378 Comments
User's avatar
JD Free's avatar

For all our complaints about the United States, the moral gap between this country and the rest of the world might be widening.

As it does, our contempt for people who describe America as the worst country in the world should only grow.

Expand full comment
flyoverdriver's avatar

Not just moral gap, but institutional gap. The EU is perilously close to making Matt’s closing summary “speech regulations in a democracy” an oxymoron. At some point, if it has not already been reached in the EU (as it was in the US in the 2020 election cycle), the ideologically targeted suppression of speech tangibly manipulates election outcomes. There’s not a democracy if and when these speech-strangling leftist/globalist/IC institutional tactics persist.

Expand full comment
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

The EU could sanction newspapers just for reporting what type of illegal content was published by someone else.

Expand full comment
TheZeitgeist's avatar

I have no problem lying to foreigners agreeing how terrible it is here, and they're lucky to not live here, and should never even visit given the dangers.

Expand full comment
Nathaniel Wilcox's avatar

Tee Hee. In the small town where I live--let's call it Davy--there's a small rear window sticker that reads "Davy Sucks... Tell Your Friends."

Expand full comment
Kurt Wullenweber's avatar

I want to do a billboard campaign at EVERY highway leading into Florida: "Don't bring your mess to Florida! Fix YOUR MESS at home."

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

Refugees from California, Washington, Oregon, and Illinois are threatening to ruin Arizona. They bring their silly voting habits with them, as if they're too dumb to make the connection between voting for morons, and watching your cities decay.

Expand full comment
Shaun's avatar

Excellent point, but you forgot the silly folks from Wisconsin and Minnesota...

Expand full comment
Joni Lang's avatar

I can’t find my emojis. Trust me I’m laughing the squinty face

Expand full comment
Just Wondering's avatar

Me Too!!! Never thought I’d use those two words together but like the Rainbow I’m reclaiming them!!!!!!!

Expand full comment
Just Wondering's avatar

Lol

Expand full comment
nancy knox-bierman's avatar

I'm glad I am here. It may suck at times, like during covid, but we still manage to get the word out.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

Electronic media gives us (and everyone else) a potentially worldwide audience, which is why institutions are so eager to regulate it.

Expand full comment
Selenti's avatar

I think it's important to remember that the only difference between us is we still have political power behind the dissidents. There is a LARGE group of people in the US who want to enact the same censorship apparatus that Europe has. When they are in power, they do.

The reason Europe is the way it is is simply because the establishment's power has won out completely there. Being a right-wing opposition in Europe that is genuinely opposed to the establishment sees you outright banned or taken off ballots--see what is happening in France now, where the courts say Marine Le Pen is not allowed to exist as a political figure. They tried to do the same to Trump here. The only difference is their level of success, and our level of resistance.

In Europe, when the wrong person wins an election, the election is annulled. In the US, they tried the same tactic, they just haven't managed to pull it off. Yet. We are one failure to resist away from being in the same tyranny as Europe.

Expand full comment
Bull Hubbard's avatar

Thanks for bringing the discussion back to the topic of censorship. Every bloody topic eventually digresses into the usual bickering bout Israel vs. Ham-ass.

It may be true that "We are one failure to resist away from being in the same tyranny as Europe," but it's also true that we have a Constitution that stipulates "Congress shall make no law [. . .] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Biden and his cronies/handlers were well on the way to throttle free speech here in the US. It's likely that a Harris administration would have continued those efforts.

Despite the zeal of his detractors and the liars that have been trying to get Trump into prison since 2015, he made it in. The system worked, and the new President began to correct course, as the Ship of State was heading for the rocks of tightly controlled public discourse.

I found this source that summarizes the situation quite well and has links to examples of the last administration's efforts to control free speech and Trump's intervention: https://mrcfreespeechamerica.org/blogs/free-speech/tim-kilcullen-dan-schneider-michael-morris/2025/03/13/biden-administration-waged

Expand full comment
Sera's avatar

I’m afraid from where I stand you’re being very provincial. The US is financing and arming two very different war zones. Ukraine should never have happened, and would not have happened without the US’s provocation and continued support. The genocide in Gaza will be remembered forever as a stain on American honor, (hopefully the stain on Israel’s honor will end soon, along with the existence of that murderous occupying army).

There’s a lot more to it than just how you feel in the moment.

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

"The genocide in Gaza ..."

In Rwanda in 1994, 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were massacred by Hutus in 12 days.

In Europe during WW2, 2/3 of the J population - about 6 million - were massacred by the Nazis in about 3 1/2 years.

In 1932-33 between 3.5 million and 5 million Ukrainians were starved to death by Soviet Russia during the Holodomor.

Those are three examples of genocide.

