USAToday "Fact Checks" Babylon Bee Article Stating That the Ninth Circuit Had Overruled Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Death

As many have noted -- