by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
People are either pro-thought or anti-thought.
The Supreme Court’s contortions on the Masterpiece Cakeshop case should dispel any doubts about this. Defendant Jack Phillips had chosen not to create an artistic cake for a same-sex ceremony because doing so would violate his conviction that marriage is the sacred union of one man and one woman.
As David Harsanyi noted in The Federalist, the Supreme Court avoided the core issues of freedom of thought and speech while ruling for Phillips. …
… So the usual political labels of Left and Right cannot explain the exploding attacks on freedom of speech and conscience that are running rampant today. The war on speech is basically a war on thought. Let’s review just a few examples that confirm power elites’ interest in abolishing freedom of thought:
- On college campuses: Administrators increasingly permit and expect students to disrupt and even riot at talks by invited speakers and scholars some deem politically incorrect.
- At Google: Software engineer James Damore was summarily fired for expressing a politically incorrect opinion, despite his copious citations of facts to back up his thesis.
- At The Atlantic Monthly: Writer Kevin Williamson was quickly fired for publicly expressing a politically incorrect opinion despite the fact that his opinion was well known before his firing, and that he was actually hired in part for his reputation as a talented provocateur. …
… In one camp are those who respect and value everybody’s right to think his own thoughts. In the other are those who already have the “right answer” and thus are either not concerned about freedom of thought, or are outright hostile to it.