Friday, October 16, 2020

Is the Government Behind the Social Media Blackout of the Hunter Biden Stories?

 As a follow up to my post, Freedom of Speech and the Recent Actions of Twitter and Facebook,I received a number of emails along the lines of this one:

I'm not all that sure the government ISN'T blocking free speech. It

might be similar to data collection where the government collects data

by proxy using the phone companies, but even more hidden. Facebook,

Twitter, and Youtube are different companies and yet they all make the

decision to block the same articles and ban the same users on the same

date. In fact, Alex Jones was banned by all the companies at the exact

same time. Either way, something is going on behind the scenes.

RW response:

I am open to evidence that the government is behind the actions but such a theory without evidence lacks an understanding of Silicon Valley. I don't think the government is behind the censorship but, even if it is, I don't see that as the major problem.

The SV crowd is rabidly anti-Trump and they all hang out together so it is not surprising that they react in concert against Trump.

I recall Justin Raimondo telling me that he was once invited to the house of Google co-founder Sergy Brin. [Gaudy furniture, Justin told me.] All the major SV players were there. It was just after the start of one of the Iraq wars and they had Justin there along with other foreign affairs experts to discuss what their position should be on the war.

That does not mean they all think alike on all positions. Peter Theil was at the get-together Justin attended and he is much more nationalistic conservative than the rest, but for the most part they buy into the lefty soup which means socialism must be advanced "by any means necessary." That is they believe it is justified to lie, cheat, distort, whatever to advance the socialist cause. This is part of their deep belief system.

If you can get them alone for a while with a drink in their hand, they will tell you this.

If you aren't exposed to these people, it is very difficult to understand how they think. Their understanding of economics is very shallow but they play a rich man's version of viva la revolution.

There are certainly deep state actors who have infiltrated these organizations but it isn't like the leadership or the programming drone underlings need convincing that everything must be done to take down Trump.

But Trump is really a sideshow. The real battle is for freedom, which the SV leaders are not in favor of. They hold what F.A. Hayek called the fatal conceit, the central planning view.

And so, in the end, the battle is an intellectual battle to promote, in a very simple manner that which can be grasped by the masses, the dangers of socialism. If this is ever achieved, social media would face such an uproar when they attempted to block information that Priscilla Chan wouldn't even try to push the idea on Zuck.

Those who are advocating some sort of government regulation of the social media giants miss the point. Creating a new point of central power will only create a new power center that can be taken over by those who will do anything to gain power. The only solution is to win the intellectual struggle in support of free markets and private property.

The advance of free ideas can never be stopped regardless of what the SV crowd thinks or tries. The ruling leaders of the old Soviet Union were more "advanced" in their censorship than the SV crowd but, still, samizdats emerged.

The SV crowd is shallow in their understanding of economics but they also lack an understanding of socialist history. In the end, they are fooling themselves if they think they can successfully block truth and that socialism is some kind of paradise.



  1. "The only solution is to win the intellectual struggle in support of free markets and private property."

    Here's the problem: There is no "intellectual struggle". The general masses are ignorant and apathetic, while the segment who consider themselves 'informed' will immediately go into cognitive dissonance mode when confronted with even simple problematic facts.

    The Narrative rules, and those who control The Narrative are our rulers.

    1. To learn who rules over you, find out who you are not allowed to criticize.
      Most of the people who control the narrative have something in common. Find out what it is.

    2. Forge is spot on. I have referenced the Idiocracy impact numerous times for years here.

      You truly cant debate with stupid. I fully expect socialism of some sort until little Jimmy and Jenny snowflake get their ass handed to them and then it will be simultaneously too late and too little

    3. I have steered 2 voting aged males away from statism, and I thoroughly believe they will never be able to hold statist or central planning type views in the future.
      I think the pov that “all those other people are too ignorant” is not productive. People try to model their be behavior and opinions based on those that they admire or respect. If the messenger is not admirable or respectable, then their impact will be limited.

  2. The primary MO of the SV crony class is that they want complete control over who joins their class. Socialism gives them that control. That is also why they despise Trump so much; he invited himself to the party; he was not invited.

  3. Why are the statists so much more competent, committed and cooperative than the libertarians?

    1. Because lolbertarianism is basically controlled opposition. One of the main reasons individualism is so ingrained into the philosophy is to promote constant infighting to ensure that there is never a real threat to the state.

    2. Not competent, violent. The modus operandi of the State is intimidation and violence. This serves to create a hierarcy of psychopaths. Libertarians are by and large pacifists, so they stand no chance against the massive organized criminality which is the State.

      This will only change when libertarians realize that advocating any statist "policy" is tantamount to declaration of intent to rob and murder and thus deserves immediate violent response in self defense. That, and understanding that nobody ever won by telgraphing one's intentions to enemies.

      You don't play "fair" with the criminals, for they sure don't. You don't give benefit of doubt to socialists, they had a century to show that their creed is anything other than death cult (they failed). Anyone who claims the "right" to rule over you is your mortal enemy, make no mistake. Treat them accordingly.

  4. This reminds me of Bezmenov's warning. Specifically see 5:020 tp 6:00 of this video interview:

  5. Some of these BigTech firms deliberately create a university campus style work environment and culture. This makes sense for their software focused business. However the campus culture also comes with the risk of being infected with campus style thinking in non-technical areas.

    However i think there is more to it than the workplace culture. Victor Davis Hanson in his discussions on California politics says that BigTech and Hollywood mouth SJW positions in public but avoid the tax bill that "putting your money where your mouth is" would imply. They use corporate SJW (and presumably partisan tech censorship is part of the deal) to "buy an indulgence" from progressive/liberal politics. VDH's comparison is to the sale of indulgences by the pre-Reformation Catholic Church hierarchy.

    The liberal/progressive willingness to go along with the deal however is unlikely to be infinite. Presumably when they believe they completely own the narrative they will go after BigTech. For the same reason Dillinger robbed banks. That's where the money is. Exactly what BigTech will do then is anyone's guess. Their political strategy is very short run focused.