Posted on 11/15/2016 6:30:07 PM PST by markomalley
Watching excerpts from various anti-Trump demonstrations, I saw this sign: “Your vote was a hate crime.”
“Hate crime” is not a figure of speech. The concept has made it into the criminal law, and would be more prevalent there if the left had its way.
Thus, those who view a vote for Trump as a hate crime must want to criminalize voting for a candidate whose views offend them greatly. The authoritarian implications could hardly be more clear.
But does this slogan typify the thinking of those freaking out over Trump’s election? I don’t know.
I do know that the CEO of Grubhub seemed to make rejection of Trump’s “nationalism” a condition of working for his company. He told employees who agree with Trump to submit their resignation because they have “no place here.”
The bright side is that if you’re in prison for a “hate crime,” you don’t need a job.
What about those emails from college presidents, deans, and diversity counselors expressing dismay over Trump’s election and inviting students to “self care” sessions, hang out together in safe spaces, and offering them blankets, hot chocolate and tissues?
On the surface, these attempts at comforting students seem very different from calling a Trump vote a hate crime. But consider the premise of the emails: Trump’s election is beyond the pale and poses a threat to the well-being of students (and others).
It’s not a large leap from that premise to the view that Trump’s election was a mass hate crime and that, in the name of protecting the vulnerable, anti-democratic measures can legitimately be employed to prevent its recurrence.
Nor does it require inference to perceive authoritarian tendencies in the breed of college administrators sending out these emails. This is the crew that, on campuses throughout America, marginalizes conservatives and shows very little tolerance for the expression of politically incorrect views.
Some of the concern about Trump’s election is fear of authoritarian tendencies on the tycoon’s part. The fear is speculative, but not baseless in my view.
Concern about left-wing authoritarian tendencies is not speculative. We have seen these tendencies in action. Ironically, we now see them manifested in the left’s response to Trump’s electoral victory.
In be’effin’leivable!
Let us list what we hate. Long list. Ill start
1. communists
I must disagree...The left is so nuts now, that they are all but guaranteed to lose all the time..if they keep it up. Let’s hope they keep up this insanity, the protests, the fake racism, I want Trump to do a 2nd term!
I kind of pinch myself every morning when i wake up: Donald Trump is president!!!!!
Indeed, they must.
We can start with Bill Ayers, George Soros, and the entirety of BLM.
And being a liberal is a stupid violation
True words
That covers all of it
Does he want to get rid of fashionistas
Democrats have wanted to outlaw non-Democrats for as long as I can remember.
Outlawing political dissent is a hallmark of fascism.
And fascism is a leftist ideology.
2. Liars
These are the ideological descendants of SDS and The Weathermen.
The violence loving Left.
Their community organizers are trying to provoke a reaction from Trump America to try to blame them for the violence.
The really dangerous ones won’t be operating out in the open.
“Your vote was a hate crime.”
Wow, just wow. ‘Cause insulting people has always gotten them to vote for you or your cause.
That's exactly why I voted for Trump!
Way back in my college days I was Libertarian. At one time we made common effort with a number of campus Communist groups in opposition to a reinstatement of registration for the draft. At one of our organizational meetings a member of the Socialist Workers Party (Trotsky aligned Communist) criticized someone who stated something which he did not approve (don't remember what) and that the speaker did not have the right to spread hate (what we today call "hate speech").
Aside from this affront to the 1st Amendment I found it somewhat amusing a member of an ideology which preaches hate as a fundamental principle could make such a statement.
That was in 1980 and I laughed it off as little more than the usual Leftist hysteria. Today such a notion has become an integral element of our law and as far as I can tell it had its origins with the Communists in the late 70s, early 80s. So now the question becomes: how did this eke from the far left into our standard legal practice?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.