|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Remember when the ACLU actually defended civil rights instead of shilling for leftist totalitarians, some nostalgically minded folks say.
Except, the ACLU was always shilling for leftist totalitarians.
In 1934, Roger Nash Baldwin, Co-Founder and Executive Director of the ACLU, wrote an article for “Soviet Russia”, in which he quite clearly explained why he was fighting for civil liberties.
I believe in non-violent methods of struggle as most effective in the long run for building up successful working class power. Where they cannot be followed or where they are not even permitted by the ruling class, obviously only violent tactics remain. I champion civil liberty as the best of the non-violent means of building the power on which worker’s rule must be based. If I aid the reactionaries to get free speech now and then, if I go outside the class struggle to fight against censorship, it is only because those liberties help to create a more hospitable atmosphere for working class liberties. The class struggle is the central conflict of the world; all others are incidental. When that power of the working class is once achieved, as it has been only in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatever.”
If you doubt that, go read Baldwin’s “Liberty Under the Soviets” where he claimed that the Soviet press was “on the whole lively, interesting, well-written—like the better European papers and quite unlike American papers padded with features and advertising.”
The ACLU founder argued that the Soviet secret police “does not get out of hand, as do the secret services in some other countries—as, for instance, in the United States.”
Has the ACLU changed? Nah. It just stopped pretending to care about free speech because the “dictatorship of the proles” it believes is on the verge of being achieved in the United States.
There’s no Soviet Union, but there is a People’s Republic of China. Time to go to work for “civil rights” and against America.
That’s what the ACLU has always done best.
A group of Chinese citizens who live, work, study, and raise families in Florida, as well as a real estate brokerage firm in Florida that primarily serves clients of Chinese descent, are filing a lawsuit to combat Florida’s discriminatory property law, SB 264. Signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, the legislation unfairly restricts most Chinese citizens — and most citizens of Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Russia, and North Korea — from purchasing homes in the state. Unless the courts act, the law will take effect on July 1, 2023.
The plaintiffs are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Florida, DeHeng Law Offices PC, and the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), in coordination with the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance (CALDA).
CALDA is a mostly Chinese language organization formed to fight the ban on WeChat under the Trump administration. Biden dropped efforts to ban WeChat and TikTok.
A number of CALDA lawyers are involved in import-export businesses.
One of the founders of CALDA, Keliang Zhu of DeHeng Law claims to be “the organizer and one of the lead counsel in a historic lawsuit that sued President Trump and successfully stopped his WeChat ban in 2020”. His Chinese bio, as opposed to his English bio, appears to read that he had “served as a senior legal adviser to international institutions such as the World Bank. China Daily, China Economic Review”.
China Daily is a “daily newspaper owned by the Central Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party.”
“Political democracy is useful only as a tool of peaceful change,” Baldwin wrote.
The ACLU and the PRC differ only in that belief, that political democracy or peaceful change are needed and in no other beliefs.
When you understand that, you understand the Left.
After reviewing the bill as a lay person it seems reasonable to me.
Is that a man or a woman in the photo above the article?
it is a Non Biden-ary
I used to read “Soviet Life” and the Red Chinese version (can’t remember the name) in the library of my former SF Bay city back in the 1970s. All the pictures looked like that, shiny happy people. Even back then somehow I knew it was propaganda.
I still wonder what the sex of that androgynous looking Chink is. The image looks photo shopped but even still, the sex is indeterminate.
I think she’s a flat chested chick.
Good point Jeff, there is something unreal about that picture, maybe AI generated.
And not a very smart AI, at that. Most s0-called AI’s are profoundly stupid. The others are rather disturbing.
The ACLU the Atheists Communists & Lawyers Underground these organization has always been far left just like the SPLC as far left as they can be
Those non citizens of Chinese descent are damn lucky he doesn’t send them home. The ACLU will not win this one because it is only a stunt. Non citizens have no legal rights here except those rights the constitution protects of our American citizens. They should never have been allow to purchase property in America unless they denounced CHINA in a written letter which will be held in the state’s Hall of Records, which can be used against them if they do not tow the line in supporting America’s values. Now that Biden has allowed the Chinese to set up police stations in America to watch their citizens they would certainly like to know who is supporting China and who is not. That letter will be the hammer held over those non-citizen’s heads forcing compliance of our laws and rules.
Russia’s Nationalist Putin is Hitler.
America’s Nationalist Trump is Hitler.
Jinoping is a Nice Guy.
Globalists like the CCP model.
Back when my company licensed our software directly to developers, we had a list of countries that were proscribed by the U.S. State Department. They included China, the USSR (later Russia), Vietnam, Cuba, and so forth — all the bad actors who had horrible human rights records and no copyright protection. The list changed with the times, and Bill Clinton took China off of it. Since I was in charge of sales, not one license made its way to the PRC and not one copy was there legally. We would have made a lot more money if I had been more flexible, but I was not. And I can look back on my life and say that I chose a moral route rather than a lucrative one, fighting evil in my own tiny, insignificant sphere. Perhaps it makes no difference in the long run, but it makes a difference to me.