"While out of power, the American right was unified in complaining about the left's speech policing. Now that Republicans control the White House and Congress, free-speech rights and values are dividing the coalition. One camp thinks Republicans should refrain from policing speech; the other favors policing the left's speech. The second camp seems ascendant, unfortunately, while the first has failed to turn its beliefs into policy."
"Senator Ted Cruz, who often sides with the Trump administration, objected on free-speech grounds. "That's right out of Goodfellas. That's right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, 'Nice bar you have here. It'd be a shame if something happened to it,'" he said on his podcast, warning, "There will come a time when a Democrat wins again" and "they will use this power.""
"In contrast, the activist Christopher Rufo argued that the right must police speech when in power to avoid being dominated by the left. "Turnabout is fair play," he wrote. "We cannot accept the idea that history started in 2025 or that only the Left can legitimately use state institutions. The only way to get to a good equilibrium is an effective, strategic tit-for-tat.""
The American right is divided over whether to police speech now that Republicans hold the White House and Congress. One faction urges restraint and warns against using government power to punish speech; another advocates policing leftist speech as strategic reciprocity. High-profile incidents, such as the Jimmy Kimmel controversy, produced agency pressure and bipartisan Republican objections on free-speech grounds. Activists like Christopher Rufo endorse a tit-for-tat approach and tangible actions by the administration. Federal agencies and officials have begun policing campus speech, visa holders' commentary, and other left-leaning expression, signaling a shift toward enforcement.
Read at The Atlantic
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]