As a semi-popular blogger, pundit, and all around neat guy, I have a deep respect for freedom of speech. After all, without it, I’d just be some lunatic behind bars talking about how bad government sucks. As it stands, I’m just in a rubber room, so yay, I guess?
I wouldn’t bring this up unless it was relevant, and thanks to Queen Kamala the Appointed and the Left, it’s become very relevant, but not in a good way. Whether it’s The Social Media Site Formerly Known as Twitter getting banned in Brazil for alleged misinformation to Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz and Presidential candidate Kamala Harris both in favor of some form of government intervention/regulation of social media, the topic is as relevant today as it was when the Bill of Rights was passed.
free speech
What the Left thinks it means – the right to express yourself without government interference, except when it crosses certain lines
What it really means – the right to express yourself without government interference, regardless of who you are and what you say
As with guns, cars, and movies like “The Room,” freedom of speech can be used for different ends. That’s why it’s important to consider the implications of their use prior to firing a gun, driving a car, or paying for a ticket to see “The Room.” Oh, and speaking out.
Yes, there are some limitations to free speech, and they’re established as a means of protecting people from physical or reputational damage. Some speech like “fighting words” aren’t considered free speech because a) they are designed to promote a violent response, and b) the person engaging in it is kinda asking for an ass-whuppin’. For those of you younger folks reading this, fighting words are what we old folks used to do in lieu of internet trolling because the Internet hadn’t been invented yet. (Thanks, Al Gore.)
Anyway, the Left has tried to apply the same approach used with fighting words with other forms of speech. Each one could be a Lexicon entry in and of itself, but here is a list of these speech forms the Left doesn’t like.
hate speech – Basically, any speech that makes Leftists look like assholes
misinformation – Basically, any speech that proves Leftists are assholes
election interference – Basically, any speech that shows Leftists losing
election misinformation – Basically, any speech that proves Leftist politicians are full of shit
I’m not sure, but I’m sensing a pattern here…
Although a case can be made for regulations on these, the case is pretty fucking bad. You can pass as many laws banning them, but they run smack in the face of the very thing Leftists claim to be all about: free speech. Yes, some speech is abhorrent and would make Gandhi want to grab a shotgun and start kicking ass, but the answer to it isn’t cracking down on the bad speech; it’s countering it with good speech. Dennis Miller put it best (and I’m paraphrasing it from here, so please don’t sue me, Mr. Miller): No free speech gives you Hitler. Healthy free speech gives you David Duke. There’s a big, big difference.
The problem is the Left doesn’t understand that difference. Either that, or they don’t get the reference, which isn’t all that uncommon with Miller’s work. Regardless, Leftists treat any speech that isn’t from their echo chamber as dangerous. And it’s not because it’s particularly threatening, dangerous to society as a whole, or offensive to society as a whole. It’s because it’s not something they can control with any degree of success.
Having said that, they aren’t going to stop trying. During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, information countering the official narrative got censored and social media accounts that spread that information got removed. Even as Mark “No, I’m Not Data” Zuckerberg had to admit the Brick Tamland Administration pressured Meta to crack down on certain content. And I’m guessing you know what content got the ban hammer.
But you know who didn’t get nailed for COVID misinformation? All the figureheads and media outlets who peddled the Administration’s bullshit. Seems “Trust the Science” didn’t include actual science. Then again, the “Trust the Science” people also believe men can be women just because they feel that way, so…
It’s bullshit like this (the censorship, not the men claiming to be women) that made Elon Musk take on the mantle of leadership when it comes to free speech online. He has rightly made it his cause, and given the lack of accountability for those who on the Left who violate the Left’s own rules (I’m looking at you, Rachel Maddow!), it’s clear we need someone who not only understands free speech, but also allows it.
Musk may not be the best person to do it, but at least he’s doing it. Since taking over the Social Media Site Formerly Known As Twitter, he has reversed many of the previous decisions made and reinstated accounts that he felt were terminated unjustly. Granted, that gave us back noted white nationalist and all around weirdo Nick Fuentes, but the upside is we can now keep better track of him and what he says. That’s something you don’t get with free speech crackdowns. Forcing people like Fuentes to go off the free speech grid makes it harder to track him down and combat whatever speech he’s spouting. With a healthy respect for free speech, he makes himself known, so we can do a little rhetorical White Supremacist Whack-A-Mole.
