What Freedom of Speech?

Brian4Liberty

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
63,456

What Freedom of Speech?

by Jacob G. Hornberger | Jul 4, 2025

In a totalitarian or authoritarian dictatorship, government officials do not need the support of the citizenry to exterminate freedom of speech. That’s because there are no elections to worry about. The regime simply starts having its military and paramilitary goons start arresting critics, disappearing them in terrorist confinement facilities, torturing them, and then killing them. Everyone else understands. No more criticism of the regime.

In a democratic system, suppressing criticism is much more difficult owing to the problem of elections. If the goons of some democratically elected president begin rounding up critics, incarcerating them, torturing them, and killing them, the ruler runs the risk of being kicked out of office in the next election. There is also the risk of impeachment.

Thus, in a democracy rulers must figure out sophisticated and oftentimes devious ways to seduce or induce people to go along with the destruction of freedom of speech.

The United States was founded on the principle of freedom of speech. The Constitution, which called into existence a government of limited powers, did not delegate to the federal government the power to suppress criticism or to infringe on the natural, God-given right of freedom of speech. Thus, even without the First Amendment, freedom of speech would have still be legally immune from any attempt to suppress or destroy it.

But just to make the matter clear, our ancestors demanded the enactment of the First Amendment. It prohibits the federal government from doing anything to infringe on, regulate, or destroy freedom of speech.

Why did our ancestors deem it wise and even necessary to enact the First Amendment? Because they were smart people. They knew that all rulers hate criticism and love praise. They also knew that rulers would inevitably adopt measures intended to infringe, control, or destroy free speech.

Now, it’s true that no one in the United States is being jailed for speaking out against the government. Indeed, there are plenty of libertarian educational foundations and libertarian think tanks that regularly speak out against federal government wrongdoing. None of us is in jail. But does that mean that there is freedom of speech in this nation?

Actually not. Federal officials have long designed sophisticated ways to suppress speech in wide sectors of American society, such as the business, educational, banking, medical, and even the mainstream-media sectors. These sophisticated ways involve the regulated economy and the dole society that the Franklin Roosevelt administration brought into existence in the 1930s.

President Trump’s rhetoric and actions are perhaps bringing some of these sophisticated suppression devices into the light of the day. Consider, for example, his former ally Elon Musk. Musk has come out publicly against Trump’s “big beautiful bill,” which Musk points out is continuing the out-of-control federal spending and debt that is threatening to take down our country from within. Musk called the bill a “massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill” and “a disgusting abomination.”

That’s a classic exercise of freedom of speech. But what is Trump’s reaction? He is threatening Musk with a cut-off of federal contracts. His “big beautiful bill” also eliminates some tax benefits for Musk’s Tesla automobiles. He also saying that he might have to “put DOGE on Musk… DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon.” He has even suggested the possibility of deporting Musk.

In other words, Trump is threatening to employ the power of the federal government to destroy or severely harm an American citizen. And for what? For simply speaking out against Trump’s spending and debt bill.

And make no mistake about it. Every business person in the country knows that every president wields the power to destroy him. For one thing, many businesses are so dependent on the federal dole, either through subsidies or federal contracts, that they cannot imagine losing the dole. The last thing they are going to do is publicly take on what the president does, as Musk is doing. Watching Trump’s threats against Musk, they know what awaits them if they do the same. Most of them will remain silent on anything any president does, especially in foreign affairs.

Consider those big, powerful law firms that have capitulated to Trump’s demands. Why did they do that? One big reason may have been the fear of losing contracts or other business that they have with the federal government.

Consider all the universities that are agreeing to run their schools in accordance with Trump’s demands. Why are they doing that? Because long ago, U.S. officials induced them to go on dole. They are now so dependent on the dole that they will do anything to avoid losing it.

It’s not just the dole system though. It’s also the regulated-economy system that FDR foisted on American economic system. The federal government wields the power to destroy businesses simply through the power of regulation.

A perfect example of this phenomenon is the banking sector. Every bank president in America knows that federal inspectors wield the power to shut down banks by easily finding violations of minute banking regulations. That’s why one never finds one single bank president anywhere in the country ever taking on any president in a public way, in the manner that Musk is doing.

Consider the $16 million settlement that Paramount is entering into with Trump over an edited interview video that its subsidiary CBS did with Kamala Harris. Why is Paramount agreeing to make that payment to Trump? One possibility is that Paramount is in merger talks with another company. Under America’s regulated-economy system, the federal government has to approve the merger. Thus, it’s entirely possible that Paramount is agreeing to settle the case with Trump to ensure that the feds don’t block its merger.

It’s this way all across the board. This is why one rarely sees the CEOs of universities, big corporations, banks, medical companies, and other establishments criticizing the policies of the federal government. The dole system and the regulated-economy system are very sophisticated devices that have succeeded in silencing them. They don’t dare to exercise freedom of speech, no matter what the First Amendment says.