In contrast, the Muslim population of Gaza and the West Bank has GROWN from about 915,000 to over 5.3 million in the past 60 years.

And in the past 2 years - if you believe Hamas - 60,000 Gazans have died, out of a population of 2.2 million. That's 2.7% - roughly half of which are actually Hamas combatants.

See the difference?

Expand full comment
ocjackel's avatar

Indeed. As soon as I ready 'genocide in Gaza' I knew I could dismiss the rest.

Fun fact: When a 19 year old Hamas fighter dies in combat the Hamas Health Ministry counts that as a death of a child.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

All your lies won't change what we can see all over the Internet.

Keep whining about Hamas all you want, but we can see what's happening.

Expand full comment
ELKFLA's avatar

They're not lies. You're being played. But that's okay. As long as you're happy with your mind slammed shut, who are we to disturb your vibe.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

Uh huh.

Zionist ghoul.

Expand full comment
Sera's avatar

As Gore Vidal quoted Christopher Isherwood in response to a similar Zionist argument:”What are you, in Real Estate?”

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

Is that supposed to indicate that you do see the difference? The term genocide has a particular definition. Don't throw it around lightly.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

It goes in the bin with words like fascist, RINO, homophobic, racist, Leftist--words that are often used in lieu of thought.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

Words that are used in hopes of shutting down the discussion.

Expand full comment
Sera's avatar

“Following the landmark publication of two reports by leading Israeli human rights organizations B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel, which concluded that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip, Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Agnès Callamard, said:

“With the publication of these two reports, B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel become the first two Israeli organizations to state it loud and clear, based on meticulous documentation and research: Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.”

That’s not ‘lightly’.

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

The U.N.’s 1948 Convention on the Crime of Genocide defines Genocide as the intent to destroy—in whole or in part—a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.

That is not Israel's objective.

Expand full comment
Mark Ende's avatar

Substitute ”corrupt” for “leading” and your statement will be accurate.

Expand full comment
Shaun's avatar

So you are quoting Gore Vidal quoting Christopher Isherwood to make an esoteric point?

Do you know Kevin Bacon, or someone who knows someone who knows Kevin Bacon?

Expand full comment
KHP's avatar

That's not exactly a way to distinguish one person from another, is it?

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

Call it whatever you want, but Israel has been committing war crimes regularly since October 7th: bombing churches, hospitals, schools, refugee camps, aid workers, ambulances -- and recently, firing on starving people lining up to receive food. The whole world is watching. Israel may well cleanse Gaza of the Palestinians, but it has lost the PR war.

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

It is hard to believe anyone could still be ignorant of the fact that Hamas stores munitions in hospitals, homes and schools, transports combatants in ambulances and basically has turned every "civlian" location into a military target ON PURPOSE.

I refer you to Dougla Murray's book "On Democracies and Death Cults." Read it.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

None of that matters.

You still cannot bomb hospitals, homes, or schools, no matter what you suspect may be hidden there.

I don't want to read anything written by Douglas Murray, but thank you anyway.

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

Actually, yes - it DOES matter. It's not a matter of "suspecting" - we've known for years that Hamas has used the population of Gaza as human shields. That is a war crime - and you obviously don't care.

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

"I don't want to read anything written by Douglas Murray, but thank you anyway."

Afraid you might learn something that contradicts your world view?

Expand full comment
Joe Merritt's avatar

There are conflicting opinions about the truth. Opinions are not facts. Let's start with a definition of genocide. The U.N.’s 1948 Convention on the Crime of Genocide defines Genocide as the intent to destroy—in whole or in part—a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.

In this war, the IDF's objective is to destroy Hamas and get the hostages released, whereas Hamas aims to eliminate Israel and the Jewish people. IMHO, the definition of Genocide applies to the terrorist group Hamas.

There is no objective evidence that supports any other conclusion than that Hamas promotes and commits genocide against Israel and the Jewish people. This organization needs to be eliminated.

Expand full comment
TeeJae's avatar

"In this war, the IDF's objective is to destroy Hamas and get the hostages released, whereas Hamas aims to eliminate Israel and the Jewish people." -- Put down the hasbara koolaid. First, it's not a "war"; it's Israel's systematic DESTRUCTION of Gaza. Second, indiscriminate bombing and targeted sniping of civilians and journalists is the OPPOSITE of an "objective to destroy Hamas."

"There is no objective evidence that supports any other conclusion than that Hamas promotes and commits genocide against Israel and the Jewish people." -- When you take the 3 monkeys approach, of course you won't see or hear the objective evidence that is clearly available for those willing to see/hear it.

Expand full comment
Joe Merritt's avatar

The events in Gaza meet the criteria for war. The sovereign country of Israel was invaded by an army of Hamas terrorists who randomly killed, raped, and harmed civilians, along with seizing hostages. The IDF is working to destroy the aggressors and release the remaining hostages.

