendment protects the freedom of speech from government interference. And surely, if the government explicitly said it was going to target people for their speech in this country, and then ruined them, then there&#8217;d be a major outcry over it.” If you thought that, however, you&#8217;d be wrong.
The attorney general of New York, Letitia James, is of course best known for her campaign to seize all of the assets of the leading presidential candidate. What she&#8217;s not so well known for is her campaign to target the website VDARE, explicitly because of its inconvenient and unpopular beliefs. This is a story that&#8217;s gotten very little attention in conservative media, but it&#8217;s every bit as scandalous as what Letitia James is doing to Donald Trump.
Shortly after she took office, as <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2023/05/24/experts-vdares-real-estate-deals-may-cost-group-nonprofit-status" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> by the fringe Left-wing activist group Southern Poverty Law Center, Letitia James promised to target conservative and Right-wing organizations based on their speech: &#8220;In 2020, James said her office would take tougher legal action on organizations that engage in real-life discriminatory actions and online hate speech against protected classes.&#8221;
It&#8217;s an astonishing statement because there is no such thing as &#8220;online hate speech&#8221; in this country. We&#8217;re not Scotland, at least not yet. That&#8217;s the point of the First Amendment. But Letitia James just admitted, out in the open, that she was going to ignore the First Amendment, and go after people saying things online that she didn&#8217;t like. And that&#8217;s exactly what she&#8217;s done.
Over the weekend, VDARE <a href="https://vdare.com/articles/it-is-finished-nyag-letitia-james-crucifies-vdare-com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">explained</a> that the New York attorney general&#8217;s office has ruined them financially with a subpoena that requires them to, &#8220;review 40 gigabytes of emails, an enormous amount. .. And of course these [emails] could in fact reveal the names of those pseudonymous writers, as well as our donors, privileged communications with lawyers, etc.&#8221; In all, VDARE says the subpoena could cost more than $150,000 to comply with, and as a result, the website may not be around for very much longer.
All of this is happening without VDARE being accused of any criminal activity whatsoever. There&#8217;s apparently just a suspicion of a possible violation of New York&#8217;s nonprofit rules, relating to their purchase of a castle as a conference venue several years ago. (Which they needed to purchase, because hotels wouldn&#8217;t let them host conferences there). But the New York AG&#8217;s office isn&#8217;t being very specific about what the problem is, so we&#8217;re really speculating about the specifics.
And as VDARE&#8217;s Lydia Brimelow said in a recent interview, New York really doesn&#8217;t have anything to do with VDARE, so their whole fixation with the organization is a little strange. In fact, VDARE has been trying to leave the state behind for a while now. The castle property that&#8217;s at issue is in West Virginia. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 Lawfare Against Normal People" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ixmsl9zYQFI?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
So VDARE is being chased around by a vindictive attorney general for an out-of-state property they bought. I&#8217;m no expert on the facts of the case, but at a glance, what VDARE is apparently being investigated for is somewhat similar to what BLM has admitted to doing.
We know BLM spent a lot of money buying multiple lavish mansions — not just one conference venue. But BLM was never subjected to any kind of investigation. They never had the New York attorney general, or any other attorney general, bombard them with subpoenas. And we know why that is. It&#8217;s because BLM is on Letitia James&#8217; side. VDARE isn&#8217;t. VDARE likes to talk about things like crime statistics, and what happens in cities like Baltimore. So therefore, like Donald Trump, they need to be crushed. Every real-estate transaction they&#8217;ve ever engaged in needs to be carefully scrutinized until they&#8217;re broke.
Suddenly Scotland&#8217;s decision to suspend freedom of speech doesn&#8217;t seem so unthinkable here. If Letitia James can get away with targeting a Right-wing media outlet like this, while admitting it, then we&#8217;re basically there already.
If anything, we could learn from what&#8217;s happening in Scotland. At least they have someone like J.K. Rowling who is willing to go to jail over what Scotland&#8217;s government is doing. Is there anyone in this country who&#8217;s even suggested sacrificing anything for a site like VDARE? Of course not. They have unfashionable views. So they won&#8217;t be around much longer. Inevitably, that means the people who decide what&#8217;s &#8220;unfashionable&#8221; will be coming for you, too.

Scotland Makes It Illegal To Hurt A Trans Person’s Feelings

Scotland Makes It Illegal To Hurt A Trans Person's Feelings

J.K. Rowling

Letitia James

New York

Parliament

Prison

Women who are critical of gender ideology are slamming Scotland&#8217;s new hate speech law, saying it restricts them from voicing their views on biological sex.
The new <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ssi/2024/82/contents/made" target="_blank" rel="noopener">law</a>, the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, went into effect on Monday. The measure criminalizes &#8220;stirring up hatred&#8221; relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity, or being intersex.
The maximum penalty for violations is seven years in jail.
Critics quickly spoke out against the law, saying it risks jailing people for voicing their sincerely held opinions, particularly those critical of gender ideology.
Under the law, a person may not communicate material or behave in a way that &#8220;a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive&#8221; with the intention of stirring up hatred based on the newly protected characteristics.
Racially-based hatred was already outlawed in Scotland, but the new law adds more protected categories.
Many voiced their opposition to the law on social media, posting under the hashtags #FactIsNotHate and #WomenWontWheesht — &#8220;wheesht&#8221; meaning &#8220;hush&#8221; in Scotland.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Women have been out and about in Scotland with our Hate Crime posters. Women&#39;s Rights Are Not A Hate Crime. Here&#39;s some fabulous women <a href="https://twitter.com/ff_scotland?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ff_scotland</a> Alloa Festival. We will not be silenced!<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotHate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotHate</a> <a href="https://t.co/pIsWO2pesD">pic.twitter.com/pIsWO2pesD</a>
&mdash; WRN Scotland (@WRNScotland) <a href="https://twitter.com/WRNScotland/status/1774696700923256964?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I will not lie. I will not betray women. Our rights matter. We are defiant. We will not be silent. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotHate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotHate</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TruthIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TruthIsNotACrime</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotACrime</a> <a href="https://t.co/KsjUCDDrEZ">pic.twitter.com/KsjUCDDrEZ</a>
&mdash; Cathy Larkman 💚🤍 💜🦢🏃‍♀️ (@JackMerched) <a href="https://twitter.com/JackMerched/status/1774581852562423931?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 31, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
We’ll be continuing to go about our lives speaking the truth. We won’t be silenced by the Hate Crime Bill ✊✊✊<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TruthIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TruthIsNotACrime</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotHate?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotHate</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactIsNotACrime?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactIsNotACrime</a> <a href="https://t.co/kRNMHwHDKE">pic.twitter.com/kRNMHwHDKE</a>
&mdash; GTF Glasgow Tactical Feminists (@GTFGla) <a href="https://twitter.com/GTFGla/status/1774689482798694786?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
&#8220;I will not lie. I will not betray women. Our rights matter. We are defiant. We will not be silent,&#8221; wrote one social media user on X.
&#8220;A Woman is an Adult Human Female,&#8221; another <a href="https://twitter.com/Your_mums_aTerf/status/1774578740023939220" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a>. &#8220;The law can not protect what it can not define. My son claims he&#8217;s a woman, he is not. It is my protected belief humans can not change sex.&#8221;
&#8220;Men are not women. Will this statement now result in arrest in Scotland? Indefinite seizure of devices? Hate crime incidents secretly recorded? A dystopian nightmare, brought about in the name of &#8216;inclusion&#8217;. Shame on you #Scotland,&#8221; another user <a href="https://twitter.com/brandubh4/status/1774585540752318872" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a>.
Some X users tagged the Scottish police in their posts.
Author J.K. Rowling <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774747068944265615">challenged</a> police to arrest her over her posts criticizing gender ideology.
&#8220;Freedom of speech and belief are at an end in Scotland if the accurate description of biological sex is deemed criminal,&#8221; Rowling posted Monday on X, adding that, &#8220;if what I&#8217;ve written here qualifies as an offence under the terms of the new act, I look forward to being arrested.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Rowling added that Scottish lawmakers &#8220;seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls.&#8221;
She said the new legislation is &#8220;wide open to abuse by activists who wish to silence&#8221; women who criticize gender ideology.
&nbsp;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
🎉🌼🌸April Fools! 🌸🌼🎉
Only kidding. Obviously, the people mentioned in the above tweets aren&#39;t women at all, but men, every last one of them.
In passing the Scottish Hate Crime Act, Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their…
&mdash; J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) <a href="https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749954629652873?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Elon Musk criticized the law as well.
&#8220;An example of why it is so important to preserve freedom of speech,&#8221; Musk <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1770032208662663278" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a> earlier this month on X in response to another post discussing the law.

People holding transgender flags

Women Gender Ideology Critics Protest Scotland’s Hate Crime Act

Women Gender Ideology Critics Protest Scotland's Hate Crime Act

Gender

In 16th century Scotland, it was easy to deal with problematic women.
Nearly 2,500 people were tried and mostly executed for “witchcraft.” Their crime? Largely, they were mouthy, opinionated, a bit odd, or disliked.
If “witch!” didn’t stick, “heretic!” would do the trick, under Scotland’s then pervasive anti-blasphemy laws.
“Othering” those of minority beliefs made them easy to hang.
With the spread of liberal democracy, Scotland’s witch trials went defunct. We thought we had learned tolerance. But on April 1 of this year, a new “blasphemy” law will come into effect – set to punish modern “heretics” who blaspheme against today’s dominant societal beliefs.
The “<a href="https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/hate-crime-and-public-order-scotland-bill" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hate Speech and Public Order Act</a>” introduces a new offense of “stirring up hatred” on the basis of, inter alia, transgender identity.
Nobody likes to feel hated. But the government has failed to adequately define which speech is actually banned, leaving citizens open to prosecution for saying anything the state deems unacceptable — or that any given individual decides is offensive.
There are no private places beyond the state’s listening ears — the law applies even to dinner table discussions in the family home, and can be enforced if your children decide to report you for voicing your (un)orthodox beliefs.
The cost of “free speech” is at an all-time high.
Up to seven years behind bars await our new heretics.
And the mob already has their eyes set on a target, pitchforks sharpened. A wise and wizardly woman with decidedly problematic, public views about pronouns: J.K. Rowling.
In anticipation of the law’s launch on April 1, activists are in frenzied <a href="https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1769412494353678400?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">anticipation</a> of bringing our most successful author down.
Having commentated on social media about the need to protect single-sexed prison cells, rape shelters and changing rooms, the world-renowned Scot put a target on her back to be hunted by the puritans of the Church of Woke.
Threats abound to report her to the police unless she succumbs to pressure to change her pronoun usage on “X.” The witch hunt has begun.
Of course, crying “witch” has gone out of fashion. In fact, in 2022, Scotland’s leader issued an official state <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/mar/08/nicola-sturgeon-issues-apology-for-historical-injustice-of-witch-hunts" target="_blank" rel="noopener">apology</a> for the ‘historical injustice’ of witch hunts. But name-calling the enemy is too successful a technique to stop.
And so the Scottish authorities have slapped a new name on an old story, and this week launched an infantilizing <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13198995/Police-face-ridicule-ludicrous-Hate-Monster-campaign.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">campaign</a> to support their new law. Beware: “The hate monster”!
The campaign, backed with public money, warns us against “the feeling some people get when they are frustrated and angry and take it out on others, because they feel like they need to show they are better than them’ — ‘in other words, they ­commit a hate crime.”
Young, white, working-class men are the most likely to succumb to “the hate monster,” we’re told, in a prejudicial jibe at a disadvantaged demographic. Holding alternative beliefs to those of the wealthy elite doth not make man “monster.”
Expressing anger is not, in itself, a crime. Rowling hasn’t even expressed anger. She’s merely spoken truthfully about biological reality. She may not be a working-class male. But she has reason to worry nonetheless.
Where hate speech laws have been enforced around the world, citizens have been prosecuted for tweets of a similarly cordial tone. In Finland, a parliamentarian and grandmother underwent a <a href="https://adfinternational.org/en-gb/portfolio/free-speech-on-trial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">criminal trial</a> for a Bible verse tweet that questioned her Church’s sponsorship of a pride event.
In Mexico, <a href="https://adfinternational.org/news/mexican-civil-society-leader-found-guilty-of-gender-based-political-violence-for-tweets" target="_blank" rel="noopener">two</a> <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/human-rights-group-demands-response-mexican-government-lawmaker-charged-political-violence" target="_blank" rel="noopener">politicians</a> from differing parties have both been convicted of “gender based political violence” and placed on an offenders’ register, simply for upholding their beliefs about gender and pronouns on Musk’s platform.
There’s nothing to stop Scotland’s hate crime law from doing the same thing — either to J.K. Rowling; or to another citizen with less money and influence to withstand the pressure.
The author of the wizarding world could be at the center of her own next witchy tale.
The Scottish government should take heed. Jailing citizens for having the “wrong” opinions — whether a working-class male or billionaire female — has never fallen on the right side of history.
* * *
Lois McLatchie Miller is Senior Legal Communications Officer for Alliance Defending Freedom UK. Follow her: @LoisMcLatch
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Scotland’s New Blasphemy Law Could Put J.K. Rowling In Jail

