WI DSA Gov Hopeful Francesca Hong Tells Fox News She’s Against Abolishing Senate…...
Trump Gave Thune One Last Chance. He Wasted It.
Republicans, the Florida Governor’s Mansion Isn’t Eighth-Grade Student Council
America's 250th Anniversary Is More Than Just One Single Day
James Carville Lashes Out at the 'Progressive Left' Frankenstein’s Monster His Dem Party...
DNC Deputy Director Scott Brown Strokes His Cat While Explaining the DNC Is...
PLEASE Put Out the Fire! Drunk Republican Revisits Billy Joel to Laugh at...
Schumer, Pelosi Back-Stabbed by Hunter Biden As Dem Coalition Collapses
Bought Blessing: How Abdul El-Sayed Quietly Paid $75,000 for a Detroit Pastor’s Endorsemen...
WH Posts Unreal Photos From Spain Due to Open Borders Insanity (Wait, This...
Comrade Mamdani’s DSA Just Pledged to 'Defend' Chinese Socialism — Peak Democrat Energy
'Dems Deliver' Account Celebrates NY Bill That Would Only Deliver Higher Prices at...
Dem Running for Maine Senate Troy Jackson Completely Blank on Tourist Spots in...
Senate Candidate Troy Jackson Is TRYING to Change the Subject to Susan Collins...
Seattle Mayor Forces Black Police Chief to Resign As Scapegoat for Shooting Chaos...

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