As Breitbart Tech reported last week, feminist Democrats are openly petitioning app stores and taking away harmless video games enjoyed by teenagers. Congresswoman Katherine Clark recently threw a fit and scared the developers of the popular Twitter trading game, Stolen, into removing themselves from app stores.
In the U.K, Margaret Thatcher once acquired the dubious nickname “Thatcher the Milk-Snatcher” after she cut subsidised milk in primary schools. Clark is fast becoming known as the Video Game Snatcher. But is she a lone voice of insanity, or does her censoriousness represent a deeper problem in Democratic politics?
It’s hard to see the electoral logic for Democrats. If there was ever a long term strategy to ensure that the youth will increasingly reject your party, developing a reputation for taking their video games away would be it. Nonetheless, Clark’s authoritarian attitudes are shared by many a big fish in the Democratic party.
Alas, the teenagers Clark alienated won’t reach voting age fast enough to stop the biggest fish of them all: Hillary Clinton.
As a Senator, Clinton was one of the leading advocates for federal regulation of video games. She called the Grand Theft Auto series a “major threat to morality,” and championed a bill that could have seen the game banned from stores. With all the alarmism of Jack Thompson or Anita Sarkeesian, Clinton promoted the bill by arguing that violent video games are “stealing the innocence of our children.”
Little wonder then, that Katherine Clark is one of Clinton’s most strident supporters. She recently told supporters on Facebook that Clinton would stand up for their “shared values” as President. I wonder what those values look like. Certainly nothing like cultural libertarianism.
Clark, who represents Massachusetts, has taken it upon herself to spend her weekends canvasing for Hillary in New Hampshire. I’m sure the locals were delighted to have yet another politician knocking on their doors. Although they may already have been sick of her, after she invaded their communities to harass the residents in November.
Hillary supporters who oppose censorship (if they really exist) should be concerned about Clark’s enthusiasm for their candidate. Over the past few decades, the Democrats have acquired a reputation for prohibitionism. They want tighter control over everything from smoking to college students’ sex lives. Is it any wonder they’re going after video games too?
Whatever reputation the Democrats once had for social permissiveness is quickly morphing into a reputation for authoritarianism. And Clinton is one of the worst of the bunch: beyond censoring video games, she has promised to introduce European-style hate speech laws if elected.
Commentators are finally starting to wake up and smell the censorship. Just last week, Forbes questioned whether the ‘net is “evolving away from freedom of speech”. With Facebook set to censor discussion of the European refugee crisis at Germany’s behest, there can be little doubt that the free internet of the 1990s and early 2000s is rapidly receding.
It isn’t just Facebook, either. Political censorship on Twitter has been so egregious that even old partisan foes have realised the dangers of loss of credibility the platform faces if it’s known to engage in political censorship.
But elites and regressive activists aren’t content with simply censoring “hate speech,” political rhetoric, and flamboyant journalists. They want to control every aspect of our lives — all the way down to one’s subconscious thoughts (just Google “microaggressions”) and now even our pastimes. In the face of full-blown authoritarianism from the Democrats, the only question is whether the Republican party has the ability – and the political will – to embrace the countervailing force of cultural libertarianism.