By Matt Underwood The New Normal: Trump Decides Which Beliefs Are ‘Legal’: When dissent becomes an “indicator,” the First Amendment stops being a right and starts being a risk.
It’s a chilling prospect: a government actively seeking out and investigating its own citizens based on their beliefs. This isn’t the premise of a dystopian novel; it’s the reality unfolding under a directive that, frankly, sounds like something out of a satirical newspaper. National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7) orders the FBI and other agencies to target individuals and groups based on a list of “indicators” – markers of potential domestic terrorism. These indicators, however, aren’t about violent acts. Instead, they focus on dissenting viewpoints, on holding beliefs that run counter to a specific, and increasingly narrow, definition of American identity.
Consider the implications. Have you ever questioned American policy, criticized capitalism, or expressed support for socialism? Have you embraced the LGBTQ+ community, or spoken in favor of single-parent families? These are now potential red flags, reasons for government scrutiny. The very act of questioning, of dissent, is becoming a potential risk. This shift isn’t just about limiting free speech; it’s about chilling it. People will be less likely to voice their opinions, to question the status quo, if they fear being targeted. The First Amendment, which guarantees our right to freedom of speech, is rendered meaningless when expressing a specific belief becomes a reason for surveillance.
This isn’t an abstract concern. The directive goes beyond mere surveillance; it paves the way for investigations based on social media posts, protest attendance, and past activities. The scope is broad and the potential for abuse is immense. The memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi explicitly mentions anti-fascism as a possible crime, linking it to political violence. This paints a disturbing picture of a government that criminalizes opposition and dissent. The ACLU is correct to be concerned; indeed, they have released a paper that goes into detail about the ways NSPM-7 can be used to target nonprofits and activists, which is the perfect storm of threats to civil liberties.
It’s a scary question to ask: “Is there an opposition plan in place to protect folks?” The prospect of lawsuits, the need for legal challenges, it will be a major undertaking in a climate where the judiciary is also being called into question. The very mechanisms designed to protect our rights are being stretched and challenged. The fact that the powers at be are not only taking actions but doing so through the guise of the law, means they are emboldened. They are following their own rulebooks.
The implications extend far beyond the political sphere. It affects our social lives, our work, and our communities. The culture of fear will cause the chilling of any discussion, as it is a natural human reaction to self-censor when in an environment they feel is unsafe. This is especially dangerous when that climate promotes a very specific group of values, and views the dissent as extremism.
The very idea of a government dictating which beliefs are acceptable is a direct assault on the principles of democracy. Freedom of thought and expression are the cornerstones of a free society. When the government decides what we can think, what we can say, and what we can believe, we cease to be free citizens. Trump’s actions are simply the latest example of a dangerous trend towards authoritarianism. History is full of examples of governments that began by silencing their critics, and it’s a terrifying prospect.
There’s a sense of helplessness that this evokes. It is natural to feel that way. It’s a fundamental powerlessness when faced with this sort of overt action. The feeling is that of a revolution, like the one in Iran in the 1970’s. It’s time to capture as many aspects of the government infrastructure, ruining parts and strengthening parts into serving the revolution, and making it all legal by having a majority on the supreme court. Jailing or killing anyone who resists. This is not some future threat; it is an ongoing reality.
This is a stark reminder that our rights are not guaranteed. They must be defended, and that defense requires constant vigilance. The time to stand up for our rights is now, before the walls of freedom close in completely.