MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘hate speech’

Last Round-up at the Wokester Corral | Kunstler

Posted by M. C. on October 27, 2020

Are you against the principle of free speech? The Democratic Party is. They used to be champions of the First Amendment; now they want to make it conditional on ideas and sentiments they support. Contrary ideas are to be labeled “hate speech,” and suppressed, along with anything that might hurt somebody’s feelings. How did you come to such a complete misunderstanding of what free speech means?

The USA is headed into a terrible ordeal of economic disorder that I call the long emergency. Mr. Trump won’t stop it, and it may yet make a fool out of him. But the Democratic Party’s agenda would add an extra layer of tyrannical and sadistic insanity to the process that will only bring more suffering to more people, and I don’t want that to happen.

https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/last-round-up-at-the-wokester-corral/

James Howard Kunstler

I have some questions for former friends who have dumped me on account of my support for Mr. Trump’s re-election — which is mostly a vote to prevent the Democratic Party and its fellow travelers from running the government. On the whole, these former friends are college-educated, mature in experience, and cultured. Some of them are well-acquainted with history, which is to say, they ought to know better than to support the obviously illiberal motives of the political Left.

Are you against the principle of free speech? The Democratic Party is. They used to be champions of the First Amendment; now they want to make it conditional on ideas and sentiments they support. Contrary ideas are to be labeled “hate speech,” and suppressed, along with anything that might hurt somebody’s feelings. How did you come to such a complete misunderstanding of what free speech means? Namely, that a free society is obliged to tolerate the expression of disagreeable ideas up to the limit, as the Supreme Court put it, of “crying ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”

I will answer my own question partially by saying: you have been programmed against free speech by what used to be the very vehicles of it, the newspapers and TV News channels, which have, amazingly, come out against freedom of the press and turned into propaganda outlets for Woke Progressivism and its illiberal agenda — thereby inadvertently committing suicide of the entire profession. We’ve seen this acted-out most vividly just the past week in the social media companies’ efforts to suppress all news of the Biden family’s global business operations, along with The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, NPR, and other leading news organizations that Americans used to depend on to know what was happening in the nation. This is especially unforgivable during a national election.

Did you support the movement on campus in recent years to shut down events featuring speakers such as Charles Murray (The Bell Curve), Heather Mac Donald of City Journal, Dinesh D’Souza, and many others who represented not-so-Woke ideas that “offended” you? Since when are your feelings so special that they negate the open exchange of ideas in the places that used to be dedicated to it, the universities? Should higher education only entertain ideas that you and your cohorts approve of? What if, in some future, a different cohort gains control of higher education and seeks to exclude your ideas on the grounds that they’re “offensive” (i.e. they just don’t like them)?

Are you in favor of a politicized Department of Justice and CIA? That is what the Democratic Party’s Resistance League deliberately brought about during the 2016 election, and they continue to promote it. Is it okay for bureaucrats to break the law to disable their political adversaries? That was the essence of the RussiaGate ruse. Former employees of those agencies, such as ex-CIA chief John Brennan and Andrew Weissmann, who ran the Mueller investigation, to this day still hype “Russian collusion” falsehoods to deflect attention from their own misdeeds. You let them get away with that.

Is it okay for these government agencies to spy on US citizens without any legal predicate, except their being political adversaries? Would it be okay if that were used against you in some future disposition of things? Is it okay for the FBI to withhold exculpatory evidence in federal court proceedings, thereby obstructing justice? Is it okay for the FBI and CIA to “leak” falsehoods to news reporters for political advantage? Do you not understand how by failing to oppose these actions you undermine the basis of political rectitude in a republic — bearing in mind the literal meaning of the word republic, from the Latin, res publica, the public thing, where civilization lives?

Are you against reason itself? For all your talk about the primacy of science, your agenda militates furiously against it: Math is “racist,” there’s no biological basis for understanding sex, all science is a “white colonial way-of-knowing,” masculinity is “toxic,” women can have penises and men can menstruate. Do you really believe these absurd fantasies manufactured in the graduate schools in the service of academic careerism at all costs — or do you just go along with them for the sake of protecting your own careers and perquisites?

