The No-Free-Speech Movement

“Censorship is the hallmark of an authoritarian regime.” Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, 1966

“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” — Benjamin Franklin

“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.” — Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

“I am a student. Please do not fold, spindle, or mutilate me.”
– Slogan of the Free Speech Movement, 1964.

A campus group at the University of California, Berkeley, invited a conservative speaker to give a talk. How did Berkeley react, the legendary home of the Free Speech Movement?

Given that the talk had been planned long in advance, did opponents get a permit to assemble legally and to protest? Or, if not, did they at least share their displeasure through a peaceful demonstration, with signs and chanted slogans?

Not a chance.

What happened is much, much darker. Thousands of people gathered, and many of them threw rocks and other dangerous objects at the police. Some rioters beat and pepper-sprayed students trying to attend the talk, several of whom had to be hospitalized. The mobs forced the emergency evacuation of the speaker and destroyed property: cars were overturned, windows broken, fires set, and stores vandalized.

Though I’ve been here since the l980s, the attacks on people and property have skyrocketed in the last 8 years. We’ve had the Occupations, with the seizing of freeways and city streets and mob rampages through the streets. Since the November election, we’ve also had other riots, with more destruction and injuries, all at an obscene amount of cost to the cities.

But this latest riot at the UC Berkeley campus and downtown Berkeley was even more sinister. This is because students trying to attend the talk were targeted for violence.

Those targeted had the audacity to want to attend a public talk, one sponsored by the campus group, the College Republicans. Even though the talk was approved and all of the channels gone through, the talk was shut down amidst the chaos. Yet more evidence that the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley was, and is, a lie.

Although many students and others protested, I have serious questions about how many local residents rioted versus being imported and paid. (1) However, putting that aside, I am extremely disturbed by how most of the residents around here support the riots.

In these parts, mayhem against people with a different point of view is excused as just desserts for “hate speech.” However, this attitude begs the question: how do they know that it is hate speech if they won’t allow themselves or anyone else to hear it?

Then there are the mind games, for instance, calling the riot a “protest,” as the campus-run newspaper, the Daily Californian, did. Personally, I’m not sure how a stampeding mob of violent thugs can be called a “protest.”

Of course, the message of the recent riots was this: don’t even try to offer a conservative point of view in the epicenter of progressivism. If so, you will be put in harm’s way. (And given that the politicos sent a message to the police to do nothing to stop the riots, you’ll be out there on your own.)

Though profoundly disturbing, the suppression of free speech in Berkeley is not surprising. It is typical of all cults, and progressivism is a cult.

With cults, no dissent is allowed; everyone must parrot the same party line. And if anyone dares to diverge from the group in any way, shape, or form, he will be marginalized, ostracized, threatened, and physically endangered.

Message, I imagine, received: It will be very, very unlikely that the Campus Republicans or any conservative group will invite a speaker here anytime soon. (Come to think of it, after decades of living here, I’ve never heard of a conservative being invited to give a talk.)

The Left is very fond of pointing fingers at Donald Trump and his supporters, defaming them with slurs, such as white supremacist, crazy, stupid, evil, fascists, and insane. Trump himself has been called Hitler.

But, honestly, who are the ones who most resemble fascists? Who are the ones who muzzle free speech and unleash a violent mob on young college students?

* *

“We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. . It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” Edward Bernays (nephew of Sigmund Freud), in his book, Propaganda

We’re playing those mind games together
Pushing the barriers
planting seeds
Playing the mind guerrilla
Chanting the mantra:
peace on earth

—Mind Games, John Lennon

A number of years ago, before I went through my political and spiritual conversion, I attended a lecture in Berkeley by a progressive Ph.D, a linguist. His talk was about how linguists were starting to work with the Democratic Party to use words to manipulate the masses.

Of course, we can all see the success of the linguists’ endeavors — how the multitudes have been manipulated through the steady drumbeat of laboratory-tested words and phrases. For instance, Obama’s linguists had people chant, “We are the change,” over and over again, robotic-style. . . until the phrase sunk into most everyone’s brains. School children and Hollywood types recited praises to their leader incessantly.

The use of words as propaganda isn’t new. It started with Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays, who borrowed from his uncle’s newfound field of psychology. The art of propaganda, through word usage, timing, and tone, has also been used successfully by hypnotists. This includes the practitioners of NLP, that is, neurolinguistic programming, which apparently was relied on heavily by the linguists working for Obama.

So what happens is this: words or phrases are used repetitively, in a hypnotic way, to create “triggers.” Those triggers can trigger what is called the “altar” state that is desired by the puppet masters. Hypnosis works on the premise that images and emotions — both positive and negative — can be evoked through careful word placement and repetition.

To see how well it works, simply observe people on the Left. When feel-good words and phrases are used, such as Obamacare, Hillary, Obama, Michelle, hope and change, happy feelings result. And then notice the complete opposite effect — the hostility, if not outright hate, — triggered by other words, e.g. Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Steve Bannon. As another example: note how the frequent repetition of one of the newer words, “haters,” drives people on the Left to hate.

Then there are words that evoke concern, a parental worry and a desire to rescue. “Climate change,” for instance, compels people to forgo bags, even regular showers, in order to save the planet. Particularly brilliant is the use of the word “refugee” in the immigration debate. “Refugee” conjures up the image of war, and of bloody victims fleeing persecution.

The repetitive use of the word, “refugee,” impels most on the Left to open up our country to pretty much anyone who wants to come here. And yet, unlike real refugees, most immigrants (legal and illegal) are here mostly for financial gain. (2)

Of course, the old term, “illegal aliens,” is out. It has morphed into the more pleasant-sounding “undocumented workers,” which implies that the person is here working, with somehow a bureaucratic snafu holding up the paperwork.

And please examine closely the dangerous words thrown around by the Left to agitate their followers and to sometimes incite violence. The term, racist, has been used for years in that regard. But there are new words that are even more inflammatory: for instance, white supremacist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi.

But what exactly is a white supremacist? Or a white nationalist? Can anyone easily explain it? Where are they and who are they?

If someone doesn’t support affirmative action, does that make him a white supremacist? If a person is proud of being from the south, does that make him a white supremacist? If someone is concerned about Spanish being required in his child’s public school, is he one of those boogeymen?

Casually throwing around fighting words, such as white supremacist or white nationalist, is a horrible thing, reminiscent of witch hunts and gulags. And yet the leaders of the Left hypnotize the gullible masses as handily as a stage hypnotist manipulates a subject to bark like a dog.

With the media, Hollywood, and the educational system all avid supporters, the Left, in the age of President Trump, will do almost anything to try to control the narrative. And, apparently, it doesn’t matter if the results are bloody. We’ve been seeing the wreckage more and more in Berkeley, Oakland, and beyond.


1. I have said this before during the Occupations: I did not know a single person rioting (peacefully protesting, yes. But not beating up students and breaking windows). I asked many others, and they did not know a single person rioting.

Yet another clue that the masked bandits at the Occupation and at the recent Berkeley rioting were probably imported, via Facebook and Craig’s list — most of them probably paid operatives, now en route to their next riotous destination.

2. Note how many immigrants go back and forth to their home country (e.g. China or Mexico) to vacation and shop and visit relatives. A true blue refugee would never be able to do this.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.