If they don’t moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control
Exactly and that is a Good Thing
Welcome, my dear readers, to the asylum. Recently, it seems the Democrats have been big mad. John Kerry and Hillary Clinton were so angry they said the quiet part out loud. While speaking at a World Economic Forum (WEF) function, John Kerry stated, “Our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence," which is misinformation. Then Hillary Clinton said “But I also think there are Americans who are engaged in this kind of propaganda, and whether they should be civilly, or even in some cases criminally, charged…”. This is incredibly ironic because she is the origin of one of the most damaging (in terms of time and money) pieces of disinformation in history with the Steel Dosier. Then, speaking at the WEF, Clinton said, “Whether it’s Facebook or Twitter or X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are if they don’t moderate and monitor the content, we lose total control…”. Emma Tucker, the editor in Chief of the Wallstreet Journal, lamented the free and open exchange of information by saying, “We owned the news. We were the gatekeepers, and we very much owned the facts as well” (here, here, here, and here). Don’t misunderstand. This is entirely about control and the narrative (here, here, and here), not what is true or false.
The establishment relies on the narrative to maintain control, and free speech on social media is a real threat to that. Please understand they are not afraid you will believe lies so they must protect you from nonsense. They are trying to protect themselves from facts that differ from the approved truth or might cause someone to behave in a manner they do not desire. They want to protect you from information on Hunter's laptop, Hillary's email, people dying suddenly after taking a vaccine that doesn’t work, and other truthful details that make them lose money or look bad (here, here, here, and here). Social media is a great equalizer in that anyone, great or small, can make public information, be it legally obtained public studies or documents that they ferreted out or leaked confidential information because the leaker knows something is wrong. In addition to giving regular people a platform, social media helps the alternative media compete with the mainstream media (MSM). The freedom that it represents is the greatest danger to the narrative. Just thirty years ago, if the New York Times had declared Hunter’s laptop a fake story, it would have died there as the MSM wouldn't have contradicted the Times. Sure, we would have found out eventually but by that point it wouldn’t have mattered.
Unfortunately, in an attempt to reign in social media and get them to support the narrative, the government keeps threatening to repeal or alter Section 230 of the Communications Act. This section, which states that a carrier cannot be held liable for what people say on or how they misuse a communication service, is under attack. If this section is repealed, it could set a dangerous precedent. Imagine a world where a carrier like AT&T could be liable for allowing any content on their platform just because someone used their service. The implications for free speech are chilling. It should be the same for all social media, and it was in the beginning. The major platforms, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, weren’t overly censorious until the middle 2010s and the advent of cancel culture. As revealed in the Twitter files, it did not take the government long to jump in with both feet to encourage censorship. In my view, the moment a service provider starts curating what you can say, they are no longer a carrier but a publisher, and publishers don’t have the protection of Section 230 (here, here, and here).
Most of the platforms bent the knee, and all of social media was turning into a cesspool of insipid woke garbage and government lies. It became so outrageous that finally, a hero emerged, and Elon Musk purchased Twitter (has renamed it X). As soon as he said that Twitter would be a place for the free exchange of ideas and a free speech zone, he came under massive attack. It was all the usual garbage. Twitter is a nest of racist alt-rights, child trafficking, a threat to democracy, gives a platform to evil people to speak, and kiddie porn. None of that is true, or at least no more accurate than any other platform on the internet (which is a dangerous place, and people can be evil). Realizing that the First Amendment protection of speech would make it almost impossible for them to do anything to reign Musk and X in, they called for foreign governments to do it (here).
Sadly, there is no freedom of expression in Europe. England and Germany are among the worst (here and here). It is no coincidence that both Kerry and Clinton were bemoaning the problem of free speech at the WEF because they want to control the scope of acceptable thought by law here in America as it is controlled by WEF puppets in the European Union (EU). This has resulted in many threats from various EU countries to charge, fine, or otherwise harass Musk if he keeps supporting people’s right to express themselves. It is so bad that European Commissioner Thierry Breton threatened to take legal action against Elon (an American Citizen) if he hosted a live public interview of Donald Trump (a leading candidate for President of the United States)(here). Imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth if an American government official threatened legal action against a European media executive for interviewing a prominent candidate for office. It is so bad that Police in the United Kingdom are threatening to arrest and extradite Americans to England for exercising their freedom of speech in America if they think it is counter to English law (here). It might just be me, but I thought we settled that 248 years ago. However, with how in love with the idea of using non-American laws to control Americans some in the political class are, I am not as confident of that as I once was.
We must defend our right to speak and to contradict the narrative because if we don’t, we will own nothing and “be happy”. In the dystopian Agenda 2030, the 4th industrial revolution is where we lease everything, own nothing, and obey.
Romans 5:8
8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
God Bless you!
-Sam