And if you know any of the scuttlebutt about him, the mole part might not be complete hyperbole.
Freedom of speech is one of the bedrock principles we should all strive to want. Without it, how would we redress grievances with the government (of which your humble correspondent has plenty), spread the message to others to gather peaceably, or print out flyers? And for those of you eagle-eyed readers out there, you might recognize the examples I just gave as rights covered under the First Amendment. If you didn’t, that’s okay. You’re still brighter than 100% of the dipshits who think free speech should be limited because fee-fees get hurt.
I don’t think free speech is going anywhere if Queen Kamala the Appointed and Vice Queen TIMMAH get into office because neither one has the brains necessary to make the case in favor of getting rid of it, but that doesn’t mean we can ease up protecting it. As Ronald Reagan put it:
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.
And if you can’t trust a man who acted with a chimp, who can you trust?
Tag: misinformation
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Although I tend to focus on stuff going on in America, there are times when I do have to train my gaze elsewhere just to see if their Leftists are as fucked up as ours are. Given what I just read, I can say they are.
The Globe and Mail, a Canadian newspaper that has its origins in two newspapers established in the 19th Century, published an opinion piece with the scorching hot take…excessive free speech is bad. I would chalk this up to frostbite affecting Canadian Leftists’ brains, but it’s harder to do so when American Leftists seem to have taken on a similar viewpoint.
Hoo boy. This is gonna get messy.
free speech
What the Left thinks it means – a right that has become too dangerous not to be curtailed by government
What it really means – a weapon the Left doesn’t want you to have so you can’t call out its bullshit
It wasn’t that long ago that liberals and even Leftists held free speech in high esteem, mainly because they were the ones exercising it the most at the expense of the Establishment. Recent First Amendment pioneers like Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, Norman Lear, Richard Pryor, and so many others made their livings off thumbing their noses at those who would seek to control their speech. To them, free speech wasn’t just a proverbial hill to die on; it was their jobs.
Then, something happened. (Sorry, I was cribbing notes off Rep. Ilhan Omar for a second.) It’s hard to pinpoint when Leftists decided free speech was a bridge too far, but I would say it had something to do with Ronald Reagan spearheading the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. In theory, the Fairness Doctrine required controversial topics get an equal hearing, and it was good at the time mainly because the most controversial topics during the bulk of the time the Fairness Doctrine was in place was whether mayonnaise or Miracle Whip made better egg salad.
But as the Left went nucking futs and media companies started to concern themselves with financial viability more than principles, the Fairness Doctrine started to be more one-sided towards more “mainstream” opinions (which would exclude most of Leftist ideals then and now). So Leftists did what they normally do: overwhelm the system to the point they took it over. Then, they didn’t give one-tenth of one shit about fairness because they could run whatever opinions they wanted while simultaneously bashing Reagan for repealing the Fairness Doctrine.
So, a win-win for them.
And with the kind of power the Left has within the media comes the temptation to use it to quiet the opposition. That’s why they demanded conservative talk radio show hosts like Rush Limbaugh be forced to comply with the Fairness Doctrine (even when they didn’t believe it). After all, what good are rules unless you can fuck over someone else in the process, amirite?
That’s one of the fundamental differences between a liberal and a Leftist. A liberal will work within the system to address inequity through compromise. A Leftist will warp the system to created inequity in the name of equity through force. The latter is often the quicker option, which benefits Leftists on many levels (mainly because they don’t want to wait for people to come around to their point of view). And let’s not forget the satisfaction of near-instant gratification. But as it too often occurs with microwave popcorn, it starts to stink if you’re not paying attention to it.
This brings us to the current state of Leftist hatred of free speech. To them, the only people who should have free speech are those who parrot Leftist squawking points. But that’s not free speech; it’s controlled speech. Free speech requires the ability to have pushback, which is something Leftists hate. They need to have control of the not just the narrative, but the means by which any narrative gets disseminated.
But in a world where there are people who have more ways to communicate than Baskin Robbins has flavors, it’s getting harder for the Left to dominate like they once did. That’s why they’re trying to rebrand anything they don’t agree with as “misinformation.” Even when it’s not. This goes into Leftist delusions about being fucking brilliant when they’re dumber than a bag of hammers, but that’s a blog post for a different time.
In the interest of transparency (and to fill out this Leftist Lexicon entry a bit more), I am a free speech fan. I mean, how couldn’t I be when being able to express myself is my gig here? To me, the solution to bad speech is more speech, not less. You want to shout racist sentiments at a black family? Yell more tolerant sentiments back, or at the very least tell the other party their hood’s on crooked. Yes, there are some limitations to that (the whole “with great power comes great responsibility” thing), but I would prefer to live where I can be shouted down instead of where I can be shot or beaten.
And, yes, that’s where the Left really wants to take this. There are Leftists out there who would think nothing of bashing someone’s head in with a brick for the crime of…not agreeing with them. If you thought the “fiery but mostly peaceful” Summer of Love was bad, just wait until Leftists decide to turn your words into their actions.
For my Canadian readers, you may be fucked. After all, you have Justin Trudeau at the helm and he’s about as sensible as Hunter Biden on a meth binge. Fortunately, The Globe and Mail is getting soundly roasted for its insanely stupid “excessive free speech” take, so all may not be lost yet. Keep on them, and remind them that without free speech, they wouldn’t have a newspaper. Tell ’em I sent ya.
As far as America is concerned, we still have some time before things go tits up. For one, Leftists aren’t handling the free speech tide going against them, especially on social media. By the way, how’s Mastodon doing? Are you finally up to double digit users yet?
The other thing that hinders Leftists when it comes to fighting for free speech is…well, they’re pussies. The only way they can be brave is by ganging up on weaker targets and being better armed than said targets. Any group that can match them, they avoid. That’s why you see very few Leftists at Girl Scout cookie sales.
More to the point, Leftists are classic bullies, and the best way to beat a bully is to show no fear. And if you really want to pour salt in the wound, mock the bully.
Let’s just say I’m investing heavily in Morton Salts right now.
On a grander level, free speech is vital to our nation’s health. Debate is healthy, even if we aren’t. When Leftists think free speech is dangerous, that’s when we know we’re hitting them where it hurts the most.
And that’s when we keep speaking.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In case you hadn’t marked it on your calendars, the World Economic Forum (think Nerd Prom for people even less hip than the White House Correspondents’ Dinner) met and gave its opinion on the biggest threat in 2024. Was it post-COVID economic instability? Was it the impact on oil production if the Middle East continues to fight like the Hatfields and McCoys with heavy artillery? Was it the impact Bitcoin and other e-currency will have on the free market?
Nope. It was misinformation and disinformation.
Oh, they also mentioned climate change and the polarization of society in the top 3, but out of all the other subjects, some of them even related to economics, these high-fallutin’ asshats chose misinformation/disinformation to worry about?
Well, that’s by design, kids, as we’ll soon find out.
misinformation/disinformation
What the Left thinks it means – information that erodes confidence in trusted institutions and sources of information
What it really means – information the Left can’t bullshit their way out of
Politics is dishonest because, let’s face it, modern politicians are lying assholes. So much of what they do revolves around releasing certain information and hiding other information that would damage The Party. And once the lie is no longer useful or needed, it’s memory-holed as though it never happened. Remember, Mitt Romney was the second coming of Hitler back in 2012, but then became a good Republican a few years later. Now, the Left would have us believe it was because the GOP and Donald Trump supporters in particular took the party to the far right, but the real reason is far easier and more believable.
Romney wasn’t the monster the Left made him out to be in 2012.
If that isn’t misinformation or disinformation, I don’t know what is. The thing is the Left doesn’t know what these terms mean either, or if they do they absolutely suck at recognizing it. While they’re quick to point out misinformation and disinformation when it comes to the Right (which is a valid point given some of the stupid shit Trump says on the regular), they have a blind spot when it comes to someone who says equally stupid shit, like MSNBC’s Joy Ann Reid.
Now, if Reid were an outlier, the Left would have an easy defense. Of course, she’s not. MSNBC is staffed with people less trustworthy than 3 day old gas station sushi. Or 3 minute old Chipotle. But, of course, when they engage in misinformation/disinformation, it’s perfectly fine because they’re doing it for the right reasons.
Like getting underinformed people to believe their bullshit!
That’s the target of any misinformation or disinformation campaign: getting people who are just aware enough to know the key facts and figures of a situation, but not aware enough to know where they have knowledge gaps. In today’s society, that’s more common than a bad Michael Bay movie. Most of us have access to a wealth of information at our fingertips, but we still fall for obvious half-truths and impossible notions because a) we hate to admit we’re dumber than we actually are, or b) we want to believe the lie.
