Well, it took us 40 years, but we’ve finally achieved the government that George Orwell warned us about in 1984.  In his book, Orwell described the Ministry of Truth building as a pyramid-shaped structure with slogans on each of its three faces – “War is Peace” “Freedom is Slavery” and “Ignorance is Strength.”  As you might have guessed, the job of the Ministry of Truth was to perpetuate lies, to help Big Brother keep the populace obedient.

In Orwell’s fictional land of Oceania, Big Brother had the power to offer any lie as the truth.  Anyone who objected to being lied to was dealt with by the Ministry of Love, whose job it was to imprison and torture all dissenters.  To those of you who think America could never turn into such an Orwellian dystopia, hold on to your hats.  I have seen the future, and it’s disturbing.

One of the things that made America the envy of the world is our Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Not because we have one.  Many dictatorships have Bills of Rights that surpass ours.  Check out the Soviet Constitution.  The difference is, Americans actually enjoyed the rights they were promised.  At least so far.

You’d think that with so many lawyers running (or infesting) the government, there would be a reverence for and dedication to the rule of law in general and the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, specifically.  But there isn’t.  An alarming number of so-called constitutional scholars from prestigious schools are advocating  disregarding or summarily changing the Constitution to help the Left succeed.

A sane law professor, Johnathan Turley, sounded the alarm recently in a Wall Street Journal op ed.  Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of UC Berkeley Law School (Harvard Law School, 1978), wrote a book complaining that the Constitution threatens the U.S.   He describes conservative justices as “partisan hacks.”  (Apparently the three liberals on the Court who rubber stamp every Leftist policy aren’t hacks).  New York Times critic Jennifer Szalai (London School of Economics) decries “Constitution worship,” writing that, “Americans have long assumed that the Constitution could save us; a growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it.”  You get that?  The Constitution guarantees all of our rights, but we must cancel our rights to save ourselves from it.  Orwell would be so proud.

In 2022, law professors Ryan Dorfler (Harvard) and Samuel Moyn (Yale) called for liberals to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.”  Other “scholars” deride what they call “rights talk,” railing against individual rights, the very thing that the Bill of Rights was enacted to protect, and the very thing that, as law professors, these numb sculls are supposed to be teaching their students.

Professor Barbara McQuade (Michigan) calls free speech (which is Number One on the Bill of Rights Hit Parade) “America’s Achilles heel.”  Professor Tim Wu (Columbia) says, free speech “now mostly protects corporate interests” and threatens “essential jobs of the State” like protecting national security.” Sieg heil Tim.

Professor Mary Ann Franks (Harvard) complains that the First and Second Amendments are too “aggressively individualistic” and are a danger to “domestic tranquility” and “general welfare.”  Sorry Mary Ann,  but you’re an idiot.  How can a list of individual rights be too individualistic?  And the general welfare clause only applies to things the Constitution authorizes the federal government to do, it doesn’t expand federal rights, and you know it.

Then there are the so-called “journalists.”  MSNBC’s Elie Mystal (Harvard), the guy who’s hairdo looks like he stuck his tongue in the light socket, calls the Constitution “trash,” and wants to abolish the U.S. Senate, without which, the Constitution never would have been ratified.

One of these constitution deniers, Harvard Professor Michael Klarman, is in favor of enacting “democracy- entrenching legislation” designed to ensure that Republicans can never win another election. (You know, “democracy”).  But he’s worried.  “The Supreme Court could strike down” their unconstitutional Acts, “and that’s something the Democrats need to fix.”  His pal, Professor Dorfler, says that all  “tools of retaliation,” like defunding the Court, should be used.

In fairness, not all Democrats favor an end to all free speech.  They’re willing to permit speech that originates in the government, and all speech that they have preapproved, to prevent the spread of “disinformation.”  You remember disinformation.  In 2016, 51 lawyers and intelligence community operatives said the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian disinformation.”  Well, maybe that’s a bad example.

From 2016 to 2018, government officials told us they were sure that Trump was colluding with the Russians.  Uh, let’s not go there.  Oh yes, from 2020 to 2023 they told us people who said Covid came from China, that there were available treatments for Covid, and that the Covid vaccines didn’t work, and were dangerous for some people, were spreading disinformation.  No, better skip that one too.

You get the idea.  According to Democrats, the government not only is authorized to, but has a duty to decide if what’s being discussed by private citizens is true or not, and if they decide it’s not, is authorized to and must censor it.  If you’re expecting the First Amendment to save you, see above.  Democrats want to save you from the constitutional provision that guarantees you the right to speak your mind.  If you think I’m exaggerating this, then you haven’t been paying attention.

In 2020, in the name of disinformation, the government successfully forced social media and other media outlets to censor the speech of a presidential candidate, as well as that of anyone else who attempted to support him.  It was for our own good, of course.  If they hadn’t cancelled free speech, you might have been exposed to disinformation during an election campaign. (I always thought “disinformation” was a synonym for “election campaign”).

Cancelling the First Amendment for the 2020 election was only the start, however.  The 2024 Democrats say they’ve only just begun.  VP candidate Tim Walz says, “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation and hate speech, especially around our democracy.”     That’s totally wrong and stupid, but he’s not a lawyer, so he’s got an excuse.  Then who gets to decide what is and isn’t true?

Even George Orwell couldn’t dream this one up.  Who’s the last person on Earth you would rely on for the truth?  That’s right, Hillary Clinton.  She’s a lawyer (Yale).  Last week, she told Rachel Maddow (who else?) that the federal government should criminally prosecute, and presumable imprison, Americans who “share propaganda” a/k/a speech.

I shit you not.  As always, the irony was lost on Democrats.  Hillary Clinton, you may recall, was the source of the Steele Dossier, a pack of lies about Trump, propaganda if you will, that she knowingly foisted on the American people, and which caused the two year Mueller investigation.  Christopher Steele later admitted it was untrue.

Hillary, of the illegal email server, the woman who ignored subpoenas and FOIA requests, and who destroyed computer hard drives and deleted 30,000 emails.  Let’s face it, if propaganda was a crime, Hillary would be walking the Green Mile.

But three cheers for the Democrats.  I nominate Hillary for Minister of Truth in the Harris Administration.  We might have to change Ministry of Love to Ministry of Joy.  Jack Smith can run that.  All the elements are present.  The world’s on fire but Kamala says, “War is Peace.”  Tim Walz wants to cancel the Bill of Rights.  “Freedom is Slavery.”  And the media keeps lying to you and you keep pretending to believe it.  “Ignorance is Strength.”  Consider this before you vote.