Are you in favor of Antifa riots and the BLM hustle? They are staunchly supported by elected Democratic mayors and governors. These organizations looted and burned down shopping districts in many cities, and Democratic leaders did nothing to stop them. In Portland, Oregon, the nightly riots have continued for over 120 days under Mayor Ted Wheeler and Governor Kate Brown. The nightly riots have ceased to have any genuine political purpose or meaning; rather they’ve degenerated into a party space for energetic young people who can’t otherwise go to clubs, parties, concerts, cafes, or raves during the Covid-19 shut-down. So, rather, they’re enjoying a long-running game of “Cops-and-Robbers” out in the streets, busting things up, setting fires, getting chased around, and waking people up in their homes late at night with bullhorns and heavy metal music. They’re obviously having fun. The police have been forbidden to effectively disperse them, and the Multnomah County DA refuses to prosecute any of them — all of which just inspires the Antifas and BLMs to keep the game going. They have no real stake in the public interest. The net effect is terrible destruction of the city as a functioning civic organism. The Democratic Party has made it all possible. Wait until it comes to your town or city.

Are you in favor of cancel culture? The Democratic Party is addicted to it. Should livelihoods and reputations be destroyed for expressing an opinion, or telling a joke? Is asking someone for a date in the office a firing offense? Were Christine Blasey Ford and Michael Avenatti unimpeachable witnesses during the Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings? Or was that just an instance of anything goes and nothing matters? How much sadistic pleasure do you suppose has been involved in the professional ruination of men in the media, the arts, and politics? How much of cancel culture and the Me-Too movement have been based on simple coercion, the wish to push other people around, and on vengeance for personal losses and slights?

By the way, did you notice that Jeffrey Toobin has not been fired from his positions at The New Yorker magazine and CNN for jerking-off on-screen during a Zoom meeting of his professional colleagues last week? None of them have even publicly criticized him. Why do you suppose that is? I suppose it’s because he is a favored member of the Woke Journalists club and enjoys special protection from professional ruin — though the truth is he’s thrown away his credibility as a legal commentator, whether the Wokerati like it or not, especially on matters of public conduct. But that’s just one example of the hypocrisy that Wokesterism is full of, and reveals its chronic disingenuous insincerity.

The Democratic Party supports all this pernicious mendacity and bad faith, and more. Joe Biden is the current figurehead of the Party. Mr. Biden pretty clearly has insurmountable defects of his own, first as an international grifter while holding national office, as well as the misfortune of his cognitive decline, which is not his fault, but disqualifies him for high office. As for everybody else in the party, I don’t want such a reliably dishonest gang to be in charge of running the American government. So, I’m voting for Mr. Trump. He’s far from my idea of an ideal candidate, but despite his defects, he’s managed to hold the country together during the greatest disruption of normal life since World War Two. I’ve also come to admire his resilience and, yes, his bravery, in the face of an opposition that has spared no effort of foul play to destroy him.

I’m under no illusions that Donald Trump will Make America Great Again in the way that many of his supporters understand that slogan. The USA is headed into a terrible ordeal of economic disorder that I call the long emergency. Mr. Trump won’t stop it, and it may yet make a fool out of him. But the Democratic Party’s agenda would add an extra layer of tyrannical and sadistic insanity to the process that will only bring more suffering to more people, and I don’t want that to happen. I believe that Mr. Trump will probably win the election, but we’ll have to see what kind of nefarious dodges his opponents will employ to prevent any resolution of that outcome.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Twitter Users Fear Saying “OK Boomer” Could Be Banned Under New Rules | Zero Hedge

Posted by M. C. on March 8, 2020

Have you ever wondered how political correctness and preferred pronouns will resolve themselves?

I think there will be an economic event that will cause snowflakes to get steamrollered when people who can actually deal with life fight to survive.

The forecasted massive market correction may do it. Preferred pronoun people will have to wake up or starve. Liberian transgender studies majors will be in tough shape.

Hate speech will be redefined when they hear “no free government money” this month.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/twitter-users-fear-saying-ok-boomer-could-be-banned-under-new-rules

 

Twitter users fear the insult “OK boomer” could be banned after the social media giant introduced new rules that banned “dehumanizing speech” against “protected groups,” which has now been extended to include age.

