Page 763«..1020..762763764765..770780..»

Category Archives: Transhuman News

Texas’ Social Media Law is Not the Solution to Censorship – EFF

Posted: September 22, 2021 at 2:53 am

The big-name social media companies have all done a ratheratrocious jobof moderating user speech on their platforms. However, much like Florida's similarlyunconstitutionalattempt to address the issue (S.B. 7072), Texas' recently enactedH.B. 20would make the matter worse for Texans and everyone else.

Signed into law by Governor Abbott last week, the Texas law prohibits platforms with more than 50 million users nationwide from moderating user posts based on viewpoint or geographic location. However, as we stated in ourfriend-of-the-court briefin support of NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Associations lawsuit challenging Florida's law (NetChoice v. Moody), "Every court that has considered the issue, dating back to at least 2007, has rightfully found that private entities that operate online platforms for speech and that open those platforms for others to speak enjoy a First Amendment right to edit and curate that speech."

Inconsistent and opaque content moderation by online media services is a legitimate problem. It continues to result in the censorship of a range of important speech, often disproportionately impacting people who arent elected officials. That's why EFF joined with a cohort of allies in 2018 to draft theSanta Clara Principles on Transparency and Accountability in Content Moderation, offering one model for how platforms can begin voluntarily implementing content moderation practices grounded in a human rights framework. Under the proposed principles, platforms would:

H.B. 20 does attempt to mandate some of the transparency measures called for in the Santa Clara Principles. Although these legal mandates might be appropriate as part of a carefully crafted legislative scheme, H.B. 20 is not the result of a reasonable policy debate. Rather it is a retaliatory law aimed at violating the First Amendment rights of online services in a way that will ultimately harm all internet users.

We fully expect that once H.B. 20 is challenged, courts will draw from the wealth of legal precedent and find the law unconstitutional. Perhaps recognizing that H.B. 20 is imperiled for the same reasons as Floridas law, the Lonestar State this week filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the appeal of a federal courts ruling that Floridas law is unconstitutional.

Despite Texas and Floridas laws being unconstitutional, the concerns regarding social media platforms' control on our public discourse is a critical policy issue. It is vitally important that platforms take action to provide transparency, accountability, and meaningful due process to all impacted speakers and ensure that the enforcement of their content guidelines is fair, unbiased, proportional, and respectful of human rights.

See the original post:
Texas' Social Media Law is Not the Solution to Censorship - EFF

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Texas’ Social Media Law is Not the Solution to Censorship – EFF

‘It’s heroic’: Tennessee Williams theater fest goes on despite a pandemic and a hurricane – Cape Cod Times

Posted: at 2:53 am

Censorship is the theme of this years Provincetown Tennessee Williams Theater Festival, but the four-day event has also turned out to be about resilience.

Those involved this year have determinedly created art through a pandemic with the many off-Cape artists waiting a year to be able to travel to present their work and some have faced the fears and challenges of a hurricane, too.

The Mahagonny Songspiel, written by Bertolt Brecht with music by Kurt Weill, will be presented with music and puppetry each day of the Sept. 23-26 annual event by members of AllWays Lounge in Exile from New Orleans.

Final rehearsals to bring the show north to Provincetown to celebrate playwright Williams had just begun last month when Hurricane Ida hit Louisiana, according to festival co-founder/curator David Kaplan.

They continued to rehearse, in rehearsal space without electricity and running water, going home to places without electricity and running water, he says. I thought (the show) might have to be canceled … but Dennis (Monn), the director, said no, (readying for the Williams festival) is what is giving them a sense of purpose.

Theyre doing something. Theyre not passively enduring a hurricane. Theyre creating something … and looking forward to coming to Provincetown and showing what theyve got, Kaplan says.

Here, the production had to be moved outside because of COVID-19 concerns as have most of the presentations and the festival is providing a keyboard and drum kit to replace what was destroyed in New Orleans. The theater company has been indefatigable, Kaplan marvels. Its been very inspiring. … Its heroic. They deserve support.

The complex musical score the group will perform is described as Hitlers least favorite collection of songs. Brechts tangos, love ballads and musical commentary are part of a fable of innocence that addresses a morally bankrupt society. The reaction at its 1927 premiere nearly a century ago? Nazi and Communist sympathizers blew whistles to stop it.

