Victimized by Private Censorship

April 26, 2025 by Dan Mitchell @ International Liberty 

Ten days ago, I wrote about the effort by a few so-called conservatives to get Trump and congressional Republicans to acquiesce to an increase in the top income tax rate.

I explained that higher tax burdens were a bad idea in general, and I explained that class-warfare tax increases were a bad idea in particular.

Since it recycled points I’ve made many times, there was nothing special about the column. Indeed, the only reason I wrote it was because Trump has expressed interest in copying Joe Biden’s tax policy.

And I did what I do with every column, posting it on Facebook, LinkedIn, and X (Twitter). All things considered, nothing remarkable.

So imagine my surprise when I get this notice from LinkedIn.

Needless to say, I was very surprised. What is hateful, after all, about arguing against tax increases?

And what triggered the removal? Did a couple of leftists make a complaint? Or maybe a couple of pro-tax pretend conservatives?

Was it a leftist employee at LinkedIn? Or maybe no people were involved and my column was removed by a computer algorithm?

I don’t even know if the removal was caused by my column or the introductory comment I put on LinkedIn about Republicans being the “Stupid Party.”

So I ticked all the boxes and submitted an appeal.

But that appeal was unsuccessful, as you can see from this next visual.

For what it’s worth, the 1st Amendment applies to government, not the private sector. LinkedIn is a private company and they have the right to censor me, just as I have the right to delete comments on my site that I think are inappropriate.

That being said, I’m nonetheless baffled that LinkedIn decided that a wonky column about tax policy was “hateful.”

P.S. While LinkedIn should have the right to remove content because its a private company, I have a much different view when governments try to suppress speech.