When Transparency Really Means Tyranny|5 Minute Video
When you hear the word” openness, “what comes to mind? David French, Senior Writer for The National Review, shows how progressive activists, under the guise of “transparency,” are messing up the lives of numerous great Americans.
Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt
Have you taken the pledge for school choice? Click on this link! https://www.schoolchoicenow.com
Joining PragerU is totally free! Register now to get all our videos as quickly as they’re released. http://prageru.com/signup
Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Countless sources and truths at your fingertips.
iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG
Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e
Sign Up With Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall telephone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys
Sign up with PragerU’s text list to have these videos, totally free product free gifts and breaking statements sent out straight 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. Exact same great products. Very same low rate. Shopping made meaningful.
GO TO 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 “openness,” what enters your mind?
Possibilities are that you associate the word with a lot of good things, like “openness,” “sincerity,” “responsibility,” and maybe even “stability.”.
In a much better world, those associations would be precise. In the world of the progressive left, “transparency” implies something really various. And you require to be familiar with that meaning or you run the risk of becoming a victim of it.
Everyone– on the right and the left– concurs that transparency in government is an advantage. With the exception of concerns including national security, the federal government needs to be transparent in its dealings. The public has a right to know what the government is making with your tax dollars. Transparency means something completely various when it comes to the private, non-government realm. Take, for instance, where you choose to contribute your cash. Transparency in this case indicates that there is a public record of your contribution. Now, this might sound all right, but it isn’t. Why? Due to the fact that it puts you on the radar of your political challengers and makes you a prospective target.
Scott Eckern was a theatre director in Sacramento, California who offered a $1,000 donation to support the traditional meaning of marriage. Perhaps you do not agree with Scott’s position. That’s your right. However the LA Times didn’t just disagree; they put each and every single contribution made by people like Scott online. Scott Eckern lost his task, and others faced boycotts and blacklisting, all since of “so-called” transparency in an area of life that ought to be personal.
Through the majority of our country’s history, what took place to Scott Eckern wouldn’t have occurred: if you made a political contribution, your identity was not exposed. However under pressure from the left, this is altering.
In New York, for instance, it’s now the law that if a non-profit organization supporters versus a position taken by an elected authorities, it should disclose to the government the identities of all the organization’s substantial donors. Confronted with this prospect, the majority of people would just as soon prevent the risk entirely. Much safer, in other words, to keep your mouth shut and your checkbook closed.
Even when state officials assure to keep this donor info personal, you can’t trust them. In 2015, the California chief law officer, Kamala Harris, now a U.S. Senator, required that nonprofits disclose their donor lists to the state, and after that her workplace “unintentionally” posted this personal donor information online.
Even if the federal government kept that info secret, it’s none of its company. Because while transparency is a federal government responsibility, privacy is a private.
In the 1950s, the state of Alabama tried to require the NAACP to reveal its subscription lists. When civil rights activists dealt with physical threats and economic reprisals for standing up for standard human rights, this demand came at a time. Luckily, the Supreme Court actioned in and ruled unanimously that the First Amendment secured their right of liberty of association, which included protection from prying eyes.
For the complete script, go to https://www.prageru.com/videos/when-transparency-really-means-tyranny.
source
When you hear the word” transparency, “what comes to mind? In the world of the progressive left, “transparency” indicates something extremely various. Everyone– on the left and the right– concurs that openness in government is a good thing. Openness indicates something completely various when it comes to the personal, non-government realm. Since while openness is a government commitment, personal privacy is a specific.