As part of telling that history of trying to censor thought, AllWays Lounge will be handing out whistles to the Provincetown audience, too.

Thats just one of numerous creative ways productions in the festival will explore and create conversations about the Tennessee Williams & Censorship theme. Thats the same focus as 2020 when organizers managed to put on a much smaller, outdoor event but the emphasis has changed from Puritans and writer Williams battle with censors.

In 2021, were discussing when, if ever, censorship is appropriate, Kaplan said when he announced the season.

The festival will include four plays by Williams, who spent a few summers in the 1940s in Provincetown and wrote some of his best-known work there, including The Glass Menagerie.

The festival will include Williams 1940 Battle of Angels, the run of which was cut short by Boston censors, presented by Blessed Unrest, a subversive physical theater ensemble from New York City. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Department of Theatre will present Why Did Desdemona Love the Moor?, an unfinished short story by Williams in which a Black screenwriter in 1940s Hollywood has a secret affair with his films white leading lady, a piece never produced because of the interracial relationship.

Back this year will be The Municipal Abattoir, which Kaplan staged last year on a dune as a Hitchcock-inspired thriller. The Philadelphia-based Die-Cast ensemble will explore The Demolition Downtown, a pointedly political short play by Williams in which a suburban family shuts themselves up in their house as explosions rock their countrys capital.

Other shows presented will include the Longing Lasts Longer rock manifesto by Penny Arcade (with a connected interactive workshop) confronting cultural amnesia as a form of censorship. A Sex play from 1926 that got Mae West thrown in jail will be produced by international ensemble The Goat Exchange, during a Tea Dance at The Boatslip Resort and Beach Club.

The Witch is a satire based on a 1616 drama by Thomas Middleton, with an all-female cast from the Outer Cape group Campfire Quorum playing women from the Pilgrim ship Mayflower.

Beyond live performances, there will also be workshops, parties and educational programming, all connected to Williams and the censorship theme. One-time events will be a Tennessees Latest Peep Show burlesque show bump and grind response to censorship by Lefty Lucy who also had to rehearse from a damaged New Orleans home; and a Cut Blanche interactive censoring display of the 1951 film of A Streetcar Named Desire, led by the former festival executive director Jef Hall-Flavin.

Beyond censorship, a pandemic and a hurricane, Kaplan adds the countrys political divide to the challenges that artists involved with the festival and beyond have to face. While some left-leaning people are angry or dismissive these days of people in conservative southern states, Kaplan said its important to think about the artists and others living in those states who dont agree with politicians stands on controversial topics and actions.

It is significant that we have a Tennessee Williams festival in New England, and not just in Mississippi (where Williams was born) and New Orleans (where he spent much of his later years) because he is an American writer, Kaplan says. We dont need to allow politicians and other people to define American identity for us. We can have our artists both dead and alive and future help to identify American identity. … We share this American cultural figure.

In New England, he says, we have an obligation … to recognize and help support those people in the South who are struggling to be heard, and that includes artists.

Noting that a group from Texas Tech University has been part of the Williams festival for years, Kaplan says, No matter how we feel about the governor of Texas, thats not the point. Not everyone in Texas feels that way and we want to encourage the people in Texas with whom we have common interests to come celebrate, and meet each other.

Then he adds with a laugh: And conspire.

Contact Kathi Scrizzi Driscoll at kdriscoll@capecodonline.com. Follow on Twitter: @KathiSDCCT.

What: The 16th annual Provincetown Tennessee Williams Theater Festival

When: Sept. 23-26

Where: Various venues around town

Tickets and information: twptown.org and 866-789-8366

COVID-19 protocols: Most performances will be outdoors or under tents with open sides. For indoor shows, a vaccination card or negative PCR test is needed for admission. Masks and social distancing required at all shows.