Reprinted with permission from Future of Freedom Foundation.
...
 
  • Like
Reactions: PAF
Elon is mad that he's losing government subsidies for EVs so he lies about the bill, Trump threatens to cut off more of Elon's pork.

Cry me a river.

This isn't about freedom of speech.
 
Elon is mad that he's losing government subsidies for EVs so he lies about the bill, Trump threatens to cut off more of Elon's pork.

Cry me a river.

This isn't about freedom of speech.

Now that's bunk. See here:

Tesla's sales are falling. Elon Musk doesn't seem to care.​


A shift in priorities​
For years, Musk’s relentless promotion of Tesla’s vehicles helped propel the company to the forefront of the electric vehicle (EV) revolution. But recently, his attention has been divided between his role in the Trump administration as head of the Department of Government Efficiency and his various other ventures, including SpaceX, X (formerly Twitter), and his artificial intelligence company, xAI.​


Not only that, but:

Elon Musk’s Brain Chip Was Put In A Patient At Miami-area Hospital

July 3, 2025​


I know you too well. You just didn't like the article because it was from the Future of Freedom Foundation.
 
Last edited:
Every president in US history has used the power of the government against their political enemies. It's the American way.
 
Now that's bunk. See here:

Tesla's sales are falling. Elon Musk doesn't seem to care.​


A shift in priorities​
For years, Musk’s relentless promotion of Tesla’s vehicles helped propel the company to the forefront of the electric vehicle (EV) revolution. But recently, his attention has been divided between his role in the Trump administration as head of the Department of Government Efficiency and his various other ventures, including SpaceX, X (formerly Twitter), and his artificial intelligence company, xAI.​


Not only that, but:

Elon Musk’s Brain Chip Was Put In A Patient At Miami-area Hospital

July 3, 2025​


I know you too well. You just didn't like the article because it was from the Future of Freedom Foundation.
Bunk.

"Doesn't seem to care", sure, mind reader.




Outgoing administration adviser Elon Musk is criticizing Republicans’ signature policy bill to advance President Trump’s agenda as the he walks out the door, saying it moves too quickly to phase out Biden-era low-carbon energy tax credits.

Musk, in a post on the social platform X, reposted his company Tesla Energy’s post that warns against “abruptly ending the energy tax credits.”

The post states: “We urge the senate to enact legislation with a sensible wind down” of credits for low-carbon electricity companies and homeowners who want to install residential green energy such as rooftop solar.


In a separate post, Musk wrote “there is no change to tax incentives for oil & gas, just EV/solar” in the House-passed GOP bill, which faces calls from changes from multiple Republicans in the Senate.

More at:
Code:
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5323536-musk-trump-gop-budget-bill-biden-green-energy-tax-credits/

 
The big one is that keeping the tax rates as they are is a cost.

Well, since that word salad means nothing, why not post a link to your source?

I'll be interested to see if it's a direct quote, or some treehouse children telling you what to think about something you haven't even listened to.
 
Well, since that word salad means nothing, why not post a link to your source?

I'll be interested to see if it's a direct quote, or some treehouse children telling you what to think about something you haven't even listened to.
I've already posted an article about it, all the claims about the increased spending are based on calculations that assume letting the biggest tax increase in history happen will bring in more revenue (a fallacy repeatedly disproven, tax rates above a certain amount reduce revenue by suppressing the economy and we are nowhere near the threshold) and that keeping the rates the same is the same as spending.

Everyone screaming about how much the bill costs is both lying and advocating for letting the biggest tax hike in history take place.

We should be lowering the rates even more and that would actually increase revenue.
 
I've already posted an article about it

You spam the fuck out of this forum, and I'm not sorting through all your treehouse fruity and nutty bullshit. Since you refuse to be specific I'm just going to assume you're proving yet again why your eyes are brown and move on.

Everyone screaming about how much the bill costs is both lying and advocating for letting the biggest tax hike in history take place.

There is no tax hike. I've never even heard of a spending bill that repeals another bill like a tax hike bill. This is the usual democrat perversion -- "If you don't vote for federal control of education you're voting for the end if all education, state local and private!!" -- translated into MAGA.

It's bullshit.
 
You spam the fuck out of this forum, and I'm not sorting through all your treehouse fruity and nutty bullshit. Since you refuse to be specific I'm just going to assume you're proving yet again why your eyes are brown and move on.



There is no tax hike. I've never even heard of a spending bill that repeals another bill like a tax hike bill. This is the usual democrat perversion -- "If you don't vote for federal control of education you're voting for the end if all education, state local and private!!" -- translated into MAGA.

It's bullshit.
I bumped it for you.

And there most certainly is a tax hike if the bill hadn't passed, during Trump's first term the RINO congress put a sunset clause on his big tax cut, the bill made the cut permanent, you are just pretending not to know things again.
 
Back
Top