The new rules forbid “dehumanizing speech based on age, disability and disease, suggesting that insults about fat people could also result in suspensions and bans.

Users responded to Twitter’s announcement by expressing concerns “OK boomer” when used as an insult could be characterized as “hate speech.”

“OK boomer” is normally used against conservatives and opponents of socialism to frame their opinions as outdated.

“The sudden update to this hateful conduct policy also comes on the same day that Twitter has introduced its new misinformation policy which is likely to kill some memes on the platform,” notes Tom Parker.

As we highlighted last week, Rapper Zuby was suspended by Twitter for tweeting “Ok dude” at a transgender activist.

Last month, Twitter also announced users “may not deceptively share synthetic or manipulated media that are likely to cause harm,” suggesting memes could also be targeted.

*  *  *

My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me. Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here. Support my sponsor – Emergency Survival Foods – delicious dishes & a 25 year shelf life!

Be seeing you

See What Margaret Thatcher Said About Socialism ...

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Colleges Dupe Parents and Taxpayers – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 1, 2020

One wonders just how far spineless college administrators will go when it comes to caving in to the demands of campus snowflakes who have been taught that they must be protected against words, events and deeds that do not fully conform to their extremely limited, narrow-minded beliefs built on sheer delusion.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/01/walter-e-williams/colleges-dupe-parents-and-taxpayers/

By

Colleges have been around for centuries. College students have also been around for centuries. Yet, college administrators assume that today’s students have needs that were unknown to their predecessors. Those needs include diversity and equity personnel, with massive budgets to accommodate.

According to Minding the Campus, Penn State University’s Office of Vice Provost for Educational Equity employs 66 staff members. The University of Michigan currently employs a diversity staff of 93 full-time diversity administrators, officers, directors, vice provosts, deans, consultants, specialists, investigators, managers, executive assistants, administrative assistants, analysts and coordinators. Amherst College, with a student body of 1,800 students employs 19 diversity people. Top college diversity bureaucrats earn salaries six figures, in some cases approaching $500,000 per year. In the case of the University of Michigan, a quarter (26) of their diversity officers earn annual salaries of more than $100,000. If you add generous fringe benefits and other expenses, you could easily be talking about $13 million a year in diversity costs. The Economist reports that University of California, Berkeley, has 175 diversity bureaucrats.

Diversity officials are a growing part of a college bureaucracy structure that outnumbers faculty by 2 to 2.5 depending on the college. According to “The Campus Diversity Swarm,” an article from Mark Pulliam, a contributing editor at Law and Liberty, which appeared in the City Journal (10/10/2018), diversity people assist in the cultivation of imaginary grievances of an ever-growing number of “oppressed” groups. Pulliam writes: “The mission of campus diversity officers is self-perpetuating. Affirmative action (i.e., racial and ethnic preferences in admissions) leads to grievance studies. Increased recognition of LGBTQ rights requires ever-greater accommodation by the rest of the student body. Protecting ‘vulnerable’ groups from ‘hate speech’ and ‘microaggressions’ requires speech codes and bias-response teams (staffed by diversocrats). Complaints must be investigated and adjudicated (by diversocrats). Fighting ‘toxic masculinity’ and combating an imaginary epidemic of campus sexual assault necessitate consent protocols, training, and hearing procedures — more work for an always-growing diversocrat cadre. Each newly recognized problem leads to a call for more programs and staffing.”

Campus diversity people have developed their own professional organization — the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education. They hold annual conferences — the last one in Philadelphia. The NADOHE has developed standards for professional practice and a political agenda, plus a Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, which is published by the American Psychological Association.

One wonders just how far spineless college administrators will go when it comes to caving in to the demands of campus snowflakes who have been taught that they must be protected against words, events and deeds that do not fully conform to their extremely limited, narrow-minded beliefs built on sheer delusion. Generosity demands that we forgive these precious snowflakes and hope that they eventually grow up. The real problem is with people assumed to be grown-ups — college professors and administrators — who serve their self-interest by tolerating and giving aid and comfort to our aberrant youth. Unless the cycle of promoting and nursing imaginary grievances is ended, diversity bureaucracies will take over our colleges and universities, supplanting altogether the goal of higher education.

