Left and Right are Begging for Nazi-Style Censorship to Stop Their Feelings from Getting Hurt

in news •  10 days ago

 America is embarking down a deeply troubling path in regard to  publishing, sharing, and consuming information. The end of this path is  something that tyrannical regimes throughout history have fought  vigorously for as it allows them to control the public narrative and  ensure ideas that challenge their rule are stomped out of existence  forever in a brutal campaign of censorship. Because we all know what censorship is and the darkness to which it  leads, one would think that all free societies would oppose it. However,  one would be wrong. 

This week, we watched  tech giants like Facebook, Google, Apple, and Spotify wipe the  vitriolic Alex Jones from the face of their platforms. The power of  these four companies wield to effectively wipe out an entire  organization all within a 12 hour time frame is as immense as it is  chilling. Sadly, because Jones was so vitriolic, this ominous precedent  was carried out without resistance and with overwhelming support. 

As TFTP reported earlier this week, Jones pushes anti-Muslim rhetoric,  plays right along with the two-party paradigm, and serves as little  more than a cheerleader for the current president, all while stoking  divide all the way along. His words are often hateful and he sometimes  spreads outrageous conspiracy theories. So what? If you don’t like what Alex Jones is saying, do what the majority of  people in this country do—don’t listen to him. When you move to silence  someone because you disagree with what they say—because it offends you  or hurts your feelings—you become an enemy of free speech.    

It's simple, you either support free speech or you don't..Join us: The Free Thought Project Posted by The Free Thought Project on Wednesday, August 8, 2018

This is exactly what so many on the left are doing as they cheer on  the silencing of Jones. But it’s not just the left, the right keeps  getting their feelings hurt too, and, according to a new poll, they want  the president to shut down entire media organizations. 

According to a recent poll by Ipsos, a whopping 43% of Republicans want to give the president the power to shut down any media outlet they would like. According to the poll, Republicans agree “the president should have the authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior.”  Ironically enough, 12 percent of Democrats agree, along with 21 percent  of independents. This is no conspiracy theory either as both the left  and the right—including the president—have pondered carrying this out. 

With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and  the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their  License? Bad for country! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 11, 2017
Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate  and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation  apart. These companies must do more than take down one website. The  survival of our democracy depends on it. — Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) August 6, 2018

Unable to think outside of immediate emotional reaction, those who  call for giving the government such ominous powers of media control  clearly fail to realize that the next president—who could be their  political nemesis—would inherit this power and wield it over them. The result of such dictatorial control over the flow of information  is the end game of tyranny.

 As we are witnessing currently, this tyranny  is being ushered in with thunderous applause from the left and the  right because they find certain information offensive or damaging to  their party. The answer to stopping people from lying and spreading false  information online is more freedom—not less. Before the days of the  internet, people were beholden to the information given to them by the  mainstream press and the government. The horrors of such a controlled  flow of information materialized into full on war, literally. 

As TFTP reported last week, the NY Times and the Washington Post both  ran articles echoing the false information given to them by the  government at the time on the Gulf of Tonkin, which subsequently kicked off one of the worst wars in the history of the United States—all based on lies. Now, thanks to the internet, those who would deceive the masses have a  harder time doing so because of the unfiltered flow of information. No  one here is arguing that there isn’t a slew of misinformation out there  which cloud the waters, but it is our job as a free thinking individual  to sift through it—not Facebook’s, Google’s, Apple’s, Twitter’s or the  government’s. 

To affect true change and foster a real awakening, we do not need to  censor or otherwise destroy information. Instead, we need to become more  vigilant by critically questioning all information and thinking for  ourselves. Those who advocate for anything else than the unfettered flow of  information are doing nothing other than advocating that you think just  like them. They want you to be apart of their collective so they can  wield their influence over you and thus garner support for their agenda.  But what if their agenda is wrong? Ideas must be debated, they must be challenged and they must prove  themselves in the court of public discourse. 

Allowing a single group of  companies or government to decide which ideas you see and hear is not  only a slippery slope to tyranny, but it’s a death blow to critical  thinking and innovation of information as we know it. Even the most crude or hurtful speech must be protected to safeguard  against unwarranted exercise of governmental power in the form of the  widespread censoring of thoughts and ideas that the government doesn’t  approve of—in the name of “keeping people safe.” 

Unless inciting violence, the right of the people to share ideas—no  matter how repugnant—is not something that governmental authorities  should have the ability to censor as it is seemingly the most basic of  all natural rights. Next time you claim that someone shouldn’t be able to say something  because you disagree with it, remember that you will be complicit in the  hellish police state that you so desperately begged for. 

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” — Hall in Friends of Voltaire

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Curated for #informationwar (by @commonlaw)

  • Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.

  • Join our discord and chat with 200+ fellow Informationwar Activists.

  • Join our brand new reddit! and start sharing your Steemit posts directly to The_IW!

  • Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call Pt 11

Ways you can help the @informationwar

  • Upvote this comment.
  • Delegate Steem Power. 25 SP 50 SP 100 SP
  • Join the curation trail here.
  • Tutorials on all ways to support us and useful resources here

ive said it before, and will again, let them be assholes, do whatever they want, censor with complete bias. Its a good thing.
It wakes up more people than probably anything else, even if only a little bit, its a start.
It forces people away from their platforms, weakling their monopolies.
if youtube didnt suck, would steemit be here?
BUT
if the government gets involved telling them they have to do this and that, people will become lazy, and not leave the platform.
Not to mention the idiots who think hurting peoples feelings should be illegal, gaining an actual legal leg to stand on, wiping out free speech in a single blow.
the government already controls the media via operation mockingbird, the Rothschilds control it via ownership of Associated Press and Reuters, they there is Disney, Viacom, GE, Time Warner, CBS, News Corp-who are controlled via the Bilderburg Group.
Do we really need more control?
we need more decentralization.
we need more people pissed off-enough to look for, use, build alternatives.
If you think some old fat pedophiles in DC gives a shit about you, or will do anything that will actually amount to anything worthy in your life your either an idiot, lobbyist or a pedophile, or all 3.
If they dont wanna share, lets go build our own, better platform, to exclude them.

Hey @tftproject your today's post about "Left and Right are Begging for Nazi-Style Censorship to Stop Their Feelings from Getting Hurt" is originalworks and very informative.

I don't think people in favor of censorship realize that it is dehumanizing. I could not agree more with your position.

Thanks!

·

Qui plume a, guerre a, Voltaire also wrote, in that insipid Western Christian perspective of war being a ritualized game, with rules and conventions among colleagues, within a monoculture that was Christendom. Privilege of open discourse is allotted only to those whose intentions are furthering ideas, in the service and benefit of a sociocultural matrix, within which they are members. The so-called "freedom" of speech can only exist within a context of conventions that clarify blasphemy and les majeste, lest public discourse degenerate into arguments among drunks in a Bristol bar. The West, drunk on humanist drivel that directly undermines its sociocultural matrix, elevates tools (media) as sacrosanct, rather than its sociocultural matrix. A case of life in servitude to art.

The West has been at war with the treacherous humanist scum that eats away at its social fabric, like some cancer, since the Thirty Years War. That now the external pressures of Islam, counter-colonial reaction, Slavic expansionism, and Sino-Marxism gnaw at its carcass is inevitable. Know then, the war of information you think to engage is not against members of your monocultural matrix, but against enemies with whom compromise, consensus, or co-existence is impossible. Granting privilege of open discourse to entities with clear intent of destroying your sociocultural matrix is the surest path to suicide. Unless you plan on being forgotten as a people like the Iroquois League, the West ought to be more serious concerning the information war, which it is fast losing.

·
·

I love your deep knowledge of history! I am baffled by the misstatement of it's lessons I read however...

"...lest public discourse degenerate into arguments among drunks in a Bristol bar."

LOL I often hear more cogent analysis and forthright discussion in such drunken ravings than I do in formal political debate. I'm all for pub rants.

As to the Iroquois League, they aren't forgotten, and the lessons to be learned from their existence and being crushed are yet being learned today, as you show.

I care little to be remembered. My life is reward enough for me.

We are going to win the information war, because the enemy of freedom is unavailed of the laws of physics in it's endeavor to suppress information. While crude media enabled crude censorship, the incessant advance of technology makes such impossible eventually.

I could not agree more that the infowar is the front in the battle against freedom, and we should more attentively wage it. While the weight of history seems to forbode great peril, to those that can perceive the reality of physical laws, the victory of freedom is clearly inevitable.

Only extinction can prevent inevitable victory, and that only of our species.

·
·

Creepy, sad but true. You damn if you do, you damn if you don't.

Know then, the war of information you think to engage is not against members of your monocultural matrix, but against enemies with whom compromise, consensus, or co-existence is impossible. Granting privilege of open discourse to entities with clear intent of destroying your sociocultural matrix is the surest path to suicide.

But what happens, when I realize that the mono-cultural matrix, as you call it, that I live in, does not align with my convictions . What do you do, when it's the matrix custodians themselves are the ones, with whom compromise, consensus, or co-existence is impossible?
·
·
·

If you can, move to another monocultural matrix, in which your principles align. If you can't, accept the reality of your circumstance and conform as much as possible. Rebellion, or revolution, require methodical organization, concentrated will to kill, and inhuman patience. Only those who are willing and able to lose everything (dignity, pride, principles, interpersonal relations, humanity itself) succeed in rebelling against his betters and his society. Such inhumanity is unsuited for decent folks.

·
·
·
·

Well, I guess I'm not a decent folk. Actually I know I'm not a folk, always resented that term, it's too close to sheep. In my opinion it is the decent human that never stops questioning the system that tries to oppress him. Every book that I've read, every lecture that I attended, was, in the least, inspired by heroes, in my opinion, heroes that don't just go along with status quo, but people that will sacrifice everything for the truth, for doing the "right" thing. Maybe we have different understanding what it means to be descent.
©Of course that's just my opinion and I could be wrong:)

And if that's the case, then I don't want to be descent, I want to be better then that.

It's simple, you either support free speech or you don't..Join us: The Free Thought Project Posted by The Free Thought Project on Wednesday, August 8, 2018

Oh my, this link took me to the bowels of hell, all of a sudden I was welcome by the all seeing "f". Just thought I'll warn the unsuspecting :)