See the original post:
'It's heroic': Tennessee Williams theater fest goes on despite a pandemic and a hurricane - Cape Cod Times

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on ‘It’s heroic’: Tennessee Williams theater fest goes on despite a pandemic and a hurricane – Cape Cod Times

Heritage Pressure Leads to Amazon’s Reversing Censorship Decision – Heritage.org

Posted: at 2:53 am

WASHINGTONEarlier this week, The Heritage Foundation was informed that Amazon would not support paid promotion of Heritage Senior Fellow Mike Gonzalezs expos on the Black Lives Matter movement, BLM: The Making of a New Marxist Revolution. Amazon declared promotion of the book no longer complies with our current Creative Acceptance Policies because it contains book/s or content that is not allowed. Content that revolves around controversial or highly debated social topics is not permitted. In other words, Heritage viewpoints were effectively being censored.

Heritage appealed the decision earlier this week, giving Amazon well beyond its own stated response time before issuing a forceful statement Thursday morning. Amazon subsequently reversed its decision and will allow paid promotion of Gonzalezs book to move forward. Importantly, an Amazon spokesperson told The Daily Signals Fred Lucas that the original decision banning promotion was the result of human error, not an automated decision by a computer or algorithm.

Heritage Foundation President Kay C. James said:

While we appreciate Amazon reversing this egregious decision, this incident is consistent with the trend of Big Tech companies to suppress conservative speech they disagree with. Thats why The Heritage Foundations Center for Technology Policy continues to monitor Big Tech companies and recommend legislative and regulatory solutions to ensure that they are held accountable when they unfairly suppress speech, especially speech that encourages healthy debate on the critical issues that America faces.

Amazons original stated reason for suspending the ad included that it does not allow content that revolves around controversial or highly debated social topics. Using that standard, one of the worlds largest booksellers apparently wouldnt allow ads for the biggest bestseller in historythe Bible.

Kara Frederick, research fellow in Heritages Center for Technology Policy, released the following statement upon learning of Amazons reversal:

This episode is a reminder that while sometimes Big Tech can be pressured to respond in certain cases of wrongdoing, there are so many more instances where those without the resources or large-enough public profile simply have to live with the arbitrary decisions made by these companies. The fact that this was the result of human error further demonstrates the need for Big Tech companies to establish clear, sensible, and consistent rules and policies, and then implement those rules and policies fairly across the board. They also must be willing to publicly admit mistakes when they do occur, whether intentional or not. Big Techs influence over everyday American life continues to grow. Its vital that we establish clear standards for how these companies behave, and mechanisms to hold them accountablewhen they dont.

Read the rest here:
Heritage Pressure Leads to Amazon's Reversing Censorship Decision - Heritage.org

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Heritage Pressure Leads to Amazon’s Reversing Censorship Decision – Heritage.org

Here’s how to beat liberal censorship of ideas – Catholic Culture

Posted: at 2:53 am

By Phil Lawler (bio - articles - email) | Sep 17, 2021

In todays Wall Street Journal, my friend Tom Spence, president of Regnery Publishing (which brought out my book Lost Shepherd), lets loose on Banned Books Week. He explains that this gimmicky promotion caters primarily to those who believe that schoolchildren should have access to anything bound between two covers without the interference of those busybodies we call parents.

Unfortunately, Spence observes, there are books being banned todayalthough the sponsors of Banned Books Week have nothing to say about it. Books that offend against woke attitudes and politically-correct standards are disappearing from bookstores and from the Amazon menu. Authors are cancelled. Lecturers are disinvited.

Such censorship hurts the authors, of course. But it also hurts the rest of us, their potential readers, because we never have a chance to learn what they have to say. We dont even know what we dont know.

The censorship is not confined to written works alone, however. The social-media giants, Facebook and Twitter, are even more blatant in stifling the views that their employees find offensive. How often have you seen a fact-check pasted onto a controversial postand, if you took the time to investigate, discovered that the fact-check was far more misleading than the post it sought to correct.

An urban television news team recently issued an appeal on Facebook, asking for stories about unvaccinated people who had been felled by Covid. That Facebook page was promptly flooded with thousands of replies. But the vast majority of those replies were not giving the reporters what they wanted; instead they were telling stories about friends and relatives who had been harmed by the Covid injections, or had contracted Covid even after being fully vaccinated. Clearly this response was not what the TV news editors expected. Still, isnt it a story nonetheless?