The tragedy that civilians in a war zone are dying is the responsibility of the aggressor who initiated the conflict, in this case, the terrorist group Hamas. To make matters worse, the terrorists store weapons, rockets, and fighters under hospitals and schools, and cluster fighters in population centers, guaranteeing that civilians will become casualties. They have been doing this for decades. Eliminating the terrorists is the best thing that could happen for the Palestinians who want peace and security.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

"The tragedy that civilians in a war zone are dying is the responsibility of the aggressor who initiated the conflict, in this case, the terrorist group Hamas. "

So war crimes are not a thing?!

Who knew?

Expand full comment
TeeJae's avatar

"The events in Gaza meet the criteria for war." -- According to which convention?

"The IDF is working to destroy the aggressors and release the remaining hostages." -- Repeating your initial argument does not magically make it so.

"The tragedy that civilians in a war zone are dying is the responsibility of the aggressor who initiated the conflict, in this case, the terrorist group Hamas." -- If terrorist attacks were declarations of war, the entire globe would be at one never-ending war.

"Eliminating the terrorists is the best thing that could happen for the Palestinians who want peace and security." -- You're fooling yourself if you think the zionist leadership will stop torturing and murdering Palestinian civilians once they've eliminated Hamas. Last I checked, Hamas wasn't in the West Bank. No, this is all about the zionist goal of Eretz Yisrael.

Expand full comment
Joe Merritt's avatar

A declaration of war is not required for a state of war to exist. However in this case, the IDF has been clear about their war objectives to eliminate Hamas and release the hostages.

The evil influences of Hamas can not be neutralized without eliminating the organization.

It's sad that civilians are caught up in the conflict.

Expand full comment
Ronda Ross's avatar

Ukraine happened because Biden announced a US energy attempted suicide. Oil soared and soon Putin was swimming in petrodollars, just as the US endured its' most feckless leadership in 40 years. We might as well have sent Putin, an engraved invitation.

Expand full comment
Hypernonpartisan's avatar

Yep. Georgia and Crimea also happened during oil price spikes. Seems that "Putin's puppet", one Donald J. "drill baby drill" Trump, failed to understand that. /sarc

Expand full comment
Bill Jarett's avatar

If money was a motive then he wouldn't have lost $600 Billion in T bills.

Expand full comment
Jlmh's avatar

Well, Hamas could do their bit by laying down their arms and releasing the hostages.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

If you still think this has anything to do with hostages, you are delusional.

This is the beginning of the Greater Israel Project.

Expand full comment
Jlmh's avatar

Well, it’s a bit convenient to forget that Hamas, on the 7 October, murdered 1000 people or more, raped many, kidnapped more than 200 hostages, of which 50 are still hostages, alive or dead. It’s also convenient to forget that the Gaza Palestinians were dancing in the streets when they heard of the Hamas murders, if they did not join in.

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

That is all horrible, I agree.

I have also seen video of Israelis celebrating bombings in Gaza.

But none of that excuses starving children, or bombing civilians.

Expand full comment
rob's avatar

There is no genocide in Gaza

Expand full comment
Paul R's avatar

The DSA has absolutely nothing to do with your comment

Expand full comment
BookWench's avatar

That's all true, but things could always be worse.

Expand full comment
AlabamaSlamma's avatar

You just favor killing everyone that you don't like, do you?

Expand full comment
Mary Jones's avatar

Straw man AND ad hominem in the same sentence! Amazing!

Try studying logic.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Just missing the genetic fallacy, and it would have been a trifecta!

Expand full comment
michael Griffin's avatar

And just what does War have to do with freedom of speech. Not everything is seen through the lens of oppressors and the oppressed

Expand full comment
publius_x's avatar

Libel

Expand full comment
Marlene Barbera's avatar

Quality comment

Expand full comment
An Inconvenient Truth's avatar

Hardly, just the rest of the NATOsphere (and even there, I think it's only the Commonwealth and Germany that are REALLY hardbitten with this sort of thing).

Expand full comment
Yuri Bezmenov's avatar

Orwell would be proud. Two tier Keir is surrendering his country to the woke jihad. America might need to liberate Europe for a third time.

“Digital safety” is demoralized doublespeak for censorship - here is a full glossary of Orwellian terms: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/demoralilzed-doublespeak-dictionary-2025

Expand full comment
Belling the Cat's avatar

Best I can do is tell them to self-rescue. The EU is the dude you knew in high school who maybe used to seem cool to some, but now lives in his parents' basement, can't keep a job two weeks, and won't do his laundry thus smells funky (not in a good way). He has a lot of stock lectures for us like the sin of driving a car (to our J-O-Bs) or the foolishness of faith in Christ, and we don't leave him alone with our kids.

Same as that guy, Yurrip needs to hit rock bottom and figure it out for themselves. No one is coming to save them this time.

Expand full comment
Dell's avatar

Nobody is asking why Western Europe decided to import and fail to assimilate their massive immigrant populations.

It's mostly their self-loathing nihilism that led them to reject God and stop having babies 20-30 years ago. Declining populations do horrible things to social welfare states (they run out of young peoples money) and so they decided to invite the 3rd world to replace them and take their nice stuff. Won't turn out well.

Poor Amira's daddy isn't going to care one bit about little Ursula's feelings when he votes to install Sharia law.

Expand full comment
ShirtlessCaptainKirk's avatar

They’re seemingly bent on a full cultural / racial reset. Many of these new censorship laws are designed to silence criticism of mass immigration. They want open borders and social welfare. There’s nothing to incentivize assimilation. Anti-immigration parties are struck from the ballot. Screw the will of the people. Maybe they hubristically think they can control things, the way the Marxists in Iran did when they tossed out the Shah. We see how that worked out. European countries are smaller and easier to dominate. But they deny all problems, like a battered housewife. France has made some token cultural demands. Still, it’s pretty much cultural masochism.

Expand full comment
Elisheva Levin's avatar

You know, WWII was enough. Next time, let the Europeans sort it out for themselves. To use a phrase from Gen X, Europe terminally sucks.

Expand full comment
ResistWeMuch's avatar

Trump should send bombers full of free speech pamphlets and lit drop all of Europe.

Expand full comment
Elisheva Levin's avatar

Love it. We should also do data dumps every month on all our platforms that go to Europe. Don't try to silence us, B****s

Expand full comment
ELKFLA's avatar

Crank up a bunch of bots, load 'em to the gills with "trigger words", launch them like swarms of drones and keep it up until the Euro hall monitor pearl-clutchers and their systems choke. This is like waving a red cape in front of Americans. We'll gore them at every opportunity just for fun.

Expand full comment
Vet nor's avatar

Yes. I was going to suggest these digital "were not censoring speech" lies could bring back the pamphlet. Though they did restrict pamphlet printing as well.

Expand full comment
Elisheva Levin's avatar

They are going full Nazi.

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

Oh yeah cause Trump is great on free speech. This is exactly what Trump wants for his own presidency.

Expand full comment
Dee's avatar

Sorry, Joe admin was number one on that one. As well as prosecuting his opposition.

Expand full comment
ResistWeMuch's avatar

but exactly what obama and biden had.

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

Yes I’m sure. When does Trump stick to his word ? Just cause he gave a bullshit the executive order, doesn’t mean he’s actually stuck to it. He’s been far worse than Biden on

Speech. None of you Trumpers want to see it.

Expand full comment
Mike R.'s avatar

(Am I overreacting to the newly introduced Gottheimer/Bacon Bill aimed at American social platform use and free speech?)

I'm 100% with RACKET's fight to save journalism--speech on internet platforms--truth speakers and seekers. But We the People are obviously going to need a fall back position. The slow creep of totalitarian restriction and--Starmer is the poster child--the public persecution and object lesson incarceration and criminalization of every day citizenship is exactly what it appears to be: totalitarian horror. Videos out of Europe of citizens being placed under arrest for speech crimes is--as it is intended to be--terrifying. More so is armed thugs pretending to be policemen questioning those in handcuffs about the contents of their personal libraries. The electronic age--like the printing press--scared the s#!t out of and made the political/economic grift transparent to reality. The D.C./Brussels/CCP Davos boys and girls aren't having it. "Smile for the camera!!"

At the current pace self preservation will require a total abandonment of electronic media and intrusion. News--as with Walter Kirn's COUNTY LINE--before it too is termed illegal--may provide an option--ultimately a return to sanity will require the removal of the electronic middle man and escape from the psyop altogether. We the People have been subsumed by the psychopathy of an avaricious and venal aristocracy --who--wrapped in the flag and the Patriot Act--looted and destroyed the greatest economy in the world --and the "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" of the citizens who built it.

The burned alive on the subway--two job no sleep ragged--on the freeway before dawn--drug addled illiterate--prison culture violence--debt blowback beyond recovery-- walking wounded dead on street corners coast to coast--boarded up downtown riot and the spiritual-emotional illiterate doomsday everyone is praying for is already here.

Whatever remains--(as has always been)--of the American Republic resides in We the People. Everything else is passing through.

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

That would be Walter Kirn's County HIGHWAY.

Expand full comment
DP McGee's avatar

With greatest respect, MR, I've got it good, then. Just finished fishing off the dock, with couple of trout in the bag.