From there, the impact of misinformation and disinformation gets a lot bigger. Whether it’s ego or a desire to believe the implausible because it fits our personal narratives, the more we get intellectually mired into believing something that isn’t true, the harder it is to reverse our thinking. This is a little thing the kids like to call the Dunning-Kruger effect, which encapsulates both the ego and the desire I just mentioned. To put it simply, it’s literally your ego writing checks your brain can’t cash.
Even though the World Economic Forum isn’t exactly the best vehicle to deliver this lesson, the lesson is worth learning as we go into the election this year. After all, the Left is fully behind the WEF’s report, so that means it’s less credible than Eric Swalwell talking about how to avoid Chinese spies. And, it gets funnier. Frequent Leftist misinformers Brian “Potato” Stelter and Philip “I Don’t Have a Vegetable-Themed Nickname” Bump have raised the alarm about misinformation/disinformation, with the latter going so far as to say doing your own research actually helps people be uninformed.
And people wonder why my opinion of the media is lower than the tip of a male snake’s condom.
What Stelter, Bump, and the Left actually want is for you to not do your homework and just believe what you’re told. Of course, when they get shit wrong, they also want you to overlook the facts and still believe them because they have all the really truthful people on their side. Just look at all the doctors, scientists, and experts who agree! You know, like Dr. Fauci!
This, kids, is a logical fallacy called an appeal to authority. Just because an expert says something doesn’t make it factual because of his or her station. They could be just as fucking stupid as your next door neighbor who thinks Elvis is alive and living in a trailer park in Missouri. This is precisely why you need to verify the information you’re getting, especially if the information is too good to be true.
I’m looking at you, Rachel Maddow.
Although I’ve ragged on the Left primarily for misinformation and disinformation (mainly because they’re the ones claiming to be fighting against it while actively engaging in it), the Right doesn’t have clean hands. In a campaign ad prior to the Iowa Caucuses, Republican Presidential candidate Nikki Haley’s PAC ran an ad bragging how how handily she would beat Joe Biden in a head-to-head election match-up, and noted how Donald Trump couldn’t. The problem? Trump’s “loss” was within the margin of error for the poll, meaning it was still possible for him to beat Puddin’ Head Joe. But that didn’t mean she stopped running it or that Haley supporters stopped believing it. Given her third place finish in Iowa, I’d say the only thing that the ad accomplished was turning off voters like me who can do math.
Which goes back to my earlier point about modern politicians being fucking liars. And as long as they’re allowed to get away with it, they’ll keep doing it.
That’s where you all come in. Hold every source of information to the same standard: tell the truth or go the way of Hunter Biden ever getting a job as the Drug Czar. That includes me. If I ever lead you astray, call me out on it. I welcome the scrutiny and it makes me a better correspondent.
The Left, on the other hand, don’t want you asking inconvenient questions like “Are you sure you’re being honest with me?” or “Just how full of shit do you think my head is?” They need you to believe, nothing more. Yet, if you look at their track record over the past, oh, year or so, you’ll find there’s not much of a reason to trust them. So, question them. Back up your thoughts with facts from multiple sources. Look for logical fallacies. Trace back the information using the “who benefits” model. And above all else, don’t continue to believe something that’s been disproven by reputable sources. The Left and the Right need you to be unthinking drones, and being one step ahead of them freaks them the fuck out.
So, good on the World Economic Forum for raising this issue. After all, if they hadn’t, I wouldn’t have much of a Lexicon entry this week!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
It’s official. The Biden Administration is engaging in the War on Misinformation! As we breath a collective sigh of…well, utter confusion to be honest, we’re left with some serious questions. What is considered misinformation? Who determines what constitutes misinformation? What is Joe Biden’s favorite flavor of ice cream? (Okay, that last one wasn’t really mine. That’s an actual question asked of the President by a “reporter.”)
Ice cream question aside, we’re entering a strange new territory, one where the rules of reality as we know them are null and void. It’s to the point we’re one ironic twist away from a Rod Serling voiceover. This isn’t just a Leftist ploy; this is a question of reality itself, and we’re not even college-age stoners. Well, you might want to light up a fatty and settle in because this one is going to get weird.
misinformation
What the Left thinks it means – false information that damages society
What it really means – information that damages Leftist narratives
As I’ve noted before, the Left has a love/hate relationship with the truth. They love it when the truth backs them up, and they hate it when the truth doesn’t back them up (which is most of the time). With the advent of a Donald Trump Presidency, however, they started hugging the truth tighter than a “popular” girl’s prom dress. And, surprise surprise, the Left found misinformation with every Republican/conservative statement, no matter how factual the statement was. There’s a reason Trump supporters and others have come up with the #TrumpWasRight hashtag, and it’s not because they’re cult members.
It’s because, well, Donald Trump was right.
But the Left can’t bring themselves to admit the truth. After all, they claim reality has a liberal bias (except when it comes to the number of genders, the effects of Welfare on the poor, and the absurdity of the government spending money to prop up the economy, just to name three). When the facts don’t fit, the Left does its best to either memory hole the truth or poison the well (not literally, unless you count Flint, Michigan) by attacking the source instead of refuting the information.
I’ve covered an aspect of this previously when I discussed media “fact checkers”, but for those who haven’t read it yet, here’s the short version. Most fact checkers you’ll find are tainted by biases, especially well-known and oft-circulated ones like Snopes and FactCheck.org. They would scrutinize every word Donald Trump said to find the worst possible interpretation while giving Joe Biden as much leeway as a needle thrown in the Grand Canyon. Yes, I know this smacks of “whataboutism” but it’s not wrong. Check out Politifact’s recent “fact check” on whether President Biden wants to ban handguns, which is a direct quote from the man. Let’s just say Politifact’s interpretation is the fact checking equivalent of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (Speaking of which, does Melinda get half of the foundation in the divorce?)
To bring this all together (finally), this process of partisan fact checking lends itself very well to misinformation. Combine that with social media’s lax and contradictory application of misinformation standards and you see the crisis for what it is. It’s like trying to get a sip of water from a firehose. There’s a good chance you’ll get something, but you’re more likely to get overwhelmed by the sheer volume being sent your way.
And that’s only part of the problem. Our attention spans are getting shorter than…wait, what was I talking about? Oh, yeah, attention spans! With the sheer amount of information we get on a daily basis, we have to pick and choose what we consume, which makes it easier for misinformation to get around. After all, if someone with some authority says something and it gets repeated by others, it must be right, right? Oh, by the way, Dr. Fauci, phone call on line 5, one for each of your positions on masking.
I don’t disagree with the notion misinformation can be destructive, but it gets more destructive when it becomes politicized because all politics is personal on some level. That’s why political attack ads are effective and still being used today. Where I part company with the Left is in the danger assessment. The Left claims misinformation can be deadly, citing the number of COVID-19 cases and President Donald Trump’s mishandling of the pandemic. If only we had followed the science and listened to our non-Trumpian leaders, we could have saved millions of lives!
Except not even the Left follows the science completely and gives off misinformation on the regular to sustain the notion President Trump made the pandemic worse. He could have taken other actions, sure, but while he was trying to get a handle on the situation, the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) gave constantly changing information. First it was “you don’t need masks” to “wearing masks is a sign of Asian hate” to “OHMYGODTHEWORLDISGONNADIEUNLESSYOUMASKUPANDQUARANTINEINPLACE” to “don’t trust the vaccinations because Trump rushed them to the public” to “maybe you should get them if you’re in a high risk group” to “OHMYGODYOUNEEDTOGETTHEFAUCIOUCHIEORYOUWILLKILLEVERYONE.” Put simply, the people who are so concerned now about misinformation are the ones who benefitted most from it politically and ideologically. If that and the gradual escalation of hysteria aren’t huge red flags that can be seen from orbit, I don’t know what to tell you.
Actually, I take that back. I do know what to tell you: be smart about what news you consume and do your own research before taking a stand. Not only will you be able to develop intelligent opinions, you will be able to ferret out the bad actors, and this time I’m not talking about Tara Reid. And don’t buy into the idea misinformation is in the eye of the beholder. It doesn’t matter who initially distributed it or what their intentions were or what greater good they think they’re serving. If something is wrong, it’s wrong. End of story.
And whether it’s the federal government or Big Tech doing it, I’m not a fan of the current crop of self-professed determiners of truth and falsehoods being the ones to dictate reality to us. Some of these folks are confused by the idea there are only two genders, for the love of Pete! Do you want these nozzleheads anywhere near the decision-making process on what is misinformation?
Anyway, I wish the Biden Administration the best of luck in their battle against misinformation. I mean, it couldn’t be any worse than our showing in the War on Drugs, right?