17 Comments
User's avatar
David Cearley's avatar

The only real purpose of all those mechanisms is to silence any opposition or criticism of the board and speaker. Bluntly, they're about maintaining power, not about improving civil discourse

Jan in NW FL's avatar

Exactly

Kat Highsmith's avatar

There is no such thing as "hate speech" under the First Amendment. There is no exception that would make it illegal to say. So nobody who knows the laws would use the term seriously. It is, as you say, just a way to shut down criticism.

Chilblain Edward Olmos's avatar

Same as it ever was…

B Smith's avatar

This regressive movement wants power and has developed this anti-racism ideology, irrationality, and doublespeak so that its power will be unquestioned, not even subject to question. This movement is allying with others, the only requirement being irrationality and hostility to traditional individual freedoms.

That parent should sue the school board for its unconstitutional denial of his/her right to speak. The suit should demand the antiracist ideology be extirpated from the school system and school board. It is anti-American and anti-human.

We are very, very close to becoming another North Korea, governed by a hateful, malevolent, implacable, and all-powerful, regressive directorate. G-d help us.

Jim Trageser's avatar

It's about quiet censorship, and good for this author for calling it out by name. We need to, whenever we run into this censorious impulse, quietly but firmly reject it's very premise. As in, "There is nothing in the least in my comments having to do with hate - please confine your comments to the actual content of what I said."

Also, when coming from a government official - whether elected or the hired help - such accusations may, in fact, still violate the First Amendment's restriction on government infringement of free speech. Labeling an individual's speech as unacceptable would sure seem an infringement ...

Pedro Frigola's avatar

"There is nothing in the least in my comments having to do with hate - please confine your comments to the actual content of what I said." - Well said, Jim!

J Chicago's avatar

"My point was simple: experience can inform a discussion, but it should not determine who is right before the discussion begins."

Jim Carmine's avatar

Yes, I hate that you disagree with me, so it is hate speech. I hate your speech.

Stosh Wychulus's avatar

Creeping authoritarianism.

Pedro Frigola's avatar

These are the soft cudgels Jon Rauch warned about long ago, still at work in (once) California’s Mayberry.

Stosh Wychulus's avatar

I would add to that , “I feel unsafe”. An insult to everyone in the world who are truly in an unsafe situation. Luxury victimhood.

Kara Dansky's avatar

Great article, thank you!

John Jordan's avatar

This behavior is only enabled by voters who put them in place. Sane candidates need to be supported and publicized to offset this progressive movement. The board members are not fools - they are pursuing and advocating what they believe in, as deviant as that may be. The fools are the voters who continue spitting into the wind and electing the deviates.

Jack's avatar

Only surprised that the school board didn't report her to CA state police as a potential "terrorist".

Can't do that with the Biden Administration anymore.

You may remember how the Biden administration treated parents at school board meetings as potential "terrorists" in response to a September 2021 letter from the National School Boards Association (NSBA) and an October 2021 Department of Justice (DOJ) memo. Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo directing the FBI and federal prosecutors to address the "disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence" against school officials. Of course, after the Biden Administration threatened parents and chilled cricicism, it was "mission accomplished". The NSBA later apologized for the letter, stating there was "no justification" for some of the language used. Dollar late, dollar short ... the damage had already been done.

Steve's avatar

Maybe it's time to take a page from some of the anti-data center people: vote them out of office. In many cases the only way to change a group's thinking is to change the composition of the group itself.

mulhern's avatar

This is all so true!