By Robert Wenzel
In a stunning 48 hours, Alex Jones and Infowars have been for the most part completely banned from Apple, Facebook, YouTube, Spotify and, yes, LinkedIn.
Jones had warned on his network just prior to July 4th that a civil war was about to be launched by Leftists on the 4th. Perhaps, his warning resulted in a one month delay in the first attack, for in terms of an infowar, he is clearly now under severe attack.
It makes you wonder just what was discussed exactly two months ago when the Bilderberg group met in Turin, Italy and "The 'post-truth' world" was on the agenda.
I see discussed in some comments in posts here at Target Liberty the topic of whether the platform operators that banned Jones are private organizations and should be able to ban whomever they choose or are in fact agents of the government and that therefore a counterattack using government tools such as antitrust laws should be used against them. It's more complicated than that.
It does appear that the attack was coordinated. But it should be remembered that this Silicon Valley group is a pretty tight group. They meet to discuss BIG questions. I was made privy to the details of a meeting that was called by a founder of one of these operations who wanted to discuss "what his position should be on the second Iraq war," just before Bush, the kid, gave the launch go ahead with that attack. I'll just put it this way, I hope a comedy of that discussion is at some future date turned into a major motion picture.
So we don't know what was behind the co-ordination. Did these mostly lefties call a meeting and decide to attack Jones or was government muscle involved behind the scenes or was it outside pressure by extreme leftists? Or a combination of all three factors?
As I consider the founders and leaders of these various organizations, I can guess that some would be more than willing to work with government to shut down Jones, where others, taking a lay of the land, probably realized that it was best to go along to protect their companies---if government was behind the takedown.
I do not see a Howard Roark in this crowd that would be willing to burn his platform down rather than buckle to government.
This move by a U.S. Senator might have pushed some to go along with the takedown:
The suspiciously simultaneous censorship of Infowars by Google, Apple, Facebook came just one week after U.S. Senate intelligence committee hawk Mark Warner (D) circulated this policy paper threatening new regulation against those same media companies: https://t.co/8kLI1GAedM pic.twitter.com/Qdo0frJbPJ— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 7, 2018
All this said, on one level what is even more concerning is the suspensions on Twitter of Daniel McAdams and Scott Horton and the permanent banning by Twitter of the 24 year State Department employee Peter Van Buren.
The suspensions and banning took place during the same general time period as the bans on Jones. I ask you to listen to the discussion that these three reasonable men just had, Behind The Scenes At The Twitter Purge, and contemplate that their ability to communicate via a major platform has been halted.
Jones taken down is one thing, outrageous as it is, but that it has spread to three non-connected men is deeply concerning. It has the appearance that something greater is afoot.
I understand those who call for a legal attack on the banning organizations or those who call for the launch of a new truly free speech platform, but what must be realized here is that we are up against operators who don't play by the rules. Whether they are government players or extreme leftists or a combination, they are driven by a philosophy of "by any means necessary" to gain power and eliminate those who are a challenge to gaining that power.
If there are any deep thinkers behind the operators, and I suspect there is at least one (a very bad guy), they/he would have thought about the obvious counter moves of legal attacks and alternative platforms. They are at least 2 steps ahead of freedom advocates and ready for the counter-attack. In other words, the censorship will likely intensify and the likelihood of an alternative platform succeeding is very low. It would be shut down somehow, using some bogus excuse, in some manner the minute it is determined to be a serious threat.
So it may not be a special platform that will provide the outlet for the brave who are unafraid to speak as the censorship becomes harsher. It will be the drive of those who must write and speak truth for their own reasons deep in their souls. This is a lesson we know from the samizdats of the Soviet Union. Truth revealing writing cannot be stopped. Censorship only reveals the evil ways of the censors. It only red pills more normies. We will get the message out even if it means a return to samizdats. The takedown of the Soviet Union was aided by the samizdats. It will help in the takedown of the Left, if that is the method by which we must shout.
Bring it on clowns. "We have not yet begun to fight."-Jones.
Robert Wenzel is Editor & Publisher of EconomicPolicyJournal.com and Target Liberty.
He also writes EPJ Daily Alert and is author of
The Fed Flunks: My Speech at the New York Federal Reserve Ban .and most recently
Foundations of Private Property Society Theory: Anarchism for the Civilized Person
Follow him on twitter:@wenzeleconomics and on LinkedIn.
His youtube series is here: Robert Wenzel Talks Economics.
The Robert Wenzel podcast is on iphone and stitcher.