Many people who were quite concerned about Alex Jones getting unpersoned overnight were afraid to speak out against it because they didn’t want to appear as if they supported Jones because of some of the outlandish things he has said over the years, but Big Tech coordinating with each other to ban him was just a test case and the beginning of what was to come.
The editor in chief of The Verge, one of Vox Media’s online properties, started calling for Fox News to be taken off the air next, saying, “I feel like we should be just as comfortable asking Comcast and Verizon and Charter why they continue to offer Fox News on their networks as we are about Facebook and Alex Jones.”96
Immediately after Jones was universally deplatformed PBS did a report about it and in that report complained that he had inspired countless “imitators” who “sell merchandise” and then showed a clip of me from one of my YouTube videos promoting my popular t-shirts.
Apple CEO Tim Cook then said it’s a “sin” for social media platforms not to ban people the Left deems “hateful” and “divisive.” He was given the first “Courage Against Hate Award” from the Jewish ADL, and during his acceptance speech said, “We only have one message for those who seek to push hate, division, and violence: You have no place on our platforms. You have no home here.”97 He went on to say, “and as we showed this year, we won’t give a platform to violent conspiracy theorists on the app store,” referring to banning Alex Jones. “Why? Because it’s the right thing to do,” Cook concluded.98
Even conservative darling Ben Shapiro is technically in violation of their terms of service for “hate speech” by saying transgenderism is a mental illness.99 They could drop the hammer on anyone at anytime for things they’ve said years ago, and even “off platform,” meaning things said in interviews or speeches that didn’t even directly involve social media.
Just voting for Donald Trump is considered “hate speech” by the Silicon Valley titans, and it won’t be long now before they include negative tone of voice, contorted facial expressions or even supposed “code words” and “dog whistles” into their terms of service as things that are not allowed.
For example, if someone is reporting on a new television commercial featuring two gay men who are raising a child they adopted and react with a disgusted look on their face, or a sarcastic, “I’m sure the child will grow up to be totally normal.” That will likely be a violation of their policies. George Orwell even warned about such things in his classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, saying, “to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offense. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.”100
They’ll start claiming that certain words or phrases are “code words” for something else just like they’ve done with the “okay” hand sign, and soon nobody will be safe from being smeared as a “white supremacist,” “Islamophobe,” “homophobe,” “xenophobe,” etc.
The Left are now engaged in a Maoist-style attempted overthrow of our culture and our country, and are systematically purging influential dissenting voices from social media. Get ready, because this is just the beginning. They don’t just want prominent vocal opponents of the liberal agenda silenced; they want our lives destroyed.
Some people believe censorship amplifies extremism by forcing people to descend into the dark corners of the Internet where their ideas aren’t challenged or debunked by onlookers who disagree with them, and so they fester in an echo chamber that fuels and radicalizes them. Censoring someone who’s not calling for violence can also be seen as confirmation that they are being persecuted and cultivate a sense that they feel justified fighting back in a more extreme way. By having their voice taken away for what was perfectly legal speech, they may be compelled to act out in other ways in order to “be heard.”
The liberal Establishment is working tirelessly to take down any independent social media personalities who organically gain sizable followings, and if they’re truly independent, meaning not working for a major media outlet then they are extremely vulnerable because they don’t have a legal department behind them that can push back on their behalf. They have developed a formula to take us down. First, a few unscrupulous liberal online outlets like the Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, and Vox label certain conservatives “Alt-Right” or “right-wing extremists” and then the editors at Wikipedia update those people’s pages to claim they are a white nationalists or neo-Nazis and use those dubious reports as “sources” to solidify the smear.
And since Wikipedia is the go-to place for information for most people and one of the top search results on Google, anyone looking those people up from that point on will be presented with information claiming they’re a racist or far-right extremist. Then, even more outlets repeat the false claims, thus generating even more news articles from mainstream sources parroting the smear which are then used to add even more citations to the Wikipedia articles to reinforce their false narrative.
These liberal outlets know that most people don’t have the vast resources necessary to sue for defamation, and so they are forever branded a “racist.” Then the self-referencing Wikipedia page is used as the justification to demonetize their YouTube channels and suspend their PayPal accounts to cutoff their revenue streams in order to crush them into silence. In our current political climate, especially as the 2020 election is approaching, I wake up every morning wondering if today will be the day that it happens to me.
What’s Next?
How far will this fascism go? Will Visa, MasterCard, or American Express deactivate certain accounts because the banks don’t like what some people say or believe? Will Bank of America and Wells Fargo start closing people’s checking accounts because they don’t like their politics? Some banks are already doing just that. Chase Bank issued a letter to Proud Boys (a pro-Trump men’s fraternity) leader Enrique Tarrio that they would be closing his account and he had until the end of the month to move all his money somewhere else.101 Then Joe Biggs, a former reporter for Infowars who banks at Chase, got the same notification. Others did as well, including Martina Markota who works for the conservative news site Rebel Media.102
After word spread of the shocking move, outraging many veterans groups because Joe Biggs is an Iraq vet, Chase re-activated his account, but wouldn’t give him a reason as to why they had initially banned him.103 PayPal has already banned Alex Jones, Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulous, Lauren Southern, Tommy Robinson, Gavin McInnes, Roosh V, Faith Goldy, as well as Twitter alternative Gab, and YouTube alternative BitChute because they support free speech and won’t ban users for posting things that hurt others feelings.104
A senior software engineer at Google recommended the company delete Donald Trump’s G-mail account, and that of everyone working in his administration. He even suggested they “brick” Donald Trump’s cell phone.105 A “bricked” phone, if you’re not familiar with the term, means one that is completely deactivated and won’t even turn on. So the engineer was literally recommending Google remotely disable Donald Trump’s phone, since they are the owners of the Android operating system which it uses.
We only know about this because the proposal was included in a series of documents obtained as part of a lawsuit filed by former Google employee James Damore who was fired after circulating a memo explaining how the company’s obsession with “diversity” is misguided.