Bette Midler Asks Us to Imagine What Would Happen If Hillary Clinton Had...
This is Why We Aren't a Democracy. George Takei Brags About Petition to...
Reporter for 'The New York Times' Caught on Hot Mic Demanding Colleagues NOT...
Wait, So Is This a Good or a Bad Thing? Rep. Cori Bush...
@HouseGOP Graphic Shows the Toll Inflation Has Taken Since President Biden Took Office
Long Covid Truther Taylor Lorenz Squashes Elon Musk Affair Rumor Zero People Believed...
Lib Rag 'The Kansas City Star' Demands the Chiefs Fire Harrison Butker and...
Claire McCaskill Claims Fellow Grocery Shopper Begged Her to Stop Trump from Returning...
SIGH: Biden at Morehouse College Tells Black Students They're Victims and America Hates...
Truly INSUFFERABLE NFL Cheerleader Whines About Harrison Butker Speech for Attention Appar...
Is the Iranian President, Ebrahim Raisi, Dead or Alive? (And the Jokes Are...
Sean 'Diddy' Combs Releases Weak Sauce Apology Video and Twitter Collectively Rolled Its...
Media LAPDOGS: Philadelphia Inquirer Says Biden 'Erroneously' Claimed Inflation Was 9% Twi...
Morehouse College Speaker Calls for Permanent Cease Fire in Gaza and CLUELESS Joe...
Get the Man a Dictionary: Bill Kristol Proves He's CLUELESS About What the...

Twitter Files Extra: The Australian government’s censorship requests

Matt Taibbi introduced this latest turn in the Twitter files:

Advertisement

So… here… we… go!

Social cohesion? The (American) Supreme Court once had something to say about the First Amendment and social cohesion:

Accordingly a function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute, … is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest. … There is no room under our Constitution for a more restrictive view. For the alternative would lead to standardization of ideas either by legislatures, courts, or dominant political or community groups.

Advertisement

Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) (Citations removed.) Naturally, there is nothing wrong with the government promoting social cohesion by means unrelated to the suppression of speech, but to do it by censorship is wrong.

But of course creating a standardization of ideas is the entire point of these censors down under:

And their censorship was not limited to their borders:

Advertisement

That link in turn links to the article in the Australian mentioned by Mr. Taibbi at the beginning, but its behind a paywall and we are cheap.

Some interesting reactions:

Australia more than most.

Advertisement

That seems like a useful resource.

***

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement