Every now and then, a review of the most recent skirmishes in the struggle between the deceivers and censors and the rest of us is desirable. A week ago, Ace produced a good one. Here’s a jewel from that piece:
The hot new concept in ” ” ” journalism ” ” ” is the “duty to not report.”
Specifically, to not report on the immigration status of criminals and terrorists. (And race, of course. And transgender status. And affiliation with the Democrat Party or leftwing causes.)
Yes, they’ve been doing that for over a decade, but now they’ve made it into an acknowledged and explicit code of Fake Journalism.
The Jonathan Turley column Ace links in the above is required reading for anyone who seeks to understand the mindset of today’s “journalists.”
That’s bad enough, but when coupled to the rash of aggressive, sometimes vindictive attempts to silence dissenting voices, it gets lots worse. Here’s a case to be aware of:
OLYMPIA, Wash. — A former state economist has filed a legal claim against two state agencies and the Office of the Governor for allegedly retaliating against him for refusing to keep quiet about his economic forecast on the state’s gas price.
For the last five years, Scott Smith of Tumwater was a transportation planner for the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). He was the primary WSDOT employee tasked with forecasting fuel consumption, pricing and revenues from gas taxes and fees. After 35 years working as a public sector economist, Smith said his career was ruined for his refusal to lie about how a new state policy, according to his mathematical calculations in early 2023, would jack up prices at the pump by 45 to 50 cents per gallon. He said the retaliation and pressure were so great he felt forced to resign.
“I tried to do the right thing, and they eliminated my job,” Smith said. “I didn’t want to quit. I’m an economist. That’s the way I think. I’ve been damaged. I’m 64 years old. I’ve got nowhere to go. They left me no other choice.”
You can be a big voice or a little one; it makes no difference. Once you position yourself against the Established Ones and any of their sacred Narratives, you will find a crosshairs on your forehead. Have a snippet from Matt Taibbi, concerning would-be canceller Jonathan Katz:
Though this site [i.e., Substack] is a true content free-for-all, where you can find everything from serialized graphic novels to Portuguese “dark storytelling” to bagel bites recipes, a microcosm of the old Internet where the randomness of being able to hop from Bigfoot to Buddhism is a key part of the free vibe, Katz believes he’s detected a malicious pattern. He aims to put a stop to it, by deplatforming Substack contributors he doesn’t like. A group letter is being organized, demanding action, following Katz’s stern argument in the Atlantic, “Substack Has a Nazi Problem.”
I have little knowledge of the range of Substack’s offerings, but given the terms under which just about anyone may set up a subsite there, I’d be greatly surprised if there were no material there that I would find objectionable. Nazis? Pedophiles? Animal abusers? People who dip shrimp in butterscotch and mix single-malt Scotch with Yoo-Hoo? So what? Read whom you like and avoid whom you don’t. It’s a big Internet. There’s room for every sort of proposition and opinion.
Except, apparently, propositions and opinions that dissent from the “received wisdom” of the Establishment. We’ve learned what size shrift they can expect.
There’s no need to flog this into the magma layer. If you have a list of reliable truth-tellers, keep a good grip on it. Any on your list who have already been targeted are especially valuable. The campaign to eliminate dissenting voices from the Internet is ongoing. Indeed, it appears to be intensifying.
