Replace All Federal Taxes on Income with the Fair Tax Act , HR 25

Hate Speech

http://timnerenz.com/content/hate-speech

The socialists have finally given us a definition of hate speech we can use: they hate it when we speak.

Before the ink was dry on the health care bill, liberals were already on the name-calling offensive, describing anyone who opposed their socialist agenda as racists, homophobes, white supremacists, fascists, or domestic terrorists.

I have yet to hear a single voice in the Liberty movement call for violence or for the overthrow of the government by force. I can’t recall hearing a single racist remark at any of the political events that I have been invited to attend. Have you?

Last week the FBI added “sovereign citizens” to their list of hate groups in a bulletin sent to local law enforcement around the nation. Imagine that: it is now considered hateful to believe in the first principle of the Constitution – individual sovereignty. The media buried that story in the back pages, if they reported it at all.

It is a sad state of affairs when the defense of Liberty is considered hate speech; when belief in the Constitution puts you on a government watch list. It’s a good thing government is incompetent, or we would be in grave danger.

Personally, I think the most vile and dangerous form of hate speech is when a self-appointed elite claim to know better than us what is good for us. It places their contempt for us and their hatred for our values on full display.

They are telling us that we are too stupid to decide for ourselves what is good, that we are incapable of attaining goodness independently from them, and that we can’t be trusted to think and act of our own volition. That is some hateful stuff.

And who is it that is hurling hateful epithets upon black libertarians and conservatives, especially those who dare to speak at “tea party” events? They are cheered by the so-called angry white mobs; it is the liberal left-wing bloggers that call them “oreo”, “uncle tom”, and “spray paint nigger”. And yet the media reports it just the opposite; tea partiers are the noisy racists and liberals the innocent victims.

The hatred directed at black libertarians and conservatives is not about race; it is about success. The socialists hate it when anyone excels without their permission, but especially minorities and women who must be kept dependent upon the state for the socialist left to remain in power. They can not tolerate the sight of a black man or woman who has made it on their own; it exposes the lie.

That’s what this hate-speech fuss is all about - keeping the socialists in power.

Democrats get hysterical when we call them by their rightful names – liberals or socialists as the case may be. I myself have been called a racist for simply using the term “socialist” in my speeches and writings.

One journalist recently went so far as to make up a racist quote, attribute it to me, and then criticize me for the message in his words – I guess he could not find anything suitably hateful in anything that I have actually said or written.

My comment correcting his fabrication was immediately deleted from his online article; and my complaint to his publication was returned undeliverable. That is the state of free speech and journalistic integrity on the left these days.

It is not hate speech to call me a libertarian; that is what I am. And it is not hate speech to call a socialist a socialist; that is what they are. The difference is that I am a member of the Libertarian Party; we actually named ourselves after what we stand for, while socialists hide from their proper name. On the political spectrum, we are polar opposites.

We oppose socialism because it is dehumanizing, and its legacy is war and genocide. When the economic policies of the socialist philosophy fail – which they inevitably do – regimes must use force to retain power of the people they have impoverished. Over 100 million were killed in the 20^th century at the hands of the socialists. To this day, the left will not own up to that - they are the ultimate holocaust deniers.

Look back at the last 100 years of our own American history. Who took us to war? Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Clinton, two Bushes – five liberal democrats and two liberal republicans. Seven big spenders who expanded the size and reach of government. Not one of them ran for office promising war; that came later.

It is ironic that our socialists call anyone who opposes them “Nazis”. The German National Socialist Party came to power promising hope and change and economic recovery. Its first initiatives were gun control, health care, minimum wage, taxing industrialists, nationalizing energy, and demonizing the banks and insurance companies. Does that sound vaguely familiar?

If you think it could not happen here, you are wrong. It is happening here right now; the power of the state is being expanded daily and liberty is being diminished daily. President Obama has expanded the very wars he ran against; into Pakistan, Yemen, and likely soon into Iran. Where is the tipping point of socialism? Why on earth would we want to find out? Each step toward the brink is a bad move.

It is not hate speech to stand up against hateful things; it is hate speech to remain silent in the face of hateful things. And socialism is a very hateful thing.

Tim Nerenz is the Libertarian Party Candidate for U.S. House of Representatives from Wisconsin's 2nd District. To support Dr. Tim's campaign, please visit the campaign website at www.timnerenz.com.

0 members like this

Comment

You need to be a member of Fair Tax Nation to add comments!

Join Fair Tax Nation

Comment by Tim Nerenz on April 29, 2010 at 2:23pm: I believe that I said "liberal or socialist as the case may be", because as you properly say, Greg, not all Democrats are socialists.

The Stalinist implication is your take, I am merely pointing out the propensity for socialist (small s) systems to degenerate into tyranny and bloodshed when none of them ever start out that way. The socialists states of Europe are not Stalinist, yet it is fair to describe them as socialist, would you not agree?

You may be interested to read an old post of mine entitled "Charitable Choice" which proposes a dollar for dollar tax credit for contributions to charities that are currently funded through government grants - it nearly doubles the funding that reaches families with special needs. As a disabled person, I am especially interested in improving the delivery of services to people who need assistance.

I would agree with you that Democrats think the government is a useful tool for solving real problems. As a Libertarian, I believe that markets and invidual volition are much better tools. In the case of social security, the IMF and World Bank (no libertarians there) warned nations with public pensions to prvatise them over 20 years ago. Many nations have, and provide better retirement security as a result, and without bankrupting the nation - on a per job basis, each working person will have over $200k share of the national debt in 10 years. On balance, private retirement accounts would have been far better than Social Security, I believe.

I blame both parties for reckless fiscal policies, but this post was about hate speech and intimidation tactics used to dampen dissent. I appreciate your thoughtful comments and wish you well.

Comment by Greg Kalember on April 29, 2010 at 12:57pm: Hateful people will take any good idea and pervert it if it suits them. You can't honestly think that all Democrats are socialists (and you use that term with it's absolute worst Stalinist implication) in disguise.

Democrats by and large think the government is a useful tool for solving real problems. I think that's as far as most go in terms of being "socialists". We're less concerned with concentrating power in the hands of a centralized government than we are with trying to build a society that doesn't allow it's mentally handicapped citizens to wallow in filth on our city streets.

Every government program... large and small... wasteful or effective... exists in response to actual problems in our society that were not solved by the purity of liberty and the markets. You don't like Social Security and Medicare? How do you feel about the problems that existed before those programs came into existence?

It would be fantastic if every American was a hard working, resourceful, self-sufficient, responsible individual. Then we could just have liberty and wouldn't even need a police force. Unfortunately, real people have real human problems. Problems that are common enough might even be best solved by a common, communal solution. Thinking this way doesn't mean I long for the day when central planning dictates every facet of my life.

Comment by norwegianwood on April 19, 2010 at 8:40pm: Bravo!!! Excellent post!

P