How society is limiting free speech

1. Fear is driving America. Fear of saying the wrong thing, fear of thinking the wrong
thing, even fear of dressing the wrong way. While this fear is prevalent, how each person
responds to it is not the same. One group fears so much about offending others that they seek out
others to tell them what to do, what to think, and how to act. This fear is carried out to the point
that they see certain freedoms as less and less important. While another group, feels as if political
correctness is being forced and upon them and in relation to this they have begun to act out in
frustration and anger. This has led this group to extol certain freedoms above that of other rights
and individuals. The consequences of both of these groups will have lasting and potentially
negative effects on society.
The question is then, how did we arrive at this point? How did we arrive to the point
that some are so afraid of speaking up that they sit by or even cheer as rights and freedoms are
taken from them while the others act out in anger and gravitate towards individual who do not
extol the virtue of leaders of the past but instead extol virtues of selfishness and a temperament
on becoming of a leader of the United States? The answer is simple. America’s past is laced with
indiscretions. Some large, some small, but each has taken its toll on society, and there exists a
fear that if America is not diligent it will repeat the transgressions of its past. Diligence is good
trait, however, this diligence has been taken to the extreme by some movements in order to push
their agenda. As such this has led to inability to deal with differing opinions among groups and
has allowed the vocal minorities of the right and the left to use the emotions and fears of past
transgressions highjack the Constitution for their own designs and purposes. This will be shown
by exploring not only the path that led to America’s current predicament, but will also examine
what needs to be done to undo the already known consequences and what the possible future will
hold if this path is continued.

2. History
In order to understand the current predicament that the United States faces what first must
explored is why Americans today hold the idea of personal freedoms in such high regard. The
United States was founded on the idea that all men were created equal, however this has not
always been the case. Within the confines of American history lies America’s original sin,
slavery.
When slavery in America is discussed the images of cotton plantations are what’s
envisioned. However, this was just a minor part of the role of slavery in America. Slavery in
America was much more complex and widespread. In David Hume’s book, “Inhuman Bondage:
The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World”, He examines the role of slavery in each of the
colonies. What is found is that from New York to Georgia, salves had played a pivotal role in
society. He does note that in each colony they played a different role. Per example in the
Northern Colonies slaves were found in the home more and a greater familiarity existed between
the slaves and their master and the master’s family. While in the Southern States slaves were
needed for working in the fields and as such the same familiarity did not existi. A prime example
of this, given by Hume, is found in a story of an individual from the South visiting the North.
The individual notes, what he considers to be an over familiarity with the family and their slaves.
As often times they’d eat at the same table and sleep in the same house and that slaves would
also be found working side by side with their non-slave counter partsii. These differences would
lead to varying opinions on the issue of slavery following the Revolutionary War.
As sung in the musical Hamilton about the Battle of Yorktown, the battle that would see
the end of the war, “Black and white soldiers wonder alike if this really means freedomiii?” The
war for independence was not independence for all. In order to appease some of the Southern

3. Colonies, concessions were made. These concessions included the 3/5 clause and the
continuation of slavery. However, the idea that all men were created equal would continue to
gain momentum through the 1800’s. Returning to Hume, he notes how the religious awakening
movements of this time caused some to question the morality of slavery. One such individual,
Theodore Dwight Weld penned this in response to a fellow abolitionist in how slavery should be
viewed as a sin. He states:
That no condition of birth, no shade of color, no mere misfortune of circumstances,
can annul the birth-right charter, which God has bequeathed to every being upon whom
he has stamped his own image, by making him a free moral agent, and that he who robs
his fellow man of this tramples upon right, subverts justice, outrages humanity . . . and
sacrilegiously assumes the prerogative of God; and further, though he who retains by
force, and refuses to surrender that which was originally obtained by violence or fraud, is
joint partner [sic] in the original sin, becomes its apologist and makes it the business of
every moment to perpetuate it afresh, however he may lull his conscience by the vain
plea of expedience or necessityiv.
The purpose of this letter was to show there would be no moral excuse for slavery, from the
slaver who captured and sold men and women on markets to those who continued the system.
Everyone were guilty of the sin of slavery. This belief and idea continued to gain momentum.
Such movements lead to a number of compromises, that would hinder the growth of slavery, but
slavery continued to exist in the Southern States. This would all change come the election of
1864 when the third party candidate Abraham Lincoln would win the Presidency. Fearing the
immediate ending of slavery, the Southern States rebelled and led to one of the most destructive