News editorslike publishers and librarians and bookstore owners and social-media baronshave enormous power to sway public opinion. They exercise that power not only by putting their own slant on news stories, but alsofar more ominouslyby censoring the stories they find inconvenient. You cannot be outraged by an injustice, or encouraged by a positive development, if you dont hear about them.

Mistrust of the mass media is widespread in our society today. Many Americans say that they dont believe what they hear from the mainstream media. That skepticism is richly deserved, and for the most part healthy. Still a problem remains. You may not believe what you see in the mainstream media, but what about what you dont see? You dont know what you dont know.

This is why, for more than 30 years now, I have been insisting that discerning readers need to find their own trusted sources of news. If you know that the mainstream media are offering slanted coverage of some stories, and blacking out other stories altogether, you need to find outlets that will provide accurate reporting on the subjects that interest you. Which is I why I established Catholic World News, 25 years ago, and why I want you all to encourage your loyal Catholic friends to discover us.

Phil Lawler has been a Catholic journalist for more than 30 years. He has edited several Catholic magazines and written eight books. Founder of Catholic World News, he is the news director and lead analyst at CatholicCulture.org. See full bio.

Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a current donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

See the original post here:
Here's how to beat liberal censorship of ideas - Catholic Culture

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Here’s how to beat liberal censorship of ideas – Catholic Culture

Kano Censorship Board bans films with scenes of abduction, drug addiction – Daily Sun

Posted: at 2:52 am

From Desmond Mgboh, Kano

The Kano State Film Censorship Board has outlawed sales of movies displaying scenes of abduction, drug addiction or theft of GSM phones as part of efforts to check the rising cases of violent crimes in the state.

The Executive Secretary of the Board, Ismaila Naaba Afakallah, disclosed this during a session with the media saying the prohibition became necessary in the face of criminal trends in the state.

Henceforth, we will not allow films displaying kidnappings, drug addiction and GSM phone snatching which has now taken a toll on Kano residents, he stated.

He added that the measure was aimed at curtailing the menace and reducing the possibility of young people taking to these criminal acts mistaking them to be real.

Not every young man has the tenacity of understanding fictitious film actions. Somebody might mistake it as a reality and may go ahead to practice it. Therefore, we must act now before it is too late, he added.

The snatching of mobile phones and other valuables like handbags has been on the rise in Kano. Also rising at an alarming rate is the rate of drug addiction and abuse across gender in the state.

The rest is here:
Kano Censorship Board bans films with scenes of abduction, drug addiction - Daily Sun

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Kano Censorship Board bans films with scenes of abduction, drug addiction – Daily Sun

Provincetown Tennessee Williams Festival returns to celebrate works that made the censors sweat – The Boston Globe

Posted: at 2:52 am

I think Tennessee Williams accidentally wrote a love letter to the year 2020, says director Brenna Geffers of Williamss The Demolition Downtown, the short play shes staging outdoors at the Bas Relief in the towns center. Geffers, founder of the Philadelphia-based Die-Cast ensemble, has directed four festival productions over the years, including Pericles in 2017.

The Demolition Downtown is about a fascist takeover and the way many might sort of comfortably slide into that, Geffers says. David [Kaplan] chose the play before the pandemic. But its about a couple afraid to leave their house and talking about what food they have left in the freezer, so it became spooky and, after Jan. 6, it seemed even more relevant.

The rarely staged play was published in Esquire magazine in June 1971 as the escalating war in Vietnam divided the nation. As a companion piece, Kaplan directs an outdoor staging of Williamss dark satire The Municipal Abattoir, a short play that Williams worked on through the 1960s. It centers on a government clerk and a state-run slaughterhouse where good citizens, when summoned, go willingly to be killed.

In both plays, the audience has a voyeuristic experience, says Geffers. They are both funny pieces [about] a world that is absurd yet so familiar that we can do nothing else but laugh at it. Its too terrifying to do anything else.

Williamss plays and their popular screen adaptations were often censored, including his first produced play, Battle of Angels. In its pre-Broadway tryout in Boston in 1940, the Boston City Council took umbrage at the story of a charismatic drifter, Val Xavier, whose arrival upends a Mississippi Delta small town and exposes its racism and religious intolerance. According to the festival program, when Margaret Webster, the plays original director, returned to Boston to watch a performance of the censored version, she wrote that she found a castrated and largely incomprehensible edition of the play dying an inevitable death at the Wilbur Theatre.

Not just that, but a conflagration at the end of the play went so awry on opening night they almost burned down the entire theater. The first two rows of the audience had to flee, says Jessica Burr, founder and artistic director of the New York City ensemble Blessed Unrest, which will stage the Battle of Angels, sans pyrotechnics, at Provincetowns Town Hall.

Perhaps not surprisingly, Battle of Angels never made it to Broadway, although 17 years later a different version with a new title, Orpheus Descending, did open in New York. A third retelling was the 1960 film The Fugitive Kind, starring Williams mainstays Marlon Brando and Anna Magnani.

Burr sees contemporary parallels in the 1939-set Battle of Angels.

We generally think of community as a good thing but in this case theres a dangerous groupthink that can destroy the individual. Its also an impossible love story between people who refuse to compromise. They are surrounded by these terrified, frightened people who have to destroy it to keep the status quo.

Unlike the original production, Burrs Battle of Angels has a multiracial cast led by Michael Gene Jacobs, a Black actor. Burr says her research indicates that Williams likely wanted Val to be played by a Black man. But in 1940 Williams was 23 years old and a nobody. He could not tell the producers what to do.

Williams was obsessed with the Othello story, says Burr. He studied Shakespeare really closely and he studied his Greeks. [Battle of Angels] is a collision between these very Christian ideals of right and wrong and the Greeks sensibility. Before completing the play, Williams wrote a short story called Why Did Desdemona Love the Moor? Its a strange piece but it led directly into Battle of Angels, she says.

Audiences can see the connection for themselves as the festival will also present a staged reading of Why Did Desdemona Love the Moor? at Fishermen Hall. Adapted by Thomas Owen Mitchell, it is about a Black screenwriter who has a secret affair with a white movie goddess. Williams abandoned the project after writing 75 manuscript pages, likely because he realized that, in 1940, the subject matter would prevent it from being produced as either a play or a film.

PROVINCETOWN TENNESSEE WILLIAMS FESTIVAL

At various locations in Provincetown, Sept. 23-26. Schedule and ticket information at http://www.twptown.org

More here:
Provincetown Tennessee Williams Festival returns to celebrate works that made the censors sweat - The Boston Globe

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Provincetown Tennessee Williams Festival returns to celebrate works that made the censors sweat – The Boston Globe

The English are rogues in a way we Irish only imagine ourselves to be – The Irish Times

Posted: September 20, 2021 at 9:32 am

I am back living in England, and Ill probably catch Covid. Theres a sense of inevitability to it. While the British government would never admit to pursuing herd immunity, the reality on the ground is fairly unambiguous.

Too many of my friends and comedy colleagues have become infected since Freedom Day, inJuly, and have reported varying levels of illness. I spoke to a comic in Hull who suffered from brain fog for months after his diagnosis. He told me how he found himself standing on stage in front of packed audiences, blanking on his own punchlines. Id really rather not catch it.

Ireland was a comforting spot to retreat to when the pandemic was at its zenith, but as the world opened back upI had a frustrating feeling that home had been too strict for too long. England has undoubtedly been at the other end of the spectrum. My first weekend back in London felt like an alternative reality, one where masks were optional and venues were heaving. Theres been a sense that the pandemic is over, that everyone hasmoved on.

Englands race towards easing restrictions has got as much to do with its national character as with its early vaccine triumph. The English are rogues in a way we Irish only imagine ourselves to be. A virulent strain of libertarianism influences all aspects of life here. As we discovered with Brexit, the notional idea of freedom is often prized as an end in itself, even if it has negative consequences.

This fetishisation of liberty at the expense of other values has played itself out again during the pandemic, with tragic consequences. When asked last year why Britains infection rates were higher than those in the rest of Europe, Britains prime minister,Boris Johnson, explained that his was a freedom-loving country.

He might have had a point. A Eurobarometer survey in 2017 found that Irish and British people were the most individualistic in Europe:most respondents in both countries said they would prefer that society be based more on individualism than solidarity. Despite this, the two nations have largely responded to the pandemic very differently, with Ireland applying a longer and harsher lockdown than anywhere else in Europe.

