Even as nearly every MSM company has become the mouthpiece for government propaganda, honest thought and dialogue continue to bubble up through the cracks. Stopping the Truth is like a Whack-A-Mole game. ;-)

Today, it is language itself that is twisted to redefine the meaning of 'rights,' such as 'hate speech' and 'free speech zones'. In America, 'hate speech' is not a crime -- the Constitution prohibits Congress from making laws that abridge the right to free speech. All of America is a Free Speech Zone. But words do have consequences, and the speaker is not free from that. Free speech zones on college campuses are more akin to a rubber room where you can rant and rave and foam at the mouth -- it is evident that these fenced in areas are for crazy people, and that is how their speech is treated.

I completely overlooked the 'privileged' part. ;-) That changes the context of the whole quote.

Truth has a resonance; it 'rings' true. The process of discernment requires the ability to speak in order to put words to the test -- do they ring or fall flat?

Divide and conquer -- don't let a crisis go to waste, right?

The City of Chicago that banned speech which "stirs the public to anger, invites dispute, brings about a condition of unrest, or creates a disturbance" was ruled unconstitutional, with Jackson dissenting. Not sure how to rate this one. I haven't read the full opinion, but I think it is a slippery slope to say that a city council statute can cancel a Constitutionally-protected right to prevent assumed 'suicide.' Suicide for whom? Who is in the pact?

How do you get rid of 'a lot' of government once its gotten? It's never pretty...

The attempt to roll everything into 'One' inevitably results in the elimination of any 'abnormalities' that vary from the rule -- the 'radical fringe' becomes ever larger and encompassing, and thus becomes the focus for war. It is 'groupism' in which the masses are herded into the largest blocs of power possible, which can only be done by appealing to the basest of urges. Elections then become populist, class struggles for power. What are the primary rallying cries? Race, sex, religion & poverty. You can't get anywhere politically if you aren't on the 'right' side of these. Which party is for the black, female, Muslim refugee? Which is for the white, male, Christian, entrepreneur? But a gay Conservative doesn't get much pull, nor a Christian black woman. Democrat Jews are finding themselves outside their once-supportive group because they don't fit the current 'profile.'

I'd like to see Americanism given a try. How about we let him/her be for a while, without the yoke, without the blinders, braces, and needle in the arm. Let their overflowing cups nurture their little 'jurisdictions.' Fulfillment comes naturally, it is the by-product of a giving nature. An American is the 'noble sovereign' living honorably and harmoniously with fellow sovereign Americans. Equal in rights, yet unequal in ages, sexes, abilities, properties, religions, cultures, and interests. Independent and inter-dependent, the American enjoys Liberty because he grants it to everyone else. But there is no 'leader' of Americans per se, our way is based upon principle not populist nationalism (as I have described it).

Mark, I do believe I understand your perspective on the American 'national' who is recognized from birth as a sovereign individual. But, I must disagree that "There is absolutely NO DOWNSIDE in the zealous practice of American (or any other) Nationalism" -- how about German Nationalist Socialist Democracy? How about the fascism of Mussolini and Franco? And FDR?

I am making a distinction between federalism and nationalism. Nationalism is statism, centralized government. Federalism is an association of sovereign states, with strictly limited powers. Nationalism centralizes power, while federalism respects the sovereign powers of the states -- at least that is what their charter declares.

The transformation from a republican form of federated government into a nationalist socialist democracy has redefined Americanism itself from an association of self-determining freemen/freewomen into worshipers of national politicians who will render us aid from our desperate and failing lives. Who to vote for? It doesn't matter -- the game is already rigged; the whole thing is a charade and a distraction from what is really happening. A Libertarian is not a party man, so in a game of 'the majority rules,' he doesn't have a chance. In a fascist democracy, the concepts of liberty and personal responsibility are but stumbling blocks, not staircases. Every effort is made to tear down the individual, and transfer his power to a 'competent authority.' It is the same from both sides of the aisle -- in a fixed game, the real opposition to fascism doesn't even get to play.

Still happening... war in the name of peace.

Politics 101. Divide and conquer. It is what a 'national' leader must do. The difference between nationalism and federalism is the difference between authoritarian and republican governments.

cal, I'm OK with persuasion rather than imposition. It's the difference between journalism and influence-peddling.

Self-evident to those working behind the 'scenes.' The lust for power and influence are driving factors. When people talk about campaign financing, they are literally talking about media financing -- all those millions upon millions raised get spent in the media. Professionals in producing 'the narrative' direct the talking heads to "get into character" -- it is a 'program', with a narration consumers are encouraged to adopt as their own inner voice. The 'actors' embrace their roles with a dollop of self-delusion, treating the script as gospel, and believing their own twist of the truth. The invention of new words and the changing of the meaning of old words fashions a false reality full of hobgoblins to war upon. I turned off broadcast TV many years ago, and it has been very liberating. I was embarrassed to discover how much I was merely parroting things I heard on TV -- even I did not believe myself as soon as I caught myself saying them. What other BS have I consumed?!

Brilliant! Where is this consciousness today among our representatives? It is certainly arising within the populace; something has got to give.

Every effort has been made to redefine the simple words of the 1st Amendment to NOT mean what it says. Even those that oppose liberty need the 1st Amendment to express that opposition -- it's the one law that the socialists have used to promote the redefinition of the rest of the Constitution. Hence the 2nd Amendment...

"Hate speech" being the exception to the rule. No one has a right to offend another. That's why we have a government, to punish the 'offenders.' What else is a government for? ;-)

Waffler couldn't get anyone to take the bait. He implies that we are "beholden to natural law written down by somebody 100-s and 1000's of years ago." No, we are beholden to natural law -- period. That's why it is called 'natural law' because it is inseparable from Nature, it cannot be 'broken.' Yes, people have been philosophizing about Nature and how it works since man could write, and yes, their interpretations can and do evolve as Logan has explained. That doesn't change the nature of the world, only our understanding of it. My sense is that there is something Waffler doesn't like that some old guy said 100s of years ago that doesn't jive with his own experience or teachings. The thing to do next is actually research the words, not just make a general statement about the words of wise men 1000 years ago, that just because they are old that they are wrong. Pick something and research it, then retell your findings. That is how discoveries are made.

The word 'truth' implies a language -- in order to tell the truth, you have to speak a language that the listener can understand. Using words to 'tell it like it is' is a skill -- you can describe a pineapple to a certain extent, but not enough to create the actual pineapple from the description -- a 3D designer can get real close, but never exact. So the words are a representation of the truth as described by the speaker. The pineapple IS. The speaker is trying to be truthful in its explanation, but the words will never equal the pineapple itself, it will always fall short of another aspect of the pineapple not included in the description. But speaking truthfully allows for a truthful 'witnessing.' Telling the truth, what little of it I may be able to communicate, leads to the bigger picture of the truth. The truth is always right in front of us. It's discernment requires an honest inquiry. Perhaps the quote should be:

"Speaking truthfully has always been found to promote the best interests of mankind."

The introduction of the concept of 'hate speech' has corrupted free speech. The stories coming from college campuses today tell us that free speech is not welcome, it is considered 'hateful.' The speakers are then vilified and the mob is encouraged to lynch them for their rhetoric. All in the name of tolerance, mind you, not love. The media fuels the fire as authorities on speech correctness and continue with their mantras of tolerance, diversity, and blame. Violent response to spoken words is the epitome of hypocrisy. This is not tolerance, this is not "non-hate speech", this is not a dialogue, it IS violence, it IS violating people's rights, it IS war. Why are colleges promoting violence and civil war in the name of tolerance and diversity? It is now a punishable 'offense' to say something that might hurt someone's feelings -- unless you are a white heterosexual male, the ultimate 'offender' of all.

One more thing, Robert. It was due to 'progressive' policies that the Federal Reserve was created, as well as the income tax to back it up. It turns out that Federal Reserve Notes are not backed by nothing -- they are 'secured' by the labors of the people which will be taxed to pay the interest guaranteed to the Fed. From this Monopoly money game, socialism/fascism (both on the left, mind you) took hold in the US. Ever since, the war/welfare/police state has been built up to make the bank the ruler of all. Progressivism cannot be fixed, its purpose is to gradually consume all, to own all, to control all, for the betterment of all.

You call for the end of monopolies, but propose health care for all -- run by whom? Paid for by whom? Decided by whom? An 'administrator'? Do not people self-organize? You say, "end all wars" -- I guess if you stop defending yourself, war would end, as would your liberty or life. Be glad you personally are not on a front-line right now -- can you really tell someone fighting for their life to stop? Good intentions without an actual process is simply a good prayer -- it still leaves the responsibility to someone else. Take responsibility for the wars you wish to stop -- there is no other way. The wars that have stopped were stopped by those that took responsibility for stopping them. Are you that guy? Why not?

If peace were simple, it would have happened long ago. Progressivism has not stopped one war, but it has financed a whole lot of them.

I know, right?!! ;-)

Robert, I agree with the many things that need to happen, just disagree on how we could get there. You are in actuality speaking of the Christian way, these ideals are not new or 'progressive,' and they have stood the test of time. I don't know how all those free services you propose will be delivered unless people agree to deliver them. It still sounds like social engineering instead of simply the protocols of a prospering community of people living in harmony -- it does happen without outside intervention. In fact, I will go so far as to say that the world works because people act independently, following their own consciences and impulses. The real 'progress' is in one's self-realization, from which an holistic view and approach naturally serves one another. Our 'cups overflowing' is a philosophical understanding of life itself. I could never understand how an atheist didn't understand what it means to be thankful for this life. "Thankful to whom, for what?" The 'One' for 'it all.' ;-)

Robert, fascism is rooted in national socialism. The NAZI party were the nationalist socialist party. You can thank FDR for putting the US on the fascist path -- the New Deal was the conversion to a socialist system. Socialist/Communist revolutions result in a permanent 'deep state' of corruption. All you socialists out there ought to remember that millions of people were killed/died transitioning to a totalitarian system -- and that is what socialism is in whatever form, totalitarianism. It matters not the good intentions. Hitler and Mao had good intentions, and many millions loved them.