When Transparency Really Means Tyranny | 5 Minute Video
When you hear the word “transparency,” what comes to mind? Maybe words like openness and honesty. But David French, Senior Writer for The National Review, shows how progressive activists, under the guise of “transparency,” are ruining the lives of many good Americans.
Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt
Have you taken the pledge for school choice? Click here! https://www.schoolchoicenow.com
Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they’re released. http://prageru.com/signup
Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips.
iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG
Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e
Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys
Join PragerU’s text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful.
VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com
FOLLOW us!
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru
Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru
Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/
PragerU is on Snapchat!
JOIN PragerFORCE!
For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX
JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff
Script:
When you hear the word “transparency,” what comes to mind?
Chances are that you associate the word with a lot of good things, like “openness,” “honesty,” “accountability,” and maybe even “integrity.”
In a better world, those associations would be accurate. But in the world of the progressive left, “transparency” means something very different. And you need to be aware of that meaning or you risk becoming a victim of it.
Everybody – on the left and the right – agrees that transparency in government is a good thing. With the exception of issues involving national security, the government should be transparent in its dealings. The public has a right to know what the government is doing with your tax dollars. But transparency means something completely different when it comes to the private, non-government realm. Take, for example, where you choose to donate your money. Transparency in this case means that there is a public record of your donation. Now, this might sound okay, but it isn’t. Why? Because it puts you on the radar of your political opponents and makes you a potential target.
Scott Eckern was a theatre director in Sacramento, California who gave a $1,000 donation to support the traditional definition of marriage. Maybe you don’t agree with Scott’s position. That’s your right. But the LA Times didn’t just disagree; they put every single donation made by people like Scott online. Scott Eckern lost his job, and others faced boycotts and blacklisting, all because of “so-called” transparency in an area of life that should be private.
Through most of our nation’s history, what happened to Scott Eckern wouldn’t have happened: if you made a political donation, your identity was not exposed. But under pressure from the left, this is changing.
In New York, for example, it’s now the law that if a non-profit organization advocates against a position taken by an elected official, it must disclose to the government the identities of all the organization’s significant donors. Faced with this prospect, most people would just as soon avoid the risk altogether. Safer, in other words, to keep your mouth shut and your checkbook closed.
Even when state officials promise to keep this donor information confidential, you can’t trust them. In 2015, the California attorney general, Kamala Harris, now a U.S. Senator, demanded that nonprofits disclose their donor lists to the state, and then her office “accidentally” posted this private donor information online.
But even if the government kept that information secret, it’s none of its business. Because while transparency is a government obligation, privacy is an individual right. How do we know? Because of the First Amendment.
In the 1950s, the state of Alabama tried to force the NAACP to disclose its membership lists. This demand came at a time when civil rights activists faced physical threats and economic reprisals for standing up for basic human rights. Fortunately, the Supreme Court stepped in and ruled unanimously that the First Amendment protected their right of freedom of association, and that included protection from prying eyes.
For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/when-transparency-really-means-tyranny
source
Exactly. Who cares what a person donates to unless it actually materially harms someone else. Personally, I can understand why this would be a big issue. You can not make comments online now without losing serious benefits or suffering serious consequences.
As usual, David French is spot-on
2:47, and now the president of the Senate
update: Kamala Harris is vice president of the USA
the GOVERNMENT needs to be transparent NOT the people, we have a right to know what POLITICIANS are doing, at ALL TIMES! if you are interested in learning more look up John F Kennedy on Transparency, the people should be able to WATCH what politicians do, and politicians should hold an account for their actions! NOT the other way around!
Is PragerU's argument against donation disclosure related to PragerU's stance on climate change & the fact that it had to disclose donations from fracking billionaires?
https://youtu.be/4lc8aqj9fq0
Can you list examples where the right also used these lists to single out people? And consider the opposite: say we do make it anonymous. What are the costs of having it?
Now the Left is making lists of Trump supporters. How prophetic this video was.
I have opinions about how others should act , behave, live their life. I better not let them know though because then I can say someone else is oppressing them. This is garbage propaganda
There is no expectation of privacy in public. If you want privacy you have to make your own. I am a conservative but totally disagree with what this video has to say. The statement that privacy is a human right is a sham.
Whoever down votes this video must like to get exposed themselves.
Excellent video.
Amazing!
Why did Australia invent Anonymous Balloting?
The tactics of the left in America is the rebirth of Maoism.
I no longer believe America has a future. Tyranny is winning. It's too strong. In 5-10 years all will be lost.
We need another Boston Tea Party. This time against the Left.
I get so mad about the Left publishing names. It's so wrong. It's pure McCarthyism!!!
Amen
transparency is needed in private matters because so ofter people use charitable organisations to do money laundering.
when it's opposing them, it's dark money and when it favors them, it ain't
what a bunch of cowards
Politicians SHOULD be required to show their donors. What about private companies? They are not require to preserve our privacy
This whole fight started when you have $millions being donated by corporations to push certain politicians up to office and continue corruption. Those companies that continue to control the government need to stop so we can bring back donation privacy once again. The government of course needs to be transparent even including the security aspects and no NSA, CIA, and other spying on citizens.
What have happened to America's traditional marriage??
"Traditional marriage" Oh right that means only heterosexual marriages are allowed…
đź‘Žđź‘Žđź‘Ž
And so the left cometh full circle
If you are donating to organisations which are trying to affect political change, therefore what the Government does with it's money you are, by definition, trying to be the Government. If the Government is not allowed to hide neither should you.
Truth cannot penetrate into the minds of the demonic, legally dead, zombots.
The reality of the world is so far beyond them that we HAVE to do this kind of thing to them. They are dangerous morons and they MUST be controlled.
Aaannd Nobody Mentions The Roblox.
This type of "forced" transparency… Its a some sort of a political weapon, definetely. Makes me very triggered.
Donations to organizations should be public information.
Secret (dark) money is an avenue for legal corruption.
Corruption will corrode civil and political society. In other words, everything will be for sale.
Why would an entity want to keep their "donations" private ?
Maybe, their public (fake) persona does not match their private (real) persona ?
"support the traditional sense of marriage" isn't that a euphemism for discrimination of LGBT peoples legal rights from marriage