The Progressive Era
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects the right to freedom of faith and freedom of expression from government interference. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as applying to the whole federal government, although it's only applicable to Congress.
Anti-war voices can be considered a dissenting opinion, but even though they might have different views, the First Amendment still protects their rights. One of the articles on Antiwar.com titled “Report: Biden Preparing Major Penalties on Russia” discusses how the Biden Administration is preparing to hit Russia with major penalties. The penalties are coming to light due to a batch of allegations. Many of the allegations, like the claim Russia paid bounties to the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan, are denied in the article and considered to be entirely unfounded. Biden hitting Russia with penalties would be an example of the 8th Amendment because there are excessive bails and fines, and while President Biden swiftly attained an accord with Governor Putin of Russia to expand New START, the vital nuclear arms treaty, he has continued an adverse viewpoint towards Moscow. Aside from the hyperbole and constraints of sanctions, the U.S. is also boosting up military enterprise on several fronts to encounter Russia.
One article that I found on the American Conservative website titled “Washington helped ‘liberate’ Egypt. Today It’s An Authoritarian Dystopia” would be problematic in mainstream news. Firstly, the title of the article is something that a lot of people will take offense to because the Sisi regime is extremely harmful to the U.S. However, perhaps the foremost, obvious, and most vital reason for the absence of an outsized and protracted anti-war perspective in the news is the nature of the enemies the US has been fighting since the Fall of 2001. Because of groups like Al-Qaeda and others, the general public feels that these groups could likely do more awful acts like a terrorist attack or a cyber attack. The topics that most anti-war speakers tend to cover are not what most people want to hear. For example, the article found on the American Conservative website titled "Washington helped liberate Egypt. Today It's an Authoritarian Dystopia" is a topic that does not appeal to the general public. These anti-war voices are causing more political divide. On Antiwar.com, the article "Democrats are as Dangerous as Republicans to Just Peace in Palestine,” is an example of how anti-war voices can increase political division because they are critical of both parties if those parties don’t pursue what the anti-war voices consider to be peaceable.
The First Amendment guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. It forbids Congress from both promoting one religion over others and also restricting an individual’s religious practices. It guarantees freedom of expression by prohibiting Congress from restricting the press or the rights of individuals to speak freely. Even though anti-war ideas are legitimate and guaranteed under the First Amendment, they are not popular and therefore do not make it into mainstream news. They’re not popular because the anti war articles seem to create disagreement with others and unnecessary conflict/controversy.
No comments:
Post a Comment