4. wars fought in North America. Before the wars end the Emancipation Proclamation would be
given and by wars end slavery would be found no more in the United States.
A mistake that is made is the belief that the Civil War ended racial discrimination. The
Civil War ended slavery but it did not end racial discrimination. After the war much of the South
was in economic and literal ruins. They considered themselves as an occupied state and looked
for those to blame for their misfortune and the loss of the war. Since a main part of the Civil War
revolved around slavery, it became easy for individuals of the South to place the blame of the
African American Community. With this they sought to find ways to punish them and prevent
them joining their society. Following the war, a number of laws were created with the intent to
prevent now freed slaves from fully integrating into society. The purpose of these laws fell into
three categories: racial segregation, disenfranchisement and exploitation.
The first, racial segregation. These laws included the separation of whites and blacks in
the school system and segregated them in other establishments, such as restaurants or libraries
and even laws against the marriage of African Americans to whites. The breaking of any of these
laws would bring the punishment of jail and fines. The second, disenfranchisement. This focused
on the representation in the political sphere. This was accomplished by the passing of voter
suppression laws such as a poll tax and test. Due to this time the number of African Americans
who voted in the South became near nonexistent as they were either unable to vote or due to the
difficulty did not vote. This resulted in the inability to elect individuals who would be able to
help them fight or repeal these types of laws and other similar types of laws and created a system
in which they were not represented. Thirdly, exploitation towards African Americans and other
minorities through the use employment discrimination. This included preventing African
Americans from obtaining certain types of employment that would have allowed for progression

5. and economic stableness. In addition, a penal system, known as the convict lease system, was
created. This system was not meant to benefit those in the system but the state and private
entities. In this system convicts were leased out to state or private entities to aid in projects. This
allowed these entities complete projects under cost and increase their profits as they had
essentially free laborv. African Americans and other minorities would be charged with minor
crimes and placed in these systems to provide the labor. This system was essentially a new form
of slavery and further led to the economic oppression of the African American Community Each
of these three categories and the laws created and associated with them created a segregated
society and perpetuated the false idea that a racial hierarchy existed.
These laws would also serve as a way to punish the African American Community. It
was taught, believed that the reason why the South lost the war was due to the African American
Community. The now freed slaves and the generations that would come after would serve as a
reminder that the South lost and such a reminder cause some to want to take action. In addition
to this thought, many could not comprehend that African Americans were now equal to them.
This is seen in a correspondence from Col. Samuel Thomas to Major General Oliver Otis
Howard. In it he states:
Wherever I go—the street, the shop, the house, or the steamboat—I hear the people talk
in such a way as to indicate that they are yet unable to conceive of the Negro as
possessing any rights at all. Men who are honorable in their dealings with their white
neighbors will cheat a Negro without feeling a single twinge of their honor. To kill a
Negro they do not deem murder; to debauch a Negro woman they do not think
fornication; to take the property away from a Negro they do not consider robbery. The
people boast that when they get freedmen affairs in their own hands, to use their own