“Diversity” is the highest goal of students and professors who openly detest those with whom they disagree. These people support the very antithesis of higher education with their withering attacks on free speech. Both in and out of academia, the content of a man’s character is no longer as important as the color of his skin, his sex, his sexual preferences or his political loyalties. That’s a vision that spells tragedy for our nation.

Be seeing you

College ‘snowflakes’ overwhelmed by grief after Trump win

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

5 Examples of the Rise of German Free-Speech Nazis | The Daily Bell

Posted by M. C. on December 30, 2019

If the German reference was removed from the title what country would you think was the subject?

https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/5-examples-of-the-rise-of-german-free-speech-nazis/

By Joe Jarvis

Germany. What are you doing? You’re the poster child for oppressive government!

And maybe it isn’t fair to single Germany out. The Soviet Union under Stalin had a much higher body count, and China’s under Mao was still higher.

But Germany is European, Western.

China and Russia reformed and changed on their own without being defeated by outside military forces. They were never entirely broken down to be built back up, like Germany–or Japan–for example.

So it’s not especially surprising when China marches ever onward toward authoritarianism. For instance, China introduced a social credit system where every behavior including online comments and neighbors’ opinions is factored into a social credit score. Low scores are used to deny citizens jobs, apartments, and the ability to travel.

But there is something especially ironic about German authoritarianism, even for an allegedly good cause.

For instance, in Germany, it is illegal to deny that the Holocaust happened. They were so concerned about that horribly oppressive time in their history… that they oppressively limit free speech.

I understand that Germany is extremely sensitive to the rise of any groups that could be easily compared to Nazis. But to paraphrase Nietzsche, he who fights Nazis should be sure that in the process, he himself does not become a Nazi.

In Germany you can get up to five years in prison for “insulting, maliciously maligning, or defaming segments of the population.”

Let’s go through five examples of German officials becoming free-speech Nazis.

1. Surveillance on minority opposition political parties.

A “far right” political party called Alternative for Germany first gained seats in the German parliament last year. They are said to be aligned with racist, xenophobic, and anti-Islamic groups.

Angela Merkel has been quite liberal in her immigration policies. The AfD is the answer to an increase in terrorism in Germany from Islamic extremists.

A poll found 57% of Germans believe the political party should be placed under surveillance.

So just for affiliating with a party which has valid concerns about loose immigration policies for refugees, you could be monitored like a criminal. No specific accusation required.

2. Ban on “Hate Speech” and “Offensive Speech.”

This year Germany banned “hate speech” and tasked social media websites with combatting “offensive speech” on their platforms. Platforms like Facebook and Twitter face €50 million fines if they do not remove “hate speech” within 24 hours of a complaint.

The clear problem becomes defining what exactly is incitement to hatred, or offensive speech.

And the German government defines it with a broad brush.

For instance, failing to call a transgender person by their preferred pronoun is considered “hate speech.”

And now people are afraid to even talk about issues like immigration and refugee policies. It is just too easy to be labeled a racist hate monger for expressing skepticism about liberal immigration policies.

3.  Raiding the Associates of the Associates of a Suspect.

Sovereignman.com summarized this absurd incident which took place in July.

Unable to obtain the information they wanted from an activist group, police basically played six degrees of separation until they found associates that they could raid.

Police say a blog’s planned protest included calls to violence. That blog used the privacy VPN and email provider RiseUp. RiseUp used a site called Zwiebelfreunde to collect donations. Zwiebelfreunde is a partner organization with TorServers.net.

So naturally, police raided the homes of three TorServers board members, a former board member, and Torservers’ office. The raid was based on the original warrant regarding the protest.

Among mountains of personal electronics and communications, police seized a list of donors to RiseUp and Torservers, including bank account details.

So now people who have donated to these privacy advocacy websites have all their information in the hands of the German Federal Police. And these are people who have absolutely no connection to the blog on which the original warrant was based…

There is absolutely no legitimate reason for the police to have raided the homes and offices of TorServers board members.

