THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

SOVIET FREE SPEECH | 2014-07-11

The definition of freedom normally given is "the right to do anything that does not abridge the rights of others."

According to this definition, there was not a single slave in the United States in 1850. Black slaves were free to do anything that did not abridge the rights of their masters.

Using that definition, free speech only allows you to say anything that doesn't offend anybody.

The Soviet Constitution of 1936, issued by history's greatest lover of freedom, Joseph Stalin, contained an absolute right to freedom of speech.

Solzhenitsyn wrote The Gulag Archipelago about his nightmare years in Soviet Death Camps. He was sent to the Gulag for writing private letters that were critical of Stalin. It was one of tens of millions of cases where Soviet Freedom of Speech had an exception.

Those letters expressed Solzhenitsyn's hatred of Stalin.

And, in the USSR then as in the US now, "Hate is not free speech."

In America, one example of this Hate would be for a white man to say he wouldn't want his daughter to marry a black man. Solzhenitsyn's letters to a friend about Stalin made it pretty clear that the Soviet Leader would not be his ideal husband for any daughter he had.

During the 1960s Mommy Professors' boys running around in hippie uniforms wanted to have something to call a Free Speech Movement. Their problem was finding something to say that anyone world dare object to. Not only was everything they said ALLOWED in the media and on campus, it was the ONLY thing allowed in the media and on campus.

So they started fearlessly yelling obscenities to each other on campus and calling themselves champions of free speech.

No one objected, but the  media announced that their shouting obscenities was courageous and daring, like everything else they did.

The purpose of freedom of speech was never the right to scream obscenities. Since the 1700s, the purpose of free speech in America was to EXPRESS AN OPINION.

In fact, freedom of speech DOES allow you to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

But only if, your honest opinion is that there IS a fire in a crowded theater.

In Britain, where Soviet Free Speech rules, "The Truth is no defense" for heresy.

Way back in 1734 America established that telling the truth as you see it IS the ultimate legal defense for free speech.

John Peter Zenger was a German American printer in New York City.

In late 1733, Zenger began printing The New York Weekly Journal to voice  opinions critical of the colonial governor, William Cosby.

In November 1734, Zenger was arrested for libel by the sheriff on the orders of Cosby.

Zenger was acquitted in a landmark case where the jury ruled that the truth is an absolute defense against libel.

Two generations later "The truth IS a defense" was overwhelmingly reasserted in the 1798 congressional election. That election destroyed George Washington's Federalist Party forever largely because that Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts.

The Alien and Sedition Acts reasserted the British and Stalinist assertions that "truth is not a defense."

What Zenger said was true but Governor Cosby didn't like it. The American jury said that was just too bad.

Soviet and now British "free speech" outlaw honest opinions and factual statements with slogans like "Hate is not Free Speech" and "Heresy is not free speech."

That way lies enslavement.

Free speech means the right to state the facts and ANY honest opinion.

Audio Bob

[audio mp3="http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/wp-content/uploads//Final-number-1.mp3"][/audio]

Soviet Free Speech Part 1

[audio mp3="http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/wp-content/uploads//Part-2.mp3"][/audio]

Audio Bob Conversation - 1

[audio mp3="http://www.whitakeronline.org/blog/wp-content/uploads//Part-3.mp3"][/audio]

Audio Conversations Bob - 2

LAW: SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS AND THE LAW | nationalsalvation.net

There are no social constructs under International Law.

Go to see the local Forensic Pathologists and pull a hair from your head. The pathologists will test it and tell you what RACE you are. However, to keep his job he will tell you that race does not exist. Social Science and Real Science are not one and the same.

The law only recognizes REAL Science. International Law only recognizes REAL Science. No one can plead, "they were just a social construct" at a genocide tribunal. Don't believe me? Just ask Saddam Hussein.

There are no social constructs under International Law.Comment by Tim

NO RESERVATIONS | 2012-09-10

In 1900 Americans Indians were known as the Vanishing Americans. As a result they were given reservations.

For whites there can be no reservations.

In fact one of the of the SPLC's great victories, for which it raised many millions, was to destroy the white reservation in Idaho. They are still raising money to get more blacks into northern Idaho.

Compared to anti-whites, Hitler was a piker. He offered to send Jews to America for ransom. There is no where on earth which will even allow anyone to TALK about white survival for ransom or otherwise.

Once again, no one talks about the real problem here:

If any area is allowed to be all-white, it is assumed that ALL whites will end up there. Anti-whites have a word for it: It's called White Flight.

It is exactly the same problem that showed Communism was ridiculous: If they allowed people to leave, the people WOULD leave.

But no one ever MENTIONED that but me.

The entire anti-white movement relies on the assumption that if whites are allowed to have ANY area of its own, there will be flow into those areas which will drain all other areas of whites.

Talking about white flight is quite an admission.

The Berlin Wall was quite an admission.

Fortunately, absolutely no one on the other side is ever going to mention it.

BASICS: FINISHING LIBERALS SENTENCES FOR THEM | nationalsalvation.net

A good many semi-respectables have done yeoman work, even the AR types with their IQ fixations. But those who face the cultists and peel the cult back to its core do the real work. People like Putnam and those like him did great and interesting work, but they made the mistake of trying to finish the sentences of liberals. Hence they got lost in the cult, it would have been like standing outside of Jonestown with a sign that said, "We too believe in peace" (or some such nonsense).

Comment by Simmons

ME:

Excellent BASIC thinking, "Finishing liberals' sentences for them" is the best description of respectable conservatives I have ever read!