Peace.

Expand full comment
Mike R.'s avatar

I hear you DP--and I'm grateful for the blessings in my life as well.---My downside is my tendency to drink too much coffee--read too much Substack and take myself too seriously. --- I have a chain saw to clean and I'll feel way better with some winter wood split and stacked for snowfall. --- Nice catch. :)

Expand full comment
Burnt taco's avatar

Europe is toast. They have allowed a Muslim takeover and will now be existential shitholes like Somalia and others. Their censorship is all aligned to hide their crimes as leaders. They are all proper fucked.

Expand full comment
alexei's avatar

If there IS a Muslim takeover, remember that two of those countries have nuclear weapons, so it shouldn't be a "fate" to dismiss so lightly.

Expand full comment
Mike R.'s avatar

If you haven't -- the N.S. Lyons/CHINA CONVERGENCE will explain the why and who. It isn't a short read--doing shop work--it is available free on YouBoob in audio.

Expand full comment
Bryan J. B.'s avatar

He wouldn't be proud, he is probably spinning in his grave. 1984 was a warning. One that was clearly ignored

Expand full comment
Bull Hubbard's avatar

As Taibbi's article reports, the Jordan-led House Judiciary Committee and its findings have laid the groundwork, provided the evidence and rationale for that liberation.

The US government obviously can't directly intervene in the process that's leading Europe into an Orwellian dystopia (sorry for the cliché), but we can and are making everyone aware of what's happening there, and there are signs that the rabble are getting really angry and that Europe and the UK are headed for major conflict over censorship intended to stop dissent, especially objections to immigration policy.

Expand full comment
VideoSavant's avatar

No, to liberating Europe again.

We have seen how much they care about their liberty.

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

You probably think Trump actually won in 2020 as well

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

You are just writing your own rules about speech as you see fit. Just like Trump

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

How did Biden threaten twitter ? You gave no examples. Therefore it was an ask.

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

The constitution applies to non citizens too

Expand full comment
Jack's avatar

How did they violate visa terms ?

Expand full comment
KHP's avatar

Not just no, but hell no! Europeans are begging for this - - their rulers are anyway, and if the common folk aren't motivated enough to rise up and throw off their chains, let those nations die.

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

They’re where we were 4 years ago. Unfortunately for them, they do not have a 2nd amendment- which I am convinced is the only thing that keeps the government in the US in check.

It was nice knowing you, Western Europe. The cradle of the Enlightenment is no more. They’ve chosen suicidal empathy over that which made them great in the first place. Pity.

Expand full comment
Catherine Andrews's avatar

My friend and her husband retired to England about 4 years ago. She is puzzled that thefts and break-ins are quite common there while they are rare here in the Upper Midwest. My response was, "It's probably because we have guns."

Expand full comment
AlabamaSlamma's avatar

It goes further than just that. In the UK you have a duty to flee. If you can't flee, you have a duty to cooperate with the criminals and let them have whatever they want. You do not have the right to defend yourself or your property. Penalties for committing self-defense are far harsher than penalties for robbery or assault.

Expand full comment
zg100's avatar

I don't think that's accurate. Or are you being facetious? I don't put much past the UK anymore but I couldn't find anything to corroborate a duty to retreat or no right to the defense of property.

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

You are correct regarding laws on the books. Here is what the actual law states: https://bsdgb.co.uk/information/law-relating-to-self-defence/

However, I think it’s important to note that the laws need to be enforced. We’ve also seen people in Germany and in the UK jailed for anti-immigrant sentiments posted to social media. So it’s not that far of a stretch to believe that they would jail someone for defending themselves when they jail the rape victims instead of rapists there. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/triggernometry/id1375568988?i=1000719397010

Expand full comment
zg100's avatar

> So it’s not that far of a stretch to believe that they would jail someone for defending themselves when they jail the rape victims instead of rapists there.

I agree, that's what I was getting at when I said "I don't put much past the UK anymore." The comment I was replying to seemed a little over the top though - "you have to cooperate with the criminals" lol.

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

Yeah. Totally agree with your sentiment and it sounds like you picked up what I was trying to convey.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Tell that to the little white girls in some English towns who were molested en masse by Pakistani immigrants while the white Brit authorities looked the other way for 20 years and still do. What made these white dudes sacrifice their daughters to the invaders' pagan practices? Could it be that they no longer fear God?

Expand full comment
KHP's avatar

It is accurate. From a while back, I remember a story about some business executive being charged for defending himself with some implement or other while on the tube.

The fact that he had some minor means of self-defense with him was the substance of the crime. It seems like it is a modern version of lese majeste -- how dare he insinuate that the government has not adequately protected him, that he needs to prepare for self-help?

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

They’re not rare in Detroit or Minneapolis. Or in Columbus, Cincinnati or Indianapolis. Are those cities not in the upper Midwest?

Expand full comment
Jim's avatar

If you would like to see the crime statistics of the top 20 urban metropolises and compare them against the rest of the country you would be astounded. Most of the country is some of the safest places on the planet. Some of our largest cities are raging criminal zones. Most of which have been governed by democrats for decades.

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

I have seen the stats and I am well aware of how LA, NY, SF, etc compared to the overwhelming majority of rural and suburban locales.

Thinking back to when I first started researching things like this- it was over 20 years ago. The chief reason I began researching crime, populations and demographics is because I didn’t believe the assertion that poverty necessarily increases crime, chiefly violent crime. Turns out I was right. Property crime (petty theft) and fraud and drug crime correlates with poverty. Violent crime is almost 100% cultural.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Did you look at the list of fear of God, ie, church attendance, personal faith? Communities can be poor without surviving to corruption if a solid percentage of them fear God. That percentage becomes the self-cleansing, self-policing mechanism without which communities sink into the mire of human evil. For example, neighborhood "Mamas" that keep all the kids in line. Where are those mamas? Not in church! But in the welfare lines, shooting up in the alleys, oblivious to where their young kids are. The socialists and atheists must be so pleased. In 60 years they decimated what slavery, poverty, Jim Crow, the KKK could not break - faith in their God. Time to repent. God is still there.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Correction: not list but loss of fear of God

Expand full comment
michael Griffin's avatar

So

The crime rate in Appalachia is about the same as Chicago?

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

Quote what I said that leads you to believe that’s what I think.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

While the populace abandoned the fear of God and love for their neighbors. Please note: this type of democrat governance cannot happen where individual righteousness still exists. The contrary voices may be too little too late, but more power to them.

Expand full comment
Catherine Andrews's avatar

I probably should have clarified that I live in rural Michigan. However, the friends that moved to a small town in England are from Madison, WI. We often joke that if someone stole a vehicle here, we would react by saying, "I wonder why Buddy is driving Pete's truck?"

Expand full comment
zg100's avatar

Lol I acknowledge that I'm missing your point - but I feel obligated to comment that Cinci and Columbus are not in the Upper Midwest. Cincinnati is, in fact, alarmingly close to Kentucky.

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

I don’t think you’re missing it- I think I’m stating it poorly. My point was that it’s not the region that is low crime, and to the extent that it is, it’s because the region has fewer metropolitan centers.

Expand full comment
Skenny's avatar

It's a sad testament to governments worldwide, that the US, as far as we have declined in many areas, but with general respect to government influence/domination of its people, is still clearly ahead of most of the world.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Speaks well of having 250 years of godly (not perfect) forebears.

Expand full comment
Lia's avatar

Forever grateful to James Madison and the First Amendment he drafted. When I lived in the UK, I was assured that its "unwritten constitution" protected the British from any of the infringements you describe. Those unwritten assurances weren't worth the paper they're not printed on.

Expand full comment
Frank A's avatar

“16-year-old Muslim girl who has a history of feeling self-conscious about her identity. ...Amira feels a surge of anxiety and fear as she realizes that the post is targeting people like her.”

You can either wear slippers or carpet the world! Maybe she feels "self-conscious" because her cultural identity is vastly different, and perhaps at odds, with the native culture of her (new?) home? Maybe she needs to come to grips with the fact that not everyone is required to accept her cultural mores? - that's called freedom. Maybe she's not used to the western concept of "free speech", perhaps coming from an extremely homogeneous culture where divergence is not tolerated - kind of where Europe is heading? Perhaps Amira needs to understand the points of view of those native to her (new?) home, and seek ways to be accepted instead of being a victim? Maybe gov'ts need to foster an environment of honest dialogue and understanding instead of "carpeting the world" to assuage the anxiety of a few, thus stigmatizing the legitimate views of others, who might be in the majority?

I don't support anyone who comes from hatred, and spreads such hatred deliberately. I don't see how wishing to preserve one's nation's identity is wrong.

Expand full comment
Ralph's avatar

Why the hell should the democratic right of adult Americans to discuss politics be limited by a neurotic 16-year-old foreigner?

Why should the standard be, "when talking about the state of your nation, only discuss that which a fragile child won't misinterpret"?

Anxious Amira with her problems with identity, lovely as I'm sure she is, should not set the standards for what we can discuss.

A much more parsimononious solution would be just to ban Amira from the discussion.

And banning Europeans from American networks is something that European states have the power to do, and better that than Americans should have to self-censor for neurotic Europeans.

Simply put: lovely as I'm sure she is, America doesn't need Amira. Or the bureaucrats in Brussels.

We've subsidized Europe for 76 years, let's reduce our NATO contributions and raise tariffs until they can't afford Brussels.

Expand full comment
Ministryofbullshit's avatar

This is Greta Thunberg at Davos Déjà vu all over again.

Expand full comment
RyanLawing's avatar

We have outsourced the roles of the family, church, community, and fathers to daycare, welfare, social media, and public education respectively. The last role left is motherhood and that is what these bills are about.

In a righteous world, no mother would let their 16 year old daughter have unfettered access to the internet without years of developing the mental and emotional skills to manage it. But we as individuals have abandoned all personal responsibility via accepting the identity-less globohomo blue pill. The government is only engaging in the next logical step in it's faustian duties.

Expand full comment
Frank A's avatar

"The government is only engaging in the next logical step in it's faustian duties."

Yup, the proverbial deal with the devil...

Expand full comment
Belling the Cat's avatar

I felt like the corrective action was to keep Amira off social media (where are the parents?) and help her build real-world social connections (home, neighborhood, school, community). Not sure that's exactly a job for [Platform] but if I'd been there that's how I'd've answered.

I'm so glad I'll never again have to participate in small-group role-play exercises with some nanny-facilitator hovering to 'nudge' sheeple in the approved direction. The world has been mad for decades and way overdue for the pendulum to swing as far back in the other direction as it can go!

Expand full comment
Noitavlas's avatar

I contend that the hypothetical parents are quite content to facilitate her victimhood, the purpose of which is to evoke sympathy and acceptance. Once accepted, the family will join with others of their culture to look down upon, show enmity toward and eventually try to exert dominance over those same sympathetic and accepting fools.

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

Better yet, explain "sticks and stones" to Amira.

Expand full comment
zg100's avatar

> You can either wear slippers or carpet the world!

I'd never heard that one! What a gem.

Expand full comment
Frank A's avatar

:)

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

"You can either wear slippers or carpet the world"

That's a keeper.

Expand full comment
Stop Being Lied To's avatar

I suppose the elasticity of freedom v totalitarianism is as old violence itself. The pendulum swings as far towards despotism as the people will allow. Then, the governed revoke their consent, revolt and shed the blood of tyrants.

There is nothing quite so offensive as thought control, and by extension, censoring information and speech. Many throughout history have lost their heads, seeking to stifle speech. It's a futile exercise and never ends well.

Some, sadly, will never learn

Expand full comment
An Inconvenient Truth's avatar

As I recall, Julian Assange once said that the advent of censorship is something to be celebrated, BECAUSE it means we've reached the point where the oligarchs can no longer ignore the public (so this is the 'SHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUP-!' phase).

"And so begins the fiiinal dramaaa...."

Expand full comment
Stop Being Lied To's avatar

fasten your seat belts....it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Expand full comment
Kittykat's avatar

Wow. Good point!

Expand full comment
An Inconvenient Truth's avatar

Hey, if it's good enough for Emperor Julian...!

Expand full comment
Aussie@ozaus1919's avatar

The European Commission and successive governments of the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia have enacted draconian speech laws as part of their respective attempts to keep a lid on the tinderboxes that they have created as a result of their decisions to permit and/or encourage massive immigration by people who adhere to an ideology that is incompatible with Western civilisation. The citizens of the United States have every reason to treasure their Constitutional right to free speech because it no longer exists in many Western countries.

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

Germany's censorship regime puts the strongarm tactics of "The Twitter Files" to shame. They not only encourage "de-amplification", they actually prosecute.

Expand full comment
ResistWeMuch's avatar

the germans are like retards. they go from one extreme to the other and since its a circle, they end up in the same spot.

Expand full comment
Ministryofbullshit's avatar

The Germans are willing to freeze to death because China, India and Africa keep burning coal.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

Not only that, there's a push to reduce air conditioning, too. They must be nuts!

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

It's that post-Nazi guilt.

Expand full comment
Mr. Bob's avatar

I wouldn't rest easy the US yet either. Congress is trying to revive the corpse of KOSA, which would provide sweeping powers to deanonymize the internet under the guise of "helping the children". Credit card companies are currently being used as a back door into censorship, as Steam, the largest video game distributor in the world, was forced to take down dozens of adult games for no other reason than that VISA decided they didn't like it. And the UK is talking about banning VPNs.

Very, very bad stuff is coming down the pipe for free speech. A lot of it, all at the same time. I don't believe it's coincidence. The censors only have to get lucky once.

Expand full comment
Holly S.'s avatar

Nothing good can come from policing speech to this degree. It’s also unworkable on a practical level, undoubtedly leading to ”officials” deciding almost anything is illegal. What is wrong with Europeans, so willing to surrender their countries to illegals who have no aspirations to assimilate and improve the quality of life? Instead they demand these countries with so much valuable history adapt to them. Just insane and sad. Great article, Matt.