But RiseUp deletes all data about its users, so the police would gain nothing from raiding them. Raiding an associated organization was the closest they could get. But it was completely unjustified.

4. Raiding Homes Over Facebook Posts.

Last summer, German authorities raided 36 homes of people accused of hateful posting on social media.

Most of the raids concerned politically motivated right-wing incitement, according to the Federal Criminal Police Office, whose officers conducted home searches and interrogations. But the raids also targeted two people accused of left-wing extremist content, as well as one person accused of making threats or harassment based on someone’s sexual orientation.

“The still high incidence of punishable hate posting shows a need for police action,” Holger Münch, president of the Federal Criminal Police Office, said in a statement. “Our free society must not allow a climate of fear, threat, criminal violence and violence either on the street or on the internet.”

Unless of course that climate of fear is created by the German authorities against whoever they decide to target.

5. Ankle Bracelets for “Extremists” Guilty of Nothing.

Last year, Germany passed a law that allows authorities to track suspected extremist Muslims.

Suspected is the key word. The people forced to wear the GPS monitors have not even been charged, let alone convicted, of a crime.

Previously, only convicted individuals could be required to wear the device used to monitor location and movements.

The cabinet proposal, “Gefährder,” or people who pose a security threat, who have not been convicted can be forced to wear the device by order of the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA).

So now they are policing pre-crime.

Has no one considered that being treated like a terrorist might actually make it more likely that someone is driven to extremism?

Germany is using the rise of the Nazis in the past to justify the current government’s quite Nazi-like behavior.

Being unable to express yourself without fear of arrest is not a good place to be.

Be seeing you

NUJ members under police surveillance mount collective ...

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

5 signs you’re actually a Puritan psychopath | The Daily Bell

Posted by M. C. on June 28, 2019

https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/5-signs-youre-actually-a-puritan-psychopath/

By Joe Jarvis

Hanging women thought to be witches in Salem, Massachusetts in 1692 and 1693 was probably the pinnacle of religious Puritanism.

That type of Puritanism used God and the Bible to force its own form of tyranny on anyone who challenged its authority.

But Puritanism doesn’t need to be based on God or the Bible. All it needs is fanatics convinced that their worldview is the only moral way and that others must be forced to adhere to it…

1. Sex is to be strictly regulated

This one is actually pretty similar to the religious Puritans.

They hated sex (outside of marriage) and regulated it strictly. Sodomy, masturbation, and pre-marital sex were strictly verboten.

Today’s Puritans have banned any talk of sex for fear that it will be classified as an unwanted sexual advance. People are terrified of sex because pursuing it in the wrong way could land them at the gallows. Even sex jokes are off-limits.

Some sex-Puritans even maintain that it is impossible for a woman to consent to sex with a man. Others say that just being asked out against their will is a form of sexual assault.

2. You can’t remember the last time you were wrong about anything.

You know all the data… even though you really haven’t read a book in a while.

And you’ve considered every side… even though you only get your news from echo-chamber websites.

You’re totally open-minded… except to opinions you regard as “hate speech”… which is basically any opinion that differs from yours.

But you’ve got the whole world figured out down to a T. And you are sure your worldview is the only good and righteous way to see things.

If people don’t see things your way, that itself is proof of their bigotry, prejudice, sexism, and intolerance.

And you won’t tolerate that.

3. You think some ideas are too dangerous to be discussed.

Some views must be silenced because they are too dangerous to be tested in the marketplace of ideas.

This really means you see other people as inferiors, lacking an internal moral compass, or too weak to resist the gravitational pull of dangerous ideologies.

You think it is perfectly reasonable to ban people from saying certain things that might offend someone, or plant a dangerous idea in the mind.

Of course, nothing you ever say could be reasonably seen as offensive…

Anyone who says otherwise is being dishonest. You know this to be the case because…

4. Evidence is not required– you already know.

It’s like you have a sixth sense that can always tell you when someone is guilty of a transgression. Their evilness manifests itself in their appearance.

In Salem, proof that women were witches could include warts. Today, proof that someone is a rapist might include muscles. Proof that someone is a Nazi might require only a smirk.

