Why Democrats Are Not the Real National Socialists

In recent discourse, some have labeled Democrats as 'the real National Socialists.' This claim is mistaken and misleading. Let's explore why Democrats are not seeking to end free speech as alleged, and the actual issues at play.

Free Speech and the Democratic Party

The claim that Democrats are in favor of silencing opposing viewpoints is an oversimplification. True Democrats value free speech as a fundamental right, specifically as enshrined in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The amendment states:

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws respecting an establishment of religion, prohibiting the free exercise of religion, or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

However, critics argue that Democrats push for restrictions on speech that aligns with their political beliefs. They assert that Democrats are not concerned about free speech in the traditional sense. Instead, they point out that Democrats may want to limit the echo chamber of right-wing opinions and ideologies. Let's clarify these points:

First Amendment and Responsibility

The First Amendment inherently comes with responsibility. Freedom of speech does not mean you can say whatever you want without consequences. For example, yelling 'Bomb!' in a crowded area can lead to arrest due to threatening behavior. Therefore, advocating for free speech does not equate to advocating for any and all forms of speech:

Your freedom of speech does not come into play when you are threatening public safety.

Power and Censorship

The argument that the people who lack power push for freedom of speech while those in power push for censorship is a complex one. Historically, during the 1960s, the far left lacked power and advocated for free speech. Today, the left as a whole is not seeking to restrict speech but rather to address the imbalance of power and promote a more inclusive and equitable society:

During the 1960s, the far left lacked power and favored free speech. Today, the left is powerful and wants to shut down its opponents.

This shift is part of a broader conversation about the influence of social media, fake news, and the disproportionate amplification of extremist views. Democrats argue for greater responsibility in speech that can harm, marginalize, or endanger others:

Obstruction and Retaliation

There is a serious misunderstanding about what constitutes censorship. When a news outlet decides not to report on every piece of right-wing propaganda, it is not censorship. It is the role of editors to curate and prioritize the news based on its significance and relevance. If there is a political figure trying to obstruct First Amendment rights, they will face significant opposition, especially from those who value the freedom to express opinions and disagree:

Anyone trying to obstruct my 1A will be engaged with the 2A. It is the duty and responsibility owed to our young illustrious revolutionaries that fought and died for the birth of this Republic. You may not want to fight but, look at your kids and ask yourself if you want them ruled over by authoritarian overlords.

In conclusion, the idea that Democrats are pushing to end free speech is a misinterpretation. They are actually striving for responsible and inclusive discourse, recognizing the importance of freedom of assembly, freedom of press, and freedom of religion, while also advocating for accountability in speech that is harmful or discriminatory. The real concern should be about the balance between the right to free speech and the need for responsible and ethical communication.