She's Looked at Policing Speech From Both Sides Now

I really have looked at life and love "from both sides now."

Read an exclusive excerpt from my new memoir on @cbsnews.https://t.co/Snyq1QGEGa

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) September 16, 2024

Posts and posts of dis info
Mocking memes and hurty mots
And Trumpy GIFs from right-wing bros
I’ve looked at X that way
But now they only break the law
They need indictments, gags galore!
So many things I would have done
But civil rights got in my way

You can depend on Hillary to blurt out loud what more emotionally balanced politicians will keep to themselves and their inner monologues. 

Why stop at censorship when you can arrest your political foes?

It's Their Mind and They'll Think What They Want

Think before you post. https://t.co/sgqCErb4AC

— GOV.UK (@GOVUK) August 8, 2024

Since we're all officially admonished to THINK (which used to be the IBM corporate slogan, IIRC, long before it became a verbal bludgeon of Britain's police bigwigs) let's spare a thought for the UK's lower-class sort that is the target of all this oppressive Nanny-Statism. 

What do you suppose they're thinking? And might it be a massive load of anger and resentment directed squarely at their 'betters'?  

 

But baby (Baby) 

Remember (Remember) 

It's my life and I'll do what I want 

It's my mind and I'll think what I want 

- It's My Life (1965), Eric Burdon and The Animals 

Eric Burdon had the best male voice in '60s pop music, if you ask me. And his best songs had a working class edge that, if you further ask me, the British need to recover today more than ever before.   

Check out the opening lyric: It's a hard world to get a break in / all the good things have been taken. 

Does that not speak to the Brits we've seen pushing back at the national leaders who are hosting all the illegal entrants they can find while arresting Brits for speaking out about it on line?

There is a long and storied tradition of Anglo-Saxon rowdyism which is triggered by unfair treatment, and it doesn't take much imagination to see such treatment happening all over the UK today.     

So the top of UK society warns the lower class to THINK before they speak, or else face vaguely sinister "consequences." Well, once the lowers have thought about it long enough, the uppers just might see that threat blow up in their faces.  

 

 

EU-crat Breton Might Have Acted Without EU Approval When He Sent That Letter to Elon Musk

The European Commission has denied that its internal market commissioner had approval from Ursula von der Leyen to send the letter, with one EU official saying, 'Thierry has his own mind and way of working and thinking'. https://t.co/DYfoEV9slL pic.twitter.com/y2kisI2b9J

— Financial Times (@FT) August 13, 2024

That's Elon Musk on the left, opposite a childless cat lady, it appears. 

The FT's headline and story say that EU Commissioner Breton overstepped his authority and sent that cautionary letter to Musk without first getting EU clearance. 

However, that is refuted by this sentence in the body of the report:

Breton is empowered to oversee enforcement of the Digital Services Act and can communicate independently with companies.

So, who knows? 

Whether it was with or without approval, Breton made an empty threat towards Musk and X, and empty threats always lead to embarrassment. I say an empty threat because Musk has the means to connect the EU's 500 million consumers with direct internet access from his network of satellites if he wishes, bypassing the EU and other authorities completely. 

To misquote the most famous line from the great Hilaire Belloc poem The Modern Traveller, "whatever happens, he has got the Starlink gun and we have not."

Much more to come on this, I hope.

Don't Tell Me Who I May or May Not Insult! Reform UK's Section 5

Rowan Atkinson on free speech. The Christian Institute spearheaded the Reform Section 5 campaign to get the word ‘insulting’ removed from Section 5 of the Public Order Act, as part of the Crime and Courts Bill. Full video: https://t.co/fSoJ0o7PEf pic.twitter.com/NqQCdJsTRZ

— The Christian Institute (@christianorguk) June 1, 2023

Until today I was not aware of the Reform Section 5 movement. Now, I'm its biggest fan. 

I particularly like Atkinson's point that the "insulting words" test does not even require that there be a victim, just some expression that someone in power - who exactly? - deems insulting. 

He arrives at the same solution the U.S. Supreme Court did in 1931: the 'counterspeech doctrine' that says the solution to speech you don't like is more speech not suppressing other speakers. 

That's how free societies behave. Anything less is simply an all-purpose excuse to lock up any party whom the police disfavor.

 

Not a Crazy Idea - Give Political Refugee Status to Opinionated Brits

Could we see refugee and asylum requests from Brits who are persecuted for their political opinion?

“Refugee status or asylum may be granted to people who have been persecuted or fear they will be persecuted on account of … political opinion.” Immigration and Nationality Act https://t.co/ZYo5dmdU8O

— TSB (@TweetingTSB) August 9, 2024

I say, Defund the Thought Police! But until then, what would prevent the U.S. from extending refugee or asylee status to Brits who are oppressed by their government for the expression of political opinion?

Here's what opinionated Brits are facing today. I'd say it qualifies them for refugee status.
 

Think before you post! 📲✋ Content that incites violence or hatred isn't just harmful - it can be illegal.

The CPS takes online violence seriously and will prosecute when the legal test is met. Remind those close to you to share responsibly or face the consequences. pic.twitter.com/5gxnUH02yw

— Crown Prosecution Service (@CPSUK) August 7, 2024

Actually, that post is misleading, or as the Crown Prosecution Service itself would probably say, it is disinformation. The law in question extends to content that is "threatening, abusive, or insulting," which goes well beyond inciting violence or hatred. 

All those terms are fundamentally subjective anyway, so the CPS is threatening to prosecute Brits for expressing political opinion that some unnamed party in the CPS dislikes. 

Moreover, by threatening to extradite offenders from abroad, the CPS threatens to take its oppressive nanny state to everyone everywhere. 

Well, the 1st Amendment stands between me and the CPS, so I feel pretty safe. Over here, we still adhere to the constitutional 'counterspeech doctrine' which holds that the best remedy to combat harmful speech is “more speech, not enforced silence” (Justice Brandeis, Stromberg v. California (1931). But our British cousins have no such protection. 

Maybe a significant number of Brits will now notice that constitutions work a lot better when they are written down, as their Chartists knew. 

But until then, why should we not welcome mouthy political refugees from the UK to come over here and breathe the sweet air of freedom?