Once upon a time, you could say something offensive during a private conversation with friends and associates, resulting in some criticism and limited social ostracism. That was during a time when you had the free speech rights provided under the Constitution. If you expressed biased and/or bigoted opinions on issues and people, you’d be judged by your peers and treated with the appropriate level of contempt. In addition, if you verbalized the same opinions publicly, you’d be criticized by columnists, radio and television talk show hosts and political pundits. In other words, you had the right to say it, and they had the right to chide you for it. However, they didn’t have the right to destroy your reputation, impugn your character, or rob you of your property. Not anymore!
In our current state of incipient totalitarianism, free speech depends on who’s using it and who’s sitting in judgment of it. If you’re a member of a protected class of people your access to free speech in unlimited. Blacks can refer to whites as “honkies, peckerwoods, rednecks,” etc., without fear of serious reprisal. On the other hand, if a white refers to a black in any context, it becomes the subject of intense scrutiny, with the hope that it can be sufficiently distorted to portray the white as a racist. Al Sharpton, a man who has turned race-baiting into a cash cow for his own nefarious activities, sits upon a lofty throne like a wizened megalomaniac, choosing who will be deemed ineligible to exercise freedom of speech.
If Mr. Black calls Mr. White an uncivilized lowlife, Mr. White can object to such a demeaning description and simply walk away. The minor disagreement won’t be on the front page of the New York Times or recorded for mass distribution on YouTube. Conversely, if Mr. White makes the same reference to Mr. Black, Sharpton, and others of his ilk, will immediately spring into action to seek out ways to destroy the purveyor of such an utterance, its constitutionality notwithstanding. Mass media will become joyous accessories to the character assassination and public humiliation of the sinful free speech practitioner, who was led to believe that he had equal rights under the law. A typical question from the “reverend” would be: “Was he called uncivilized because he’s black?” Or, “Does his skin color make him a lowlife?”
What race-hustlers have learned is that whites can be intimidated to the point in which they will be deathly afraid to criticize anything black, lest they be branded for life with the term “racist;” the most heinous crime in the world, with the possible exception of “child-molester.” Such demonization of the majority makes tyrants of the minority. Hence, if a white points out that blacks commit violent crimes way out of proportion to their percentage of the population, he will be attacked as a racist, and it won’t matter that he’s simply stating a fact. There’s no such thing as a fact if it tends to illustrate something negative about a protected group. With that in mind, the protected group category is growing ever larger. People are eagerly seeking asylum within the sacrosanct boundaries of political correctness.
If you violate someone’s right to privacy by secretly taping a conversation and disseminating it to the world, opening them to vicious defamation and misinterpretation of their actual views, you’re “protected” if the misinterpreted words had a racial context. In a recent case, a sports franchise owner was told he must sell his team, pay a $2.5 million fine and never show his face at an NBA game again. Can anyone’s personal safety and private property be protected in a country where free speech has been turned into a public whipping post and an ATM machine for the opportunist with a cell phone? There is much more at stake here for the rights of individual Americans than this recent bimbo eruption disguised as racial inequality. Whatever happened to: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Sadly, the new freedom is defined as “I’ll agree with what you say if it is consistent with liberal orthodoxy, but I will do everything possible to destroy you if it isn’t.”
The question isn’t whether or not a person is a racist; it’s whether or not their private thoughts and reckless rants should be protected under the Bill of Rights. Yet, the way the despotic system has been constructed, you dare not even try to argue the merits of free speech if that speech has been connected, however remotely, to skin color. Moreover, if you say anything that doesn’t begin with “That guy is a hateful bigot,” you’ve become suspect in the eyes of the speech police and you may not get a chance to finish your thought. To say this is a slippery slope is a gross understatement, since we’re already plummeting at full speed to the bottom of the hill.
Bob Weir is a veteran of 20 years with the New York Police Dept. (NYPD), ten of which were performed in plainclothes undercover assignments. Bob began a writing career about 12 years ago and had his first book published in 1999. Bob went on to write and publish a total of seven novels, “Murder in Black and White,” “City to Die For,” “Powers that Be,” “Ruthie’s Kids,” “Deadly to Love,” “Short Stories of Life and Death,” and “Out of Sight.” He also became a syndicated columnist under the title “Weir Only Human.”