6. classic expression, "the niggers will catch hell." The reason of all this is simple and
manifest. The whites esteem the blacks their property by natural right, and however much
they may admit that the individual relations of masters and slaves have been destroyed by
the war and the President's emancipation proclamation, they still have an ingrained
feeling that the blacks at large belong to the whites at large, and whenever opportunity
serves they treat the colored people just as their profit, caprice or passion may dictatevi.
This violence was carried out against them though unorganized means and organized means.
During this time period the formation of KKK1 took place. What had originally started as a
fraternity of confederate soldiers. The purpose of this secret organization was to act as an
insurgent group against the occupying Northern Army and against the African American
Community. They would carry out violence and acts of terrorism against those in charge of
reconstruction and as time would go on more and more against the African American
Community. The reason for this is they sought to target this community was for purpose of
retaliation due holding them accountable for losing the war and in their minds restore white
supremacyvii. This would be accomplished through open violence against the African American
Community and more subvert means such as voter intimidation. Each action taken by them
would further entrench in the minds of both whites and African Americans that past would not
soon be forgotten.
Some of these actions and the laws associated with them came with the support, either
outwardly or secretly, of political leaders in the South. This surprising aspect of all of this,
appears to be in contradiction to 14th amendment which states:
1 Klu Klux Klan

7. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities
of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the
equal protection of the lawsviii.
Even with this and as noted laws and actions were taken to prevent this from becoming a reality.
It would not be until 1954, Brown v Board of Education Topeka that such laws and institutional
structures be found unconstitutional.
In Brown v Board of Education Topeka, the plaintiffs argued that the idea of “separate
but equal”2, as declared as constitutional by an earlier Supreme Court Case, was an impossible
fact. They noted and showed the disparities between all white and all black schools as well as the
psychological effect it had on the African American community. It was these arguments Justice
Warren noted while reading the unanimous decision overturning Plessy V Ferguson and
effectively desegregating the school system of the United States. He stated:
Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon
the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the
policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the
Negro group...Any language in contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude that in
the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate
educational facilities are inherently unequalix.
This decision would lead to further desegregation in other aspects of society and could be
argued as the beginning of the Civil Rights movement.
2 Plessy v Ferguson

8. The Civil Rights movement (1954-1968) sought to fix the issues that were created during
the reconstruction period3. As noted with the decision in Brown v Board of Education
desegregation began in the South. However, such a movement was meant with great resistance.
States in the South sought by all means to block or ignore directives from the courts and the
Federal Government. This period of time was highlighted with a number of high profile events,
violence and leaders. One of these events in 1957, three years after Brown v Board of Education,
dealt with nine African American students who sought to enroll and attend Little Rock Central
High School. At this point schools in Arkansas had refused to segregate. To push this the
NAACP sought to push an agenda that would include nine African America students enrolling in
school. This plan was meant with great resistance as the local populace and state government
refused to allow this to take place. As such they undertake means to prevent the nine students
from attending. This included intimidation, violence, and when this still would not work
Governor Orval Faubus deployed the National Guard to prevent the students from entering the
school. This standoff would continue until President Eisenhower sent in the 101st Airborne and
federalized the national guard and used them to escort and protect the students.
In addition, to events such as this, leaders like Martin Luther King Jr, became a
prominent face of the Civil Rights movement. Reverend King’s movement was focused on
nonviolent protest and due to this idea he was able to garner support from both the African
American community and the white community. He led marches in Georgia, Alabama, and
Washington DC where he gave his “I have a dream” speech. Each march highlighted various
issues facing African Americans and was meant with resistance, some of which included
3 Period of time after the Civil War in which theSouth was forced to repay the costof the war, rebuild,and it was
duringthis time laws were passed keep African Americans segregated from society. This included laws limiting
voting and marriagelaws,and the segregation of schools,restaurants,and other establishments.

9. violence and false imprisonment. In the end he would eventually give his life to the cause, his
words, actions and beliefs would bring change. His death would lead to further changes and in a
way bring an end to the Civil Rights Movement. Organizations continue to exist and still push
agendas associated with the movement, but the issues focused on became more specific and less
general and as such the large marches of the past were no longer seen as effective or needed.
The Why
The path from slavery to the Civil Rights Movement is one wrought with difficulty,
emotion, and the coming to terms with that America made mistakes. Problems still exist, recent
events show this. However, the purpose of this paper is not to fully delve into the issues that still
exist and need to be corrected but to see how this past and the emotions of it have shaped the
psyche of the America. The lessons learned during this time have been rightfully applied to other
issues that America has faced that have ranged from dealings with Native Americans to those
living with disabilities. However, as time has progressed the lessons of the past have begun to be
applied in more social and political movements.
These movements revolve not around race but around social or moral issues. These
include gay marriage, transgender bathrooms, polygamy, and even prostitution. In the past these
issues were viewed as purely moral issues and under this belief they were unable to gain support.
However, as each of these groups began to change their tactics and focus more on the civil rights
aspect they not only were able to garner more support but made it increasingly difficult for others
to speak out against. These movements call themselves the “new civil rights movement” and if
you speak out against them you’d be tied to the idea that you were against the idea of the all civil
rights. This stifled conversation and made many warry and worried about having a differing
opinion. Nearly no individual wants to be called raciest or a bigot or against the ideas that

10. America was built on. In addition, no one wants to relive the sins of the past. As such groups of
individuals adopted this sense of hyper diligence to, in their mind, promote and protect these new
social agendas.
The support and the promotion of these social agendas are not the issue. The issue is
some of the methods they’ve used to promote their agenda. Since the creation of the 24hr news
cycle the importance of “viral4” news to promote a social or political agenda has increased. This
is due to first how individuals determine importance. According to Robert Zajonc, a social
psychologist, as individuals were repeatedly exposed to something the more familiar and
accepting of it they be became. He discovered this by running a number of tests and using
actual words and nonsense words. What was found was that as the test subject heard the
nonsense words more and more they became more accepting of them and began to believe they
may be actual words, this would become known as the mere exposure effectx. This would be
further shown in another study conducted by Vanderbilt University. In their study certain phrases
were repeated to the test participants whose job it was then to state whether it was a true or false
statement. What was found was that as the statements repeated more often were rated more true
than those that were not repeated as much, regardless of actual truthfulness of the statementxi.
Each of these human characteristics are nothing new to those who have worked in advertising or
in the media. However, these human characteristics have become more exploited with the
creation of social media platforms.
Social media has become an essential forum for any organization wanting to promote a
cause. According to a recent Pew Research Center Study 62% of U.S. adults get their news from
4 A rapid circulation of an image, story, video or other form of media

11. social mediaxii. This has allowed organizations a more direct way to get their message out to the
populace and allows more individuals with the same beliefs to connect. On the surface this
appears to be a helpful aid, however, with any technology there is a potential downside.
Organizations have found ways to get their stories to go viral. This they accomplish with clever
hashtags, catchy headlines, or emotional headlines. With this they are then able that understand
able to highjack a story or create a story in order to promote their own agenda. A simple way to
accomplish this is to tie the cause to an aspect of the Civil Rights Movement. In doing so they
not only recreate those emotions but bring to the forefront of many that fear of not wanting to
repeat the past. With this they are able to silence those who may have differing views.
In 2014 Mozilla Chief Executive Brendan Eich was forced to step down due to a
donation he made contributions he made in 2003 three to the proposition 8 movement in
California5. When this story first broke it appeared to be a small, nonstory. However, with the aid
of social media pro LGBTQ organizations and groups where able to cause the story to go viral. It
quickly made its way through the social media forums and then into the national spotlight.
Fearing backlash from advertisers Eich was forced to step down and Mozilla issued an apology.
This would be one of the first high profiled stories in which this would occur but it would not be
the last. Other examples include the forcing of speakers from withdrawing from various forms of
speaking arrangements. It has become popular on university campuses that if what is deemed a
controversial speaker is invited to speak to take to social media and organize protest, to the point
that either they are forced to withdraw or the university has to withdraw the invitation. It has
5 Prop 8 was a referendum statingthat marriagewas only to be allowed by a man and woman

12. gotten to the point that any time it was found that an individual or organization had a different
belief then certain movements, actions will be taken to silence these individuals or organizations.
Each of these organizations believe they are protecting the rights of all and promoting
what it says in the 14th amendment6. However, there mistake lies in the idea that the 14th
amendment must be interpreted as applying not only to states or the federal government but to
each and every single individual as well. Meaning that individuals must not hold or act on any
beliefs that are deemed to go against the belief of another. But at what cost and how far can this
be taken? As it states in the First amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of
the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
grievancesxiii.
Understanding this it should be understood that it should not matter what individuals believe,
who they donate to or what or who they support. However, it appears more and more often that
this idea of 14th amendment is being used to limit the 1st amendment. In another recent Pew
Research study, they found that 40% of millennials7 would be in favor of limiting what people
can and cannot say. Especially in regards to or about minority groups. This was compared to
other groups such as Gen X8 and Baby Boomers9 where the percentage was found to at 27% and
6 No State shall makeor enforce any lawwhich shall abridgethe privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life,liberty, or property, without due process of law;nor deny to
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
7 Millennial arethose18 to 34 years of age
8 Gen X are those 35 to 50 years of age
9 Baby Boomers are those 51 to 69 years of age

13. 24%xiv. This stark compression shows what some are willing to give up, in order to appease
others and to prevent the sins of the past.
What are the consequences of this though? Is it not better that we keep this hyper
diligence and protect the rights of others? The danger lies in the fact that for every action there is
an equal and opposite reaction. The extreme diligence on this side has pushed another side to the
other extreme. 2016 has seen prime examples of this. A certain presidential candidate has made
his mark by being the anti-political correctness candidate. He has not held back on what he has
said in public, on twitter, or on any other forum and what he has said should have prevented any
individual from making it as far as he has, but it hasn’t. Due to the push from some to limit what
can be said the push back has turned into “why?” and into “I’ll say what I want.” Make no
mistake what has been said by this candidate is vulgar, it is rude, and it is uncalled for. Name
calling, shaming, or plain old discrimination is not being anti politically correct, it is being plain
intolerant.
However, many have gravitated towards this candidate, supported him, and defended
him. All in the name of protecting their right to say what they want and how they want to say it.
They have taken that fear of the past and turned it into anger. Right or wrong, some in this group
feel as if they are becoming the ones who are being discriminated against and they fear the sins
of the past will happen to them. This fear has caused them to look for a leader, a protector and
just as a terrible, but influential man once said:
The art of leadership. . . consists in consolidating the attention of the people against a
single adversary and taking care that nothing will split up that attention. . . . The leader of
genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to
one categoryxv.

14. and this is what is being accomplished. This candidate and his supporters continue to speak out
and with each phrase the anger appears to grow. In may a butler of this candidate stated, in
speaking about President Obama, “should be shot as an enemy agent” and a growing number of
his supporters at his rally can be heard chanting “hang the bitch” and “kill the bitch” and these
are just a few of what has been said by him or his supporters about women, minorities, and those
who disagree with themxvi.
The consequences of this speech are just as dangerous as those who are trying to limit it.
For it is this type of speech that gives more credence to those who believe that the 1st amendment
should be limited. In the end both groups will cause limitations to be placed on the first
amendment.
The Solution
The solution is simple to state and difficult to accomplish. To begin with it must start
with open communication and conflict resolution. America must realize that while it still has
some progression to make on issues of race, it has made progress and it now longer needs to be
overly cautious. That instead it needs to be open and honest. In addition, it needs to understand
that the issues associated with both sides are complicated and each side needs to understand this.
However, yelling, threatening, and/or bullying will not allow either group to achieve the goals
they seek. These steps are simple conflict resolution steps that have been shown to work when
applied correctly. It is based on the dual concern model. In this model two views are taken into
account. The first is focusing on concern for self. As noted I the steps above each group has their
view, there view, while understood or not, is important. Each must enter the discussion knowing
this. Second, focusing on concern for others. To come to a solution all can agree on, empathy
must exist. Without the understanding that the other side has a right to their view, no solution

15. will be foundxvii. In this model a balance is found and this balance can be accomplished my
following these four steps.
First, each group must maintain their composure. The current tactic of yelling or
threatening and the reaction to this only empowers one side and limits what can be discussed.
Each side must remain calmxviii.
Second, both sides need to understand that how certain topics are discussed will be
triggers for one of them. Those looking to limit speech, for fear of offending and alienating
minorities must understand that the word “limit” will end the discussion. Understanding what
each of the triggers are and finding better ways to approach them will prevent either side from
accidently (or purposely) angering the other sidexix.
Third, only the facts need to be focused on. Those tired of overly political correctness
cannot rely on their emotion or fear to defend their position. They must stick with facts that can
be proven. This will keep the discussion on the issue and not people, thus avoiding personal
attacksxx.
Lastly, there will need to be moments when each side will have to play to each other’s
ego. This will show an understanding and empathyxxi.
Once more on the surface this appears simple. However, the accomplishing of this will
not be. Given the size of the United States and the unrealistic ability to get all into the same room
to accomplish this, the ability to accomplish this is limited. With this limitation there still exists
one place this can be accomplished, the classroom. Whether this starts at the primary education
level or secondary education level or both. This is the one place where individuals of multiple
backgrounds and beliefs will be congregated. If done properly by an induvial who can follow the

16. steps mentioned above, it should provide the forum necessary to discuss the difficult issues
found on both sides. Outside of this it would be up to human nature, a willingness to learn, and a
willingness to understand. The likelihood of this being accomplished, however, is not a high
probability.
In the end two things must be remembered. First, the world will not be changed just by
one individual, however as Mother Teresa states, “I alone cannot change the world, but I can cast
a stone across the water to create many ripples.xxii” Change will be slow, this has been seen, but
it can happen if all sides are willing. Second, this will only work if all views are willing to be
open with one another and speak.
Conclusion
In the end this may fall on deaf ears. The pattern has been set, the examples have been
given. As both sides move further and further to the extremes in the end the consequences will be
the same, freedom of speech will be limited. Not from the government, but from society itself.
The solution is simple, but even knowing this it still may be as Hugh Laurie stated while playing
Governor David Nix in the film Tomorrow Land.
Let's imagine: if you glimpsed the future, and were frightened by what you saw, what
would you do with that information? Would you go to the politicians? The captains of
industry? And how would you convince them? Data? Facts? Good luck. The only facts
they won't challenge are the ones that keep the wheels greased and the dollars rolling in.
But what if … what if there was a way of skipping the middleman, putting the critical
news directly into everyone's head? The probability of widespread annihilation kept
going up. The only way to stop it was to show it. To scare people straight. What

17. reasonable human being wouldn't be galvanized by the potential destruction of everything
they've ever known or loved? To save civilization, I would show its collapse. But how do
you think this vision was received? How do you think people responded to the prospect
of imminent doom? They gobbled it up like a chocolate eclair! They didn't fear their
demise, they repackaged it! It can be enjoyed as video games, as TV shows, books,
movies – the entire world wholeheartedly embraced the apocalypse, and sprinted toward
it with gleeful abandon. Meanwhile, your Earth was crumbling all around you. You've
got simultaneous epidemics of obesity and starvation. Explain that one! Bees and
butterflies start to disappear, the glaciers melt, algae blooms - all around you the coal
mine canaries are dropping dead and you won't take the hint! In every moment there is
the possibility of a better future, but you people won't believe it. And because you won't
believe it, you won't do what is necessary to make it a reality! So you dwell on this oh,
terrible future, you resign yourselves to it. For one reason — because that future doesn't
ask anything of you today. So, yes, you saw the iceberg, warned the Titanic, but you all
just steered for it anyway, full steam ahead. Why? Because you want to sink. You gave
upxxiii.
America is at a crossroads; it can continue down one path that will only lead to further division
and a further limitation on speech. Or it can choose with a willingness to work its problems. Far
too long America for its original sin, and while diligence is still needed, it is time to let that go.
America has made great strides to pay for its transgressions. Problems still exist and there are
still some ways to go, but it cannot let that fear cause a hyper diligence and a fear of not being
willing to speak up for its beliefs. Fear only leads to anger, and in the end all lose. However,
when America is willing to deal with these issues through open dialogue it will finally be able to