Your paranoia leads you like the inquisition to see hidden signs of white supremacists and micro-aggressions everywhere.

And like a righteous and holy judge sent from the heavens, you will condemn the transgressors for their sins.

5. You reject the scientific method when it doesn’t support your dogma.

Sometimes you use phrases like, “the science is settled,” to cut off any discussion or debate.

That is a direct contradiction to the scientific method, in which nothing is ever settled. Debate leads to clearer and clearer truths.

The Salem Puritans knew it was the devil causing the stricken girls’ illnesses–that was not up for debate. And after all, the Puritans were the educated ones, they even started Harvard.

But other times, science itself is offensive, such as saying someone with an XY chromosome is a biological male. And that’s not up for debate either (See 2-4).

So if you think of yourself as progressive, just make sure you’re not actually regressing to a state of Puritan tyranny…

Be seeing you

Remembering 9/11, 17 Years Later - Biography

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Exclusive: Facebook’s Process to Label You a ‘Hate Agent’ Revealed

Posted by M. C. on June 14, 2019

…and as we saw with the Daily Beast doxing story, the platform will publicize private information on their users to assist the media in hitjobs on regular American citizens…

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/13/exclusive-facebooks-process-to-label-you-a-hate-agent-revealed/

by ALLUM BOKHARI

Facebook monitors the offline behavior of its users to determine if they should be categorized as a “Hate Agent,” according to a document provided exclusively to Breitbart News by a source within the social media giant.

The document, titled “Hate Agent Policy Review” outlines a series of “signals” that Facebook uses to determine if someone ought to be categorized as a “hate agent” and banned from the platform.

Those signals include a wide range of on- and off-platform behavior. If you praise the wrong individual, interview them, or appear at events alongside them, Facebook may categorize you as a “hate agent.”

Facebook may also categorize you as a hate agent if you self-identify with or advocate for a “Designated Hateful Ideology,” if you associate with a “Designated Hate Entity” (one of the examples cited by Facebook as a “hate entity” includes Islam critic Tommy Robinson), or if you have “tattoos of hate symbols or hate slogans.”…

Facebook will also categorize you as a hate agent for possession of “hate paraphernalia,” although the document provides no examples of what falls into this category.

The document also says Facebook will categorize you as a hate agent for “statements made in private but later made public.” Of course, Facebook holds vast amounts of information on what you say in public and in private — and as we saw with the Daily Beast doxing story, the platform will publicize private information on their users to assist the media in hitjobs on regular American citizens…

The Benjamin addition reveals that Facebook may categorize you as a hate agent merely for speaking neutrally about individuals and organizations that the social network considers hateful. In the document, Facebook tags Benjamin with a “hate agent” signal for “neutral representation of John Kinsman, member of Proud Boys” on October 21 last year…

Here’s how “hate speech” — both on and off Facebook — will be categorized by the platform, according to the document:

Individual has made public statements, or statements made in private and later made public, using Tier 1, 2, or 3 hate speech or slurs:

3 instances in one statement or appearance = signal
5 instances in multiple statements or appearances over one month = signal

If you’ve done this within the past two years, Facebook will consider it a hate signal…

Are you a source at Facebook or any other corporation who wants to confidentially blow the whistle on wrongdoing or political bias at your company? Reach out to Allum Bokhari securely at allumbokhari@protonmail.com.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. 

Be seeing you

Faux

Identity Politics

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Difficulty of Writing for Americans – PaulCraigRoberts.org

Posted by M. C. on March 20, 2019

The people have to find solutions, but first they must be informed.  As this article makes clear, that is a difficult enough undertaking.

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/03/19/the-difficulty-of-writing-for-americans/

Paul Craig Roberts

Writing for Americans, unless for their entertainment, is a challenging undertaking.  One reason is that many, especially of the younger generations, no longer have a concept of objective truth.

For them “truth” is simply a bias reflecting one’s race, gender, upbringing or predisposition.  Emotion overwhelms fact. Biases are not considered to be equal.  Some are worthy and some or not.  The biases of white people are defined as “hate speech,” “white supremacy,” and “hate crimes.”  Today America has many self-hating whites, especially in the media and Democratic Party.

