The Republican governor of Iowa has been under fire for a satanic statue that was slated to stand in the state house for two weeks.
She said she opposed the statue and urged Christians to pray. But after all, the Satanic Temple had followed the rules in having it installed, so their statue was a form of protected speech.
Yesterday a former congressional candidate from Mississippi, Michael Cassidy, beheaded and destroyed the statue. He faces a fine and up to a year in prison.
The past and the future were juxtaposed here. “We oppose X, but the rules say X is all right, so there’s nothing you can do.” That’s the past.
The future: “Fuck you. We’re taking this thing down.”
The so-called neutral public square is collapsing.
It may be just as well, since nobody really believed in it in the first place.
Appeals to the neutral public square ring hollow these days, because they come from the very people who once pretended they wanted neutrality in things like employment, promotions, education, and everything else under the sun, and once again “neutrality” wound up in practice meaning privilege for their side.
We’ve got multiple ideologies, incompatible with each other, uneasily coexisting under the same political roof. This is going to be a rough ride.
There are still Republicans who think they can stick it to their opponents by calling them hypocrites, or noting that they’re inconsistent in banning speech.
This is silly. The people we’re dealing with are not operating on the basis of general principles like freedom of speech or equality before the law or any of those pretty-sounding phrases.
They are operating on this basis: we intend to win, and if that means sticking it to our enemies good and hard regardless of any abstract principle, then we’re going to do it.
What this means for you: you’re living under a hostile regime, and you’re an enemy of the state.
Here’s a wild idea: how about we try to navigate this bizarre and challenging situation together?
And here’s another thing:
They’ll destroy the value of your money and (1) deny it’s happening, then (2) say it’s happening but it’s a sign of a good economy (they actually did this), then (3) admit that it’s bad but blame you for it (they actually did this, too).
After confining your kids in an ideological prison until age 18, they leave them with absolutely zero knowledge of how to navigate the 21st-century economy, and then shrug their shoulders as they gather statistics about underemployed young people with no prospects living with their parents.
They got tens of millions to cheer when you got fired for refusing an injection you neither wanted nor needed.
They’re colonizing your kids’ minds with crazy, anti-human theories.
Every last thing they get up to is a front in the war against you.
They want you discouraged and demoralized. They want to make you think nobody agrees with you. They want you to think they’ve won, so you’ll just give up.
That’s just not us. We don’t give up. We don’t have it in us. We fight, have kids and they deserve a better world. Moreover, we don’t care what people say about us. Anybody who was captain of his high school math team obviously cares about things other than popularity.
I want to break us the fuck out of all this. I want my community to be successful and secure, so that nothing the regime or its weird economy throws at them can harm them. While other people are arguing on Facebook, I want to combine the knowledge and talents of my community to make us all unbreakable. You don’t have to feel isolated. You don’t have to face the 21st-century economy alone. You don’t have to make your own lonely way under a system that’s throwing everything it has at you.
We need to stand our ground together and take back our country.
After October 7, the public was shocked at what they saw and heard on America’s campuses.
Americans knew previously they were intolerant, leftwing, and increasingly non-meritocratic.
But immediately after October 7—and even before the response of the Israeli Defense Forces—the sheer student delight on news of the mass murdering of Israeli victims seemed akin more to 1930s Germany than contemporary America.
Indeed, not a day goes by when a university professor or student group has not spouted anti-Semitic hatred. Often, they threaten and attack Jewish students, or engage in mass demonstrations calling for the extinction of Israel.
Why and how did purportedly enlightened universities become incubators of such primordial hatred?
After the George Floyd riots, reparatory admissions—the effort to admit diverse students beyond their numbers in the general population—increased.
Elite universities like Stanford and Yale boasted that their so-called “white” incoming student numbers had plunged to between 20 and 40 precent, despite whites making up 68-70 percent of the general population.
The abolition of the SAT requirement, and often the comparative ranking of high school grade point averages, have ended the ancient and time-proven idea of meritocracy. Brilliant high school transcripts and test scores no longer warrant admissions to so-called elite schools.
One result was that the number of Jews has nosedived from 20-30 percent of Ivy League student bodies during the 1970s and 1980s to 10-15 percent.
Jewish students are also currently stereotyped as “white” and “privileged”—and thus considered as fair game on campus.
At the same time, the number of foreign students, especially from the oil-rich Middle East, has soared on campuses. Most are subsidized by their homeland governments. They pay the full, non-discounted tuition rates to cash-hungry universities.
Huge numbers of students have entered universities, who would not have been admitted by the very standards universities until recently claimed were vital to ensure their own competitiveness and prestige.
Consequently, they are no longer the guarantors of topflight undergraduates and professionals from their graduate programs.
Faculty are faced with new lose/lose/lose choices of either diminishing their course requirements, or inflating their grades, or facing charges by Diversity/Equity/Inclusion commissars of systematic bias in their grading— or all three combined.
The net result is that there are now thousands of students from abroad, especially from the Middle East, far fewer Jewish students, and student bodies who demand radical changes in faculty standards and course work to accommodate their unease with past standards of expected student achievement.
And, presto, an epidemic of anti-Semitism naturally followed.
In such a vacuum, advocacy “-studies” classes proliferated, along with faculty to teach them.
“Gender, black, Latino, feminist, Asian, Queer, trans, peace, environmental, and green”-studies courses demand far less from students, and arbitrarily select some as “oppressed” and others as “oppressors”. The former “victims” are then given a blank check to engage in racist and anti-Semitic behavior without consequences.
Proving to be politically correct in these deductive gut-courses rather than pressed to express oneself coherently, inductively, and analytically from a repertoire of fact-based-knowledge explains why the public witnesses faculty and students who are simultaneously both arrogant and ignorant.
At some universities “blacklists” circulate warning “marginalized” students which professors they should avoid who still cling to supposedly outdated standards regarding exam-taking, deadlines, and absences.
All these radical changes explain the current spectacle of angry students citing grievances, and poorly educated graduates who have had little course work in traditional history, literature, philosophy, logic, or the traditional sciences.
Universities and students have plenty of money to continue the weaponization of the university, given their enormous tax-free endowment income. Nearly $2-trillion in government-subsidized student loans are issued without accountability or reasonable demands that they be repaid in timely fashion.
Exceptions and exemptions are the bible of terrified and careerist administrators.
Faced with an epidemic of anti-Semitism, university administrators now claim they can do little to curb the hatred. But privately they know should the targets of similar hatred be instead blacks, gays, Latinos, or women, then they would expel the haters in a nanosecond.
What is the ultimate result of once elite campuses giving 70-80 percent of their students As, becoming hotbeds of dangerous anti-Semitism, and watered-down curricula that cannot turn out educated students?
The Ivy league and their kindred so-called elite campuses may soon go the way of Disney and Bud Light.
They think such a crash in their reputations is impossible given centuries of accustomed stature.
But the erosion is already occurring—and accelerating.
At the present rate, a Stanford law degree, a Harvard political science major, or a Yale social science BA will soon scare off employers and the general public at large.
These certificates will signify not proof of humility, knowledge, and decency, but rather undeserved self-importance, vacuousness, and fanaticism—and all to be avoided rather than courted.
The government is using the censorship industrial complex to gain control of its own citizens. They are collaborating with private companies and others to suppress thought.
About 10 years ago, I read a story about someone who posted something on Twitter before leaving for a plane flight. By the time her flight landed in another country, she’d already been “canceled.”
What she wrote was a satirical joke that was easily explained once she landed. However, the damage had already been done. She was fired.
For months after, she couldn’t get a job because the first thing that came up when potential employers Googled her were the news stories about her Twitter gaffe.
She eventually discovered there are companies created solely to suppress and hide information on the internet, such as a negative news story. You could pay money, and a company would create tons of content that would change search results in your favor.
At the time I read it, this was revelatory. That was almost 10 years ago.
Fast forward to today, and not only is this common, but now it has grown into a political machine used for suppressing the thoughts of anyone who disagrees with the approved narrative at the time.
Disagree with lockdowns? Fake social media accounts can be used to downvote you, discredit you, and flag you to social media companies.
Fake accounts can be created to boost content that opposes your idea, so it will never be seen.
In 2020, Americans had their social media posts surveilled, and content flagged with the entire goal of suppressing views that went against the narrative at the time.
The plan was hatched by interns at a federal agency in the national security sector.
Not elected officials. Not actual federal workers. INTERNS.
They knew that they could “bury” information online. They just took it much, much further.
What once seemed like a sneaky way to change your internet profile now seems horrifyingly Orwellian when it is intentionally used for censorship.
The Worst Case Scenario
Controlling free speech (aka censorship) is one of the fastest ways to gain control.
If people cannot express their thoughts and ideas freely, it begins to seem like everyone thinks the same way.
As a result, this prevents movements from standing up, speaking out, and going against the grain.
Think of popular movements over the last few years: mask protests, lockdown protests, Black and Blue Lives Matter.