18. progress even further. This is utopian idea, but it is one worth working towards, for if not in the
end it loses all. If its people cannot speak up without fear, no man, woman, or child, will be
equal. However, if all can accept each other, faults and all then we’ll finally get back on the path
that Martin Luther King Jr spoke of long ago, a path where we acknowledge that we are created
equal, that we are all brothers and sisters and that as Ben Lee said long before High School
Musical. “We are all in this together”

19. i
Hume, David. 2006. "Slavery in Colonial North America ."Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and
Fall of Slavery in the New World, by David Hume, 124-140. Oxford : Oxford University
Press .
ii Ibid pg. 128-129
iii Cast, Hamiton. 2016. "Yorktown (The World Turned Upside Down)." Hamilton (Original
Broadway Cast Recording). Comp. Lin-Manuel Miranda.
iv Hume, David. 2006. "Abolitionism in America. "Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of
Slavery in the New World, 253. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
v Douglas, Blackmon. 2008. Salvery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black
Americans from the Civil War to World War II. New York : Anchor Books.
vi Thomas, Col. Samuel. 1865. "PBS: Check the source Freedom a History of US." "The Niggers
Will Catch Hell" Col. Samuel Thomas to Major Gen. Oliver Otis Howard . September 6.
Accessed November 1, 2016. http://www-
tc.pbs.org/wnet/historyofus/web07/features/source/docs/C11.pdf.
vii Walter, Fleming. 1905. In Ku Klux Klan: It's Origins, Growth and Disbandment, 25-30. Neale
Publishing.
viii U.S., Const. n.d. "Amend 14 § 1."
ix Brown v Board of Education of Topeka. 1954. (Supreme Court).
x Neuberg, Kenrick, and Cialdini. 2009. Social Psychology 5ed. . Pearson .
xi Hasher, Lynn, David Goldstein, and Thomas Toppino. 1977. "Frequency and the conference of
referential validity." Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 107-112.
xii 2016. PewResearchCenter Journalism & Media. May 26. Accessed November 1, 2016.
http://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/.
xiii U.S., Const. n.d. "Amend. 1."
xiv Center, Pew Research. 2015. US Millennials More Likely to Support Censoring Offensive
Statements about Minorities . November 15. Accessed November 1, 2016.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/40-of-millennials-ok-with-limiting-speech-
offensive-to-minorities/ft_15-11-19_speech/.
xv Hitler, Adolf. 2016. "Mein Kampf." In Chapter 3: General Political Considerations Based on
my Vienna Period. General Press.
xvi Crowley, Michael. 2016. Politico. August 16. Accessed November 1, 2016.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-violent-rhetoric-history-226873.

20. xvii Goldfien, Jeffrey H, and Jennifer K Robbennolt. 2007. "What if Lawyers have their way? An
empirical assessment of conflict strategies and attitudes toward mediation styles." Ohio State
Journal on Dispute Resolution 277-320.
xviii Hut, PM. 2014. Dealing with Difficult People. October 4. Accessed November 1, 2016.
https://pmhut.com/dealing-with-difficult-people.
xix Ibid
xx Ibid
xxi Ibid
xxii Bradberry, Travis. 2015. 38 of the Most Inspirational Leadership Quotes. April 8. Accessed
November 2, 2016. https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/244674.
xxiii 2015. Tomorrowland. Directed by Brad Bird. Performed by High Laurie.