Expand full comment
Clawmute's avatar

"Nothing good can come from policing speech to this degree."

That depends on who is defining "good." This censorship is not a careless move based on good motives.

It is deliberate and aimed to eliminate free speech. If eliminating free speech is your goal, then censorship is "good."

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

And eliminating free speech keeps them in power and maintains their grip on the throat of the people to enforce any policy they want.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

Europe is a dead continent. It has some wonderful people and beautiful scenery, but it’s a dead continent. They make themselves feel relevant by trying to police the Americans, because (1) it makes them feel better, and (2) they know Americans have historically been willing to take it. Notice how they don’t try this garbage with China or even Russia.

I’m waiting for tech companies to just tell them to F off and pull their products. It would be glorious to see a company be like “alright we’ll just stop selling the iPhone in your countries” and actually walk away.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Exactly. Stop sending X and Meta into Europe if it's so offensive. See how long it takes the euro public to revolt against their keepers. "I want my Facebook/Instagram!"

Expand full comment
Tardigrade's avatar

I agree. It would be great to see Elon or some other company call their bluff. However, he buckled in a market as (relatively) small as Brazil. Not encouraging.

Expand full comment
Clawmute's avatar

"participants were additionally asked to come up with intervention plans for content that isn’t “illegal,” even according to Europe’s loony standards."

The (European) standards are not "loony" if you view them as a very deliberate step towards their goal of totalitarianism.

They are methodically and purposefully heading towards their goal, which goal is different from your goal and my goal.

Expand full comment
Belling the Cat's avatar

Totalitarianism doesn't work when there's no economic base of production, or not for long. Some pigs are more equal than others only as long as the others keep working until their hearts burst.

Expand full comment
Clawmute's avatar

I think "doesn't work" is precisely correct.

But these people honestly, deeply believe . . . know! . . . that totalitarianism has never succeeed for long because it hasn't been implemented the way THEY would implement it.

Expand full comment
Ministryofbullshit's avatar

Thus Cuba

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

True or as Thatcher intimated, until other people's money runs out.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

BUT everyone NEEDS to keep looking at the loony standards so that they do not become more tolerable but rather less tolerable. It's called resisting the rising water temperature in the pot.

Expand full comment
Al Gonzalez's avatar

Ironic that the continent that was saved from Fascism would revert to Fascistic behavior, trying to punish speech more than the violent crimes of migrants. We are fortunate to have the first amendment.

Expand full comment
Frank A's avatar

Kinda like using non-Democratic means to save Democracy...

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

We are fortunate to have many, many generations between us and the kings/serfs dynamic. The thing that makes Americans so obnoxious to Europeans is our absolute unwillingness to be controlled and told what to do. Freedom begets more freedom.

Expand full comment
DMC's avatar

only part of the continent wanted to be saved in the first place.

Expand full comment
Steve Smith's avatar

It is the epitome of racism when European authorities treat violent acts by muslim immigrants differently from domestic wrong doers. That is why the citizens are so incensed. Woke official policy makes everything worse. It's happening here, too.

Expand full comment
Ministryofbullshit's avatar

It’s also when an entire citizenry have to adhere to the laws our democratic Congress passed (whether we like it or not- tax law comes to mind). But somehow there are millions upon millions of people from planet earth that get to openly break laws Congress passed (immigration law) and are rewarded with subsidies for doing so.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Similar to the last straw of taxation without representation. We had a non-violent revolution last November. Don't ever forget that. The system does work although for the previous four years it was looking pretty iffy.

Expand full comment
Kurt Wullenweber's avatar

Time for the US tech companies to tell the rest of the world to piss up a rope. We are NOT censoring ANYTHING. If Europe wants to censor what is on US social media, they can set up their own filters coming into their territory. Then we can sell their people ways to hack through it and we'll break up the Euro-Soviet Union the same way cheap black-market TVs and radios destroyed the old Soviet Union. Tyrants can NEVER survive fee exchange of ideas.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Yes!

Expand full comment
who cares 73's avatar

since american democrats are so hot for european censorship, i say deport them. Freedom only happens when the society supports it, not with half of it duped into marxism, & adoring criminals because race.

Expand full comment
DaveL's avatar

On what basis would you do that? Democrats have incorrect thought??

Expand full comment
who cares 73's avatar

sedition. censorship is unconstitutional, on its face, so putting censorship into place, as democrats did & big tech did & big media did, is sedition by virtue of hindering the enforcement of the first amendment.

Expand full comment
TeamOfRivals's avatar

Bingo!

Expand full comment