A preoccupation with personal liberty isnt necessarily a bad thing, of course. Ive always found the English to be largely laid back and open-minded. Irish people have migrated to the UK for generations in search of both economic and personal opportunities. Even Tnaiste Leo Varadkar flew to London and attended a festival in September. Similar events were banned at home, and he obviously needed to blow off some steam. The English, broadly speaking, will let you get on with things.

Englands decision to lift all restrictions while the Delta variant was still surging is a little more explicable in this context. But it is also worth considering the terrible example set by its most senior politicians. Most countries have had examples of government officials breaking their own rules, but the UK has been a world beater.

The hypocrisy reached its nadir when it emerged that Matt Hancock, the former secretary of state for health who effectively imposed a sex ban on the nations single people, had breached guidelines to conduct an extramarital affair. Public morale reached a new low, and continued Covid regulations became untenable. There was a sense of people having just given up.

Ultimate responsibility for the UKs coronavirus debacle lies with its prime minister. No public figure better embodies the countrys jolly libertarianism than him. With the dark days of 2020 now behind him, Johnson seems to be having a bit of a laugh again. He even joked to party colleagues that the early success of his governments vaccine rollout was because of capitalism, because of greed, my friends. Theres truth in jest.

While the Gordon Gecko school of public service may have endeared him to pharmaceutical companies, the broader public-health outcomes for the UK have been more mixed. Britain has reported the highest death rate from Covid-19 anywhere in Europe, and with hospital numbers surging againthere is concern that an October firebreak lockdown could be on the cards.

Johnsons government should certainly take credit for its vaccine triumph at the beginning of the year, but it must also take the blame for its failure to capitalise on its head start and for the Delta variant to spread as easily as it has.

Wearing a mask is not a political statement. Using a condom does not make you a communist. The benefits of mask wearing, social distancing and vaccine certificates while a highly transmissible airborne virus is still in circulation should be obvious. Coronavirus deaths in the UK are now hitting about 1,000 a week, and its not even winter.

If all of this leads to another lockdown, then dropping all restrictions will have made Britain less free, not more so. The British government would have you believe that all responsibility lies with the individual. The reality is that we are being governed by a cabal of ageing frat boys, and their decisions are making people sick.

Peter Flanagan left Ireland in 2016 to perform stand-up comedy in London. He has worked as a writer and comedian in Britain and Europe

If you live overseas and would like to share your experience with Irish Times Abroad, email abroad@irishtimes.com with a little information about you and what you do

Visit link:
The English are rogues in a way we Irish only imagine ourselves to be - The Irish Times

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on The English are rogues in a way we Irish only imagine ourselves to be – The Irish Times

Salter: The constitution and the concept of liberty – LubbockOnline.com

Posted: at 9:32 am

ALEXANDER SALTER| Lubbock Avalanche-Journal

In a democracy, public policy rests on the consent of the governed. The great economist James Buchanan, who won the Nobel Prize in 1986, wrote that the status quo matters in a democracy because its from that point--wherever we happen to be--that the conversation about policy change begins. Our starting point, here and now, is the U.S. Constitution: its text, duly ratified amendments, and judicially interpreted meaning.

For lovers of liberty, the Constitution is an impressive document. Although lacking in some ways compared to the Articles of Confederation, our current national charter has the clear benefit of durability. The Constitution has been the basic law of the land for 232 years. Many of those years were prosperous. Some were tumultuous and destructive. The Constitution endured it all. It provides the basic backdrop of order against which liberty finds its meaning.

Libertarians like me admire the Constitution. We just wish our fellow citizens admired it as much as we do! While the Constitution isnt a fully libertarian document, its arguably the most pro-freedom compact in existence. When libertarians have a problem with the Constitution, its usually because too many politicians, bureaucrats, and sadly even voters ignore parts of the text they dont like.

The ways in which the Constitution protects freedom are obvious. Separation of powers and checks and balances are built into our governance system. This makes it incredibly difficult for political coalitions to seize absolute control of the government. And even if they do, the Bill of Rights, buttressed by the courts, stand guard over the citizenry. We Americans cherish our rights to speak freely, assemble freely, worship freely. We take pride in our protections against arbitrary seizure of property. And we know that these rights are natural rights, given to us by God. The Constitution recognizes them, but does not establish them.

In fact, the 9th Amendment explicitly says this: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. In other words, the rights of the people are far too numerous to list. Just because the Framers didnt write down a specific right doesnt mean we dont have that right. The Constitution is meant to limit the government, not the citizens.

Another support for liberty is the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. While libertarians lament the omission of the word expressly from this amendment, its nonetheless a demonstration of the Founders fondness for federalism. That government which governs best governs closest to the citizens themselves.

What parts of the Constitution do libertarians dislike? There are a few: the Necessary and Proper Clause, the Commerce Clause, and an unlimited power of taxation are the most obvious cases. The Necessary and Proper Clause, unless carefully interpreted, could easily result in an almost-unlimited federal government. Likewise, the Commerce Clause has been used to justify federal meddling in any situation which could conceivably--not even actually!--affect trade across the United States. The lack of strict controls on the taxing power has resulted in tax rates that are downright confiscatory. All of these yield a government that is too big, too intrusive, and too powerful.

But we oughtnt throw the baby out with the bathwater. The Constitution remains a respectable governance framework for a free and virtuous people. We can work within the Constitutional system to preserve its strengths and shore up its weaknesses. Unfortunately, the greatest obstacle to Constitutional renewal is the mass of politicians who are sworn to uphold it.

Republicans and Democrats are quick to praise the Constitution on the campaign trail or at a fundraiser. But when it comes to governing, their policies are a Constitutional disgrace. One is reminded of the prophecy of Isaiah: These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. The sad reality is that government-run-amok is a bipartisan consensus. No party believes in keeping Washington, DC within the bounds of the Constitution. Many libertarians became libertarian because theyve had enough of our political duopolys two-step between Constitutional rhetoric and un-Constitutional policy.

The Constitution isnt perfect. No governing document is. But thanks to the Constitution, life, liberty, and property have been reasonably secure in the United States for more than two centuries. Libertarians seek to rein in the federal government by forcing it to follow the law of the land. While we can be reformist in our political programs, we must be radical in our aims.

American exceptionalism comes down to the rule of law: the idea that governed and governors alike must play by the same rules. Libertarians demand, as a matter of natural right, nothing less than the restoration of the rule of law. A crucial first step is to reinstate Constitutional constraints on government. Any other way of governing is profoundly un-American.

Alexander William Salter is the Georgie G. Snyder Associate Professor of Economics in the Rawls College of Business at Texas Tech University and the Comparative Economics Research Fellow at TTUs Free Market Institute.

Read the original here:
Salter: The constitution and the concept of liberty - LubbockOnline.com

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on Salter: The constitution and the concept of liberty – LubbockOnline.com

Navalny allies accuse Telegram and other platforms of censorship – Al Jazeera English

Posted: at 9:32 am

Jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalnys allies are accusing YouTube and Telegram of censorship after the video platform and messaging app restricted access to their anti-government voting recommendations for Russias parliamentary election.

The latest accusations came on Saturday, one day after Navalnys allies had already accused Alphabets Google and Apple of buckling under Kremlin pressure after the companies removed an app from their stores that the activists had hoped to use against the ruling party in the election.

Voting began on Friday and ran until late on Sunday.

Telegram, the social media platform used by protesters from Iran to Belarus, blocked a smart voting channel aimed at defeating ruling party nominees, which carried recommendations for candidates in Russias parliamentary elections.

The app gives detailed recommendations on who to vote for in an effort to challenge the party that backs President Vladimir Putin. It is one of the few levers Navalnys allies have left after a sweeping crackdown this year.

Telegrams founder Pavel Durov, who has carved out a libertarian image and resisted past censorship, said the platform would block election campaign services, including one used by Navalnys allies to give voter recommendations.

He said the decision had been taken because of a Russian ban on campaigning once polls are open, which he considered legitimate and is similar to bans in many other countries.

Navalnys spokeswoman Kira Yarmysh condemned the move.

Its a real disgrace when the censorship is imposed by private companies that allegedly defend the ideas of freedom, she wrote on Twitter.

