This is like a comedy routine. Free thinker #1: Check out Wikipedia on FIRE (but I hope you don't, so I won't provide the link) Free thinker #2: Don't be clos

This is like a comedy routine. Free thinker #1: Check out Wikipedia on FIRE (but I hope you don't, so I won't provide the link) Free thinker #2: Don't be closed minded and read Wikipedia! (I too won't provide the link) So I will do it, said the little red hen. (Are you using reverse psychology on me?) I had to poke through a fair amount of "disambiguation" to find it, as FIRE is such a common name/acronym. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Individual_Rights_and_Expression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_for_Individual_Righ... What seems to me relevant context is that originally it was founded by Harvard faculty, one of whom was an ACLU board member in Massachusetts, but may have drifted/evolved as funding is allegedly coming more and more from right wing and (faux?) libertarian sources. Also, like practically everyone, it seems to be engaging in mission creep, expanding from E=education to E=expression. But in fairness, college and college campuses have become such litmus tests of which side you are on in the culture wars, that that is probably driving them to widen their focus if they have any desire to preserve a non-partisan image. I recommend reading the "Cases" section. One of the most recent things they have allegedly done is: `FIRE announced a lawsuit challenging Florida’s "Stop Woke Act"' I'm not convinced they are pure and non-partisan and uncorrupted, but after skimming the list of controversies they have been involved in, they don't seem too transparently partisan. They seem to have defended an organization threatened with a defamation lawsuit for criticizing electro-shock therapy.