Hunting down dissidents: How the right in the US is repeating the mistakes of the woke movement

Vice President J.D. Vance's words resonated for weeks as if he had hit on something true. At the Munich Security Conference, Vance described censorship of free speech as the greatest threat to Europe.

European governments are silencing their citizens, Vance said, specifically mentioning England and Germany. Dissenting opinions are suppressed and labeled as misinformation. But people cannot be forced "to think, feel, or believe what they should."

Seven months later, Vance said on the podcast of murdered right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk, on which he guest-hosted earlier this week: "If you see anyone celebrating Charlie's murder, report them. And damn it, call their employer." He said extremist ideology must be combated: both actions and ideas. By this, he meant ideas on the far left.

Since Kirk's assassination, many Republicans and Trump supporters have made similar statements. Congressman Clay Higgins of Louisiana threatened to use congressional influence over technology platforms: all accounts that made "degrading comments" about Kirk's death should be permanently suspended. These "evil, sick animals" should be blacklisted, expelled from schools, and have their driver's licenses revoked.

Others demand exclusion from civil society or even expulsion from the country. Left-wing organizations should be banned or prosecuted.

Often, there's little distinction made when it comes to complaints about comments following Kirk's murder. Some actually glorify violence or call for it. Many others are simply tasteless expressions of celebration. Even mere criticism of the right-wing influencer and his views is targeted by his followers.

Shortly after the assassination, the website "Charlie's Murderers" called for people to report the names of those who had reacted inappropriately to Kirk's murder. Authors of disrespectful but harmless statements also ended up on the site, as various media outlets reported. The site is now offline. The site's title alone said it all: Expressing a false opinion, however misplaced, equates it with murder.

Suddenly, those who for years prioritized freedom of expression above all else and warned against labeling it as violence or misinformation are talking about "political online violence." Many leftists made this short-circuit during the height of the woke movement. They were therefore horrified when the big tech companies abolished fact-checking. Now the right is doing the same, attributing the power to kill to words and thoughts.

This contradiction – some speak of hypocrisy – is pointed out even by American intellectuals who have fallen victim to or criticized the dominant progressive, woke ideology in recent years.

Journalists, authors, and scientists, who often think liberally and conservatively, have left their editorial offices or universities, have been bullied or even fired because they did not want to submit to the prevailing dictates of opinion.

Their own experience with self-righteous left-wing intolerance makes them all the more concerned. They now see freedom of expression threatened by the right.

One of them is journalist Bari Weiss. During Donald Trump's first term in office, the paper hired her as a columnist precisely because of her conservative stance, i.e., to promote diversity of opinion. In 2020, Weiss left the newspaper and, in a sensational, public letter of resignation, spoke of left-wing censorship: "Social justice warriors" were setting the tone in the newsroom, she said, suspecting discrimination everywhere and excluding dissidents.

In an interview with the NZZ, Bari said that the knife emoji was placed after her name in internal communication channels because she refused to be carried away by the fight for "Black Lives Matter." Because she, a Jew, stood up for Israel, the bosses and editors of the "Times" were turned against her, without them supporting her.

Weiss later founded "The Free Press," an online publication with 1.5 million readers today. As the name suggests, the exchange of opinions is explicitly encouraged and supported.

This week, the editorial team presented its, for once, unanimous opinion on hate speech and freedom of expression in an editorial. The reason for this was the statement by Justice Minister Pam Bondi, who said of the reaction to Kirk's murder: "We will absolutely prosecute you if you attack someone with hate speech." Employers have a duty to fire employees who say "horrible things."

The Free Press clarified that hate speech is not illegal in the US and is not a legal category. Charlie Kirk himself said: "Hate speech does not legally exist in America. There is ugly speech. There is crude speech. There is evil speech. And all of that is protected by the First Amendment. Preserve America's freedom."

As justified as the grief and anger are, the Free Press commentary states: The government appears to have "forgotten the most basic American principles at the moment when we need to remember them most."

This was directed directly at Trump, who, when asked by an ABC reporter what he thought about Bondi's statements, said: "She's probably going to target people like you because you're treating me so unfairly. You have a lot of hate in your heart."

Since the beginning of his second term, Trump has been trying to pressure critical media outlets. He now seems to have forgotten the executive order he signed a few weeks ago, ordering the "restoration of free speech and an end to government censorship."

Instead, Trump filed a $15 billion defamation lawsuit against the New York Times and four of its journalists. He also sued Penguin Publishing because a book about him was unflattering. He threatened to revoke ABC and NBC's broadcast licenses, calling them an "arm of the Democratic Party."

The pressure is working. As the most recent example, ABC has suspended the "Late Night Show" featuring Trump critic and comedian Jimmy Kimmel indefinitely. Apparently because of his punchlines about the Kirk assassination. These can be considered a failure. The result is cancel culture, a term previously coined by the left.

This is why even Bari Weiss is defending the New York Times, which she once accused of censoring unwelcome opinions. Trump's legal threats against the paper are a case "where the cure is worse than the disease," she and her co-editors write. After all, every media outlet has the right to have an ideological orientation.

They've had that happen in recent years, too. People have been canceled and silenced in the media, culture, and educational institutions. They have been marginalized and socially destroyed by the woke movement.

Campaigns were waged against female biology lecturers who insisted on two genders, until they voluntarily resigned. Universities were under enormous pressure to conform to left-wing ideologies. Journalists who uttered the "N-word"—in one quote—lost their jobs. Books were withdrawn from sale because authors faced #MeToo accusations.

Now the other side is setting the rules of the Kulturkampf. The right is defining what is acceptable to say. The difference is that the most powerful man in the country is leading the counter-revolution.