The National Pulse Publishes List of Google's Top 100 Pseudoconservative "Influencers" Who Rush to Defend Google Whenever Google Needs Them to Spin

White knights for Google.

Or is it... Green Knights? There are suspicions that many or even most of these people are "Google grantees" -- people paid grant money by Google.

Before getting to that, let's check in with Robert Spencer, the scholar of Islamism who was subject to a coordinated, all-points deplatforming by just about every tech company for not pedddling the progressive/Islamist/moderate Bushite line on Islam.

Everyone is all upset about Google pole-axing the Federalist and Zero Hedge, and rightly so. Twitter is full of warnings from conservatives that if this silencing of dissenting voices isn't stopped, the freedom of speech will be a dead letter, free society will be a thing of the past, and America will swiftly become a totalitarian state.

I'm sympathetic, but must point out that I've been sounding this warning for years, while establishment conservatives, the ones who are feeling the heat now, paid no heed (and the Left celebrated).

Well, hold on there: Establishment Republicans are not now feeling the heat.

They will be the last the crocodile eats. The crocodile has promised them that, and while the crocodile is a liar, he has no reason to break that promise: the Establishment Republicans are virtually liberals who join the left in almost all important controversies.

The Federalist is as far from "establishment Republican" as you can be (outside of us, of course), and in fact has been one of the only major sites warning, correctly, that the left had no intention of ever stopping its aggressive war on conservatives and traditionlits.

Now, Jonah Goldberg National Review, David French, The Bulwark, etc., have long insisted that claims the left would become more aggressive and violent in their determination to dehumanize conservatives and strip them of all incidents of citiizenship were mere "fear-mongering" by the "paranoid quarters" of the "far right."

But that's not The Federalist. (And, I assume based on general reputation, that's not Zero Hedge either).

I was one of the people sounding the alarm about Robert Spencer.

I agree with his sentiment that if only the establishment pseudoright had once told its very good leftwing friends that this unceasing campaign of aggression would not be tolerated, maybe they would have stopped advancing.

But the establishment pseudoright never did.

Indeed, they justified the left's actions, and the actions of the corporate monopolies actually executing the deplatforming orders.

What has happened now to the Federalist and Zero Hedge is nothing new at all: Google banned me and other foes of jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women several years ago. I was also banned by GoFundMe, PayPal (briefly), Patreon, MasterCard, Indiegogo, Amazon Smile, Amazon's Associates program, and probably others I've forgotten.

As the Corporatists always tell us: Go build your own MasterCard.

Do you know the MasterCard network processes something like 98% of all electronic transfers in the US?

When MasterCard says you cannot be transferred money through them, that means you cannot hve money transferred to you, period.

And the corporate toadies say: This is fine. We're being paid by AEI, Koch, the US Chamber of Commerce and MasterCard itself to say, "Build your own monopoly electronic money transfer business if you don't like it."

When all that happened, there was no reaction from mainstream conservatives who professed to oppose the progressive Leftist silencing of voices that oppose them.

Agreed. But again, I'll go further: their typical reaction, if forced to offer one, was to defend the rights of the poor put-upon billion-dollar monopoly corporation and justify the subtraction of rights from mere human citizens (who happen to be conservative).

That's why I want to deplatform them: They will continue deplatforming us until we get serious and cash these quisling bastards out.

You probably know that the left has come to get law professor William Jacobsen of LegalInsurrection fired from his position at Cornell University for criticizing -- criticizing! -- black lives matter.

I said nothing. I said nothing because I know there is no point. I will bring it up, the 10% of online conservatives who are not bought out by major corporations will say something, we will attempt to get the establishment corporate-funded pseudoconservatives on-side for just one fucking time, and they will all refuse and tell us why it's important that we let the process play out and that William Jacobsen be fired.

It happens every time. Every time.

Every time, the well-conpensated Google "grantees" and AEI "fellows" decide that it's more important to keep their own sinecures than rock the boat by arguing against the left's next attempt at deplatforming.

I just can't go through it any more. I have given up trying to lobby National Review. I have given up trying to shame them.

They cannot be shamed into defending conservatives, because they're on the other side ideologically, and even when they're not, they're paid to let the left-leanibg corporations do as they will.

Paid. Money. To lobby in favor of trillion dollar tech monopolies.

I can't compete with that.

You cannot reason a man out of a position he was never reasoned into in the first place, but rather, paid to take.

If money isn't involved, then cowardice is.

It goes like this:

People are pressuring me to defend Robert Spencer but the left has branded him "controversial." If I defend him, then the left will brand me "controversial," too. And then I might be deplatformed or even just talked about badly on Twitter.

Ah, better to keep my coward's mouth shut in a cowardly way, and keep cashing the checks the establishment pays me to never defend anything controversial... except for the trillion dollar tech monopolies who are my controversial clients.

The idea of putting one's neck out not for personal gain but for principle alone is anathema to our cowardly, pampered Corporate Welfare Queen media.

Just keep your heads down and just keep cashin' those checks, Brave Warriors...

We are now five years into the most unceasing and unchecked mass censorship campaign in American history and the National Review is still debating internally about whether it wants to commit to the First Amendment or continue seeing other speech-controlling regimes.

And on that point, enjoy this list of Google's top 100 pseduoconservative "influencers" who they mass email to argue on their behalf whenever they're caught silencing another actual conservative.

Few of the names will surprise you.

Not that at least one name on this list -- Phil Kerpen -- I don't think should be there. At least, I've never noticed him being a Google lackey.

So the list may not be reliable.

The list (at the bottom of this article) includes key conservative influencers from major think tanks and publications -- some of whom are believed to be beneficiaries of large Google donations.

Featured in the list are high-profile "conservative" organizations which solicit conservatives in the public for donations, all the while promoting Big Tech talking points, and/or taking grants from Big Tech companies which continue to censor conservatives online.

The Heritage Foundation, the CATO Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, R Street, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and more were named. The National Pulse reached out to both Google and Max Pappas before publication, though neither responded to our queries.

Some of these same influencers haven taken to social media in the past 24 hours to defend Google, or draw attention to the Google talking points on the back of the demonization story.

The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) visiting scholar Mark Jamison tweeted ahead of the news an op-ed entitled "Big Tech is biased… and that’s a good thing".

Jamison’s colleague at AEI, James Pethokoukis, appears to have taken his marching orders from Pappas's email, hurriedly publishing an article on the AEI website endorsing Google's actions, and claiming that "the ongoing conservative alarm about anti-conserative [sic] bias by America’s tech titans continues to fail that test [of reality]".

In fact, Big Tech's bias against conservatives is well documented.

Julian Sanchez -- a CATO and Reason magazine contributor -- stated "only conservative sites whine publicly about it, because other sites aren't nursing a martyr complex."

Et cetera.

A full list of Google lobbyist Max Pappas's "go to" influencers appears below. The National Pulse asked both Google and Pappas if the list represents grantees of Google, but neither responded after almost a full day...

Google's "grantees" are, of course, the recipients of Google's grants.

Let me make this clear: Almost all of the people who argue in favor of censorship by trillion dollar tech monopolies claim to be... "Libertarians."

Or, "Conservatarians"

Libertarians against liberty.

I don't know how you square that circle, but I betcha a whole lot of money would help.

Not everyone on this list is a Google shill, and undoubtedly, many are not being paid by Google.

But it's a good list to start from -- demanding that these alleged "independent analysts and commentators" perform basic journalistic disclosure and tell us if they are being paid by Google at the same time they're shilling for Google.

posted by Ace at 06:50 PM

| Access Comments