“Freedom of the press” is another of the principal slogans of “pure democracy”. And here, too, the workers know — and socialists everywhere have admitted it millions of times — that this freedom is a deception while the best printing presses and the biggest stocks of paper are appropriated by the capitalists and while capitalist rule over the press remains, a rule that is manifested throughout the world all the more strikingly, sharply, and cynically, the more democracy and the republican system are developed, as in America for example.

The first thing to do to win real equality and genuine democracy for the working people, for the workers and peasants, is to deprive capital of the possibility of hiring writers, buying up publishing houses, and hiring newspapers. And to do that the capitalists and exploiters have to be overthrown and their resistance suppressed.

The capitalists have always used the term ‘freedom’ to mean freedom for the rich to get richer and for the workers to starve to death.

In capitalist usage, freedom of the press means freedom of the rich to bribe the press, freedom to use their wealth to shape and fabricate so-called public opinion.

In this respect, too, the defenders of ‘pure democracy’ prove to be defenders of an utterly foul and venal system that gives the rich control over the mass media. They prove to be deceivers of the people who, with the aid of plausible, fine-sounding, but thoroughly false phrases, divert them from the concrete historical task of liberating the press from capitalist enslavement.

—Lenin, Congress of the First Comintern

It probably came from the fact the British arrested owners of American newspapers for calling for rebellion and criticising the stamp act

Parenti's Myths of the Founding Father's is a great listen if you haven't checked it out yet. He recommends Charles Beard's An Economic Interpretation of the United States Constitution, which I'm currently working my way through. Pretty interesting stuff.

:ohnoes:

Is.... is it a gulag offense??

Excerpt is here: https://newpol.org/constitutions-are-the-problem/

It's hilarious to me that Liberals will simply resort to citing "Muh Constitution says freedom of everything" like gospel as an epic own against chuds trying to impose christo-fascism.

Like, I'm sure the idea of the First Amendment was progressive for the day and age when it was written (more that the writers were "progressive" to suit their own interests rather than for its own sake), but I don't need to look back centuries at what some slave-owning plutocrats wrote for legitimacy.