If people were not allowed to share their thoughts, none of these movements would have gotten off the ground.
Censorship ultimately becomes a threat to every infrastructure.
We’ve already seen people de-banked for their political views and statements on social media platforms.
It can trickle down to every part of our lives – including what we eat.
What if those “in charge” of the internet decide that they agree with the UN and start suppressing any information posted about meat?
Henry Kissinger famously said, “Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.”
If they control speech, they can control movements.
If they can control movements, they can control critical infrastructure.
If they can control infrastructures, they can control the food.
You may think, “No one is in charge of the internet.” Well, that’s somewhat true…for now.
The UN has created an organization just for this purpose. They just released a document of rules. And it’s terrifying.
The Development of the Internet of Trust
UNESCO stands for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
And they just released a plan to combat “misinformation” by creating what it calls the “Internet of Trust.”
The main goal straight from the source is: “Safeguarding freedom of expression and access to information through a multi-stakeholder approach.”
Here is what it says on the first page:
“Safeguarding freedom of expression and the right to information while dealing with dis- and misinformation, hate speech, and conspiracy theories requires a multi-stakeholder approach. This is the reason why UNESCO, the leading UN agency for the promotion and protection of freedom of expression and to information, is launching Guidelines for the Governance of Digital Platforms. […] Cultivating an Internet of Trust is a shared responsibility among all stakeholders. It calls upon us all to sustain an enabling environment for freedom of expression and the right to information.”
The term, Censorship Industrial Complex, is a play on the “military-industrial complex.”
With the military-industrial complex, the military, private companies, and academia work together to help the US win on the battlefield.
In this case, it’s the government (with the help of big business and academia) using censorship of its own citizens to dominate.
Pete McGinnis explains it perfectly when he writes, “But the censorship industrial complex builds algorithms, not bombers. The players aren’t Raytheon and Boeing, but social media companies, tech startups, and universities and their institutes. The foes to be dominated are American citizens whose opinions diverge from government narratives.”
What’s worse is that our government knows and participates.
In the Testimony by Michael Shellenberger to The House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on March 9, 2023, Shellenberger spoke about the Censorship Industrial Complex. He said:
“Today, American taxpayers are unwittingly financing the growth and power of a censorship-industrial complex run by America’s scientific and technological elite, which endangers our liberties and democracy. I am grateful for the opportunity to offer this testimony and sound the alarm over the shocking and disturbing emergence of state-sponsored censorship in the United States of America.
“The Twitter Files, state attorneys general lawsuits, and investigative reporters have revealed a large and growing network of government agencies, academic institutions, and nongovernmental organizations that are actively censoring American citizens, often without their knowledge, on a range of issues, including on the origins of COVID, COVID vaccines, emails relating to Hunter Biden’s business dealings, climate change, renewable energy, fossil fuels, and many other issues.”
What We’ve Learned Since
Since Michael Shellenberger’s explosive testimony in March, another whistleblower has come forward with even more documents showing government involvement in censorship on social media platforms.
As of publication, word came out that it was discovered the US and the UK military made plans for global censorship in 2018.
Again, global internet censorship.
Exactly like what the UN just created a list of guidelines for.
Shellenberger reports that one document “explains that while such activities overseas are ‘typically’ done by ‘the CIA and NSA and the Department of Defense,’ censorship efforts ‘against Americans’ have to be done using private partners because the government doesn’t have the ‘legal authority.’”
Terrifying.
The CTIL (Cyber Threat Intelligence League) developed a strategy for censoring online.
Shellenberger reports, “In the spring of 2020, CTIL began tracking and reporting disfavored content on social media, such as anti-lockdown narratives like ‘all jobs are essential,’ ‘we won’t stay home,’ and ‘open America now.’ CTIL created a law enforcement channel for reporting content as part of these efforts. The organization also researched individuals posting anti-lockdown hashtags like #freeCA and kept a spreadsheet with details from their Twitter bios. CTIL’s approach to ‘disinformation’ went far beyond censorship. The documents show that the group engaged in offensive operations to influence public opinion, discussing ways to promote ‘counter-messaging,’ co-opt hashtags, dilute disfavored messaging, create sock puppet accounts, and infiltrate private invite-only groups.”
How This Affects You and Me
It’s only a matter of time before people start seeking out alternative communication channels.
Not because they want to, but because they might be de-banked, discredited, or put in prison.
Censorship is a powerful weapon that can be used to control our actions and movements.
fox files 
Recent Comments