Ivan Zhdanov, a political ally of Navalny, said he did not believe Telegrams justification and that the move looked to have been agreed somehow with Russias authorities.

Late on Saturday, Navalnys camp said YouTube had also taken down one of their videos that contained the names of 225 candidates they endorsed.

The video presentation of the smart voting recommendations for the constituencies with the nastiest (United Russia candidates) has also been removed, they wrote.

Navalnys camp said it was not a knockout blow as their voting recommendations were available elsewhere on social media.

But it is seen as a possible milestone in Russias crackdown on the internet and its standoff with US tech firms.

Russia has for years sought sovereignty over its part of the internet, where anti-Kremlin politicians have followings and media critical of Putin operate.

Navalnys team uses Googles YouTube widely to air anti-corruption videos and to stream coverage and commentary of anti-Kremlin protests they have staged.

Russias ruling United Russia party, which supports President Vladimir Putin, retained its parliamentary majority although its performance was slightly weaker than at the last parliamentary election in 2016 andfollows the biggest crackdown on the Kremlins domestic opponents in years.

The Navalny teams Telegram feed continued to function normally on Saturday and included links to voter recommendations available in Russia via Google Docs.

On a separate Telegram feed also used by the team, activists said Russia had told Google to remove the recommendations in Google Docs and that the US company had, in turn, asked Navalnys team to take them down.

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Reuters news agency.

In his statement, Durov said Google and Apples restrictions of the Navalny app had set a dangerous precedent and meant Telegram, which is widely used in Russia, was more vulnerable to government pressure.

He said Telegram depends on Apple and Google to operate because of their dominant position in the mobile operating system market and his platform would not have been able to resist a Russian ban from 2018 to 2020 without them.

Russia tried to block Telegram in April 2018 but lifted the ban more than two years later after ostensibly failing to block it.

The app block by Apple and Google creates a dangerous precedent that will affect freedom of expression in Russia and the whole world, Durov said in a post on Telegram.

Visit link:
Navalny allies accuse Telegram and other platforms of censorship - Al Jazeera English

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on Navalny allies accuse Telegram and other platforms of censorship – Al Jazeera English

At the Supreme Court, a Plea to Reveal Secret Surveillance Rulings – The New York Times

Posted: at 9:32 am

After Edward J. Snowdens leaks in 2013 disclosed that the court had authorized the bulk collection of logs of all Americans phone calls and emails under the USA Patriot Act, Congress passed a new law, the USA Freedom Act of 2015. Among other things, it required executive branch officials to make public, to the greatest extent practicable, decisions from the intelligence court that included significant legal determinations.

Critics say that is not enough, for two basic reasons. Under separation-of-powers principles, they say, courts rather than the executive branch should decide whether judicial opinions ought to be made public. And the 2015 law, at least according to the executive branch, does not apply to decisions issued before its enactment.

The A.C.L.U. filed a motion in the FISA court, seeking disclosure of major decisions issued between the Sept. 11 attacks and the 2015 law and arguing that the FISA court itself should decide whether disclosure of its decisions was required by the First Amendment.

These court opinions are vitally important, said Patrick Toomey, a lawyer with the A.C.L.U. They can have far-reaching consequence for Americans privacy and free expression rights. It shouldnt be up to the executive branch whether the public has access to them.

A specialized appeals court ruled last year that the FISA court lacked the power even to consider whether there is a right of access to its decisions under the First Amendment. Though other federal courts routinely consider requests to unseal their own records, the appeals court ruled that the FISA court could not consider the constitutional question before it because Congress had not granted it the power to do so.

The jurisdictional issues in the case are tangled, but the larger questions it presents are not.

In a supporting brief, former government officials including James Clapper, a former director of national intelligence, and John Brennan, a former C.I.A. director wrote that excessive secrecy can result in indiscriminate and destructive leaking.

Too much secrecy, in other words, they wrote, puts at risk the very intelligence operations that require secrecy to be effective.

Read more:
At the Supreme Court, a Plea to Reveal Secret Surveillance Rulings - The New York Times

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on At the Supreme Court, a Plea to Reveal Secret Surveillance Rulings – The New York Times

Page 763«..1020..762763764765..770780..»