Scotland's New Blasphemy Law Could Put J.K. Rowling In Jail

Europe

Great Britain

The New York Post Editorial Board published a piece Thursday laying into a recently-introduced bill that they argued would turn <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/canada" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Canada</a> into an Orwellian nightmare.
The bill in question (Bill C-63), referred to as the Online Harms Act, was first introduced by Justice Minister Arif Virani in February — and would <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/03/14/world-news/canadian-law-endorsed-by-trudeau-could-imprison-people-for-speech-crimes/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">empower the government</a> to place citizens on house arrest if social media posts provide &#8220;reasonable grounds&#8221; for officials to believe that someone &#8220;will commit&#8221; a crime.
&#8220;No, Canada!&#8221; the Post&#8217;s Editorial Board wrote in response. &#8220;The country that brought you debanking protesters and government-assisted suicide for the poor now wants to criminalize speech to lock up people for life and to put wrongthinkers under house arrest if the state sees a chance they will commit a crime. Doesn’t get more Orwellian than that.&#8221;
Minister Virani claimed that the bill was all about safety on the internet, something that he said hit close to home because he had children himself — and suggested that it would be no different than forcing toy manufacturers to abide by certain product safety regulations.
Another provision in the bill addresses &#8220;advocating for genocide&#8221; and increases the penalty for that particular infraction from five years to life in prison — and the Post noted an inherent risk in that provision as well.
&#8220;We’re sure a law that criminalizes &#8216;advocating for genocide&#8217; could never be twisted to criminalize support for Israel,&#8221; they wrote. &#8220;The pro-Hamas left will have a field day.&#8221;
The penalties for social media companies would be steep as well if they dared to refuse cooperation if the bill becomes law: fines could be upwards of a staggering 6% of global revenue.
&#8220;Handmaid&#8217;s Tale&#8221; author Margaret Atwood pointed out the dystopian future the bill was likely to help facilitate, saying via X, &#8220;If this account of the bill is true, it’s Lettres de Cachet all over again. The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If this account of the bill is true, it’s Lettres de Cachet all over again. The possibilities for revenge false accusations + thoughtcrime stuff are sooo inviting! Trudeau’s Orwellian online harms bill <a href="https://t.co/GziivgfNGt">https://t.co/GziivgfNGt</a>
&mdash; Margaret E Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) <a href="https://twitter.com/MargaretAtwood/status/1766323300853297262?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 9, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Kamloops

NYPost Slams Canadian ‘Thought Crime’ Bill That Goes Full ‘Minority Report’

NYPost Slams Canadian 'Thought Crime' Bill That Goes Full 'Minority Report'

Canada

Crime

New York Post

Menu