Another reason is that many Americans confuse an explanation with a justification.  An explanation of an event is seen as a justification of the event.  For example, if one provides an explanation of slavery the assumption is that the writer approves of slavery.  A defense of a disapproved category is taken as a demonstration of your own unworthiness. For example, if you defend white people from the propagandistic accusations leveled at them by Identity Politics, you are a “white supremist.”

Yet another reason is that some races and genders have succeeded in defining any criticism of themselves as an expression of bias. For example, criticism of Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians or of the Israel Lobby’s power makes one an “anti-semite.” Similarly, if you criticize a black person, you are a racist and your argument is dismissed as an expression of your bias.  If you criticize a woman, you are a misogynist, and your criticism of a woman proves it.

If you express skepticism of false flag events, you are dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist.”…

In a world such as this, honest ordinary language is risky as many are not attending to the cogency of the analysis but looking for indications of racism and sexism.  Exposure of government deceptions gets one branded  “anti-American” with the result that people cling more tightly to the lie that deceives them…

Be seeing you

aipac

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Free Speech Is Dead in Canada: The Persecution of Christian Activist Bill Whatcott

Posted by M. C. on January 15, 2019

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/free_speech_is_dead_in_canada_the_persecution_of_christian_activist_bill_whatcott.html

By Amy Contrada

In the past year, I witnessed two frightening assaults on free speech by a kangaroo “justice” system.  This wasn’t in some banana republic, North Korea, or China; it was in Canada.  These were gut-wrenching experiences for me.

These stories from Canada are potent warnings to the U.S.

If Congress and more states pass anti-discrimination “equality” laws giving special protection to LGBTQ identities, “hate speech” prosecutions and compelled speech will surely follow.

There can be no doubt of that, given the LGBT-driven lawsuits we have already seen against florists, bakers, and wedding photographers.  The Civil Rights Commission of Colorado has tried to compel speech from Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop.  We’re seeing numerous battles over bathroom use and forced use of silly pronouns in our mediacolleges, and public schools.  The EEOC already interprets Title VII (employment) to protect employees from “sexual orientation” discrimination.

So, we’re already on that totalitarian road; Canada is just farther along.

An Enemy of the Canadian State

The victim of Canada’s repressive “injustice” system is Bill Whatcott, a pro-family born-again Christian activist.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Berkeley scientists developing artificial intelligence tool to combat ‘hate speech’ on social media

Posted by M. C. on December 17, 2018

Berkeley developing a “hate index” algorithm that could censor and perhaps ruin your reputation.

Getting a warm fuzzy? Me neither.

BERKELEY! They ARE the haters.

https://www.thecollegefix.com/berkeley-scientists-developing-artificial-intelligence-tool-to-combat-hate-speech-on-social-media/

DANIEL PAYNE – ASSISTANT EDITOR

Scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, are developing a tool that uses artificial intelligence to identify “hate speech” on social media, a program that researchers hope will out-perform human beings in identifying bigoted comments on Twitter, Reddit and other online platforms.

Scientists at Berkeley’s D-Lab “are working in cooperation with the [Anti-Defamation League] on a ‘scalable detection’ system—the Online Hate Index (OHI)—to identify hate speech,” the Cal Alumni Association reports

Be seeing you

safe space

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Censorship and Gun Control Will Not Make Us Safe

Posted by M. C. on November 6, 2018

The effort to silence “hate speech” is not just about outlawing racist, sexist, or anti-Semitic speech. The real goal is to discredit, and even criminalize, criticism of the welfare-warfare state by redefining such criticism as “hate.”

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2018/november/05/censorship-and-gun-control-will-not-make-us-safe/

By Ron Paul

Some social media sites, particularly Facebook and Twitter, are eager to silence not just bigots but those using their platforms to advocate for liberty. Facebook has recently banned a number of libertarian pages— including Cop Block, a site opposing police misconduct. Twitter has also banned a number of conservatives and libertarians, as well as critics of American foreign policy. Some libertarians say we should not get upset as these are private companies exercising private property rights. However, these companies are working with government and government-funded entities such as the Atlantic Council, a group funded by NATO and the military-industrial complex, to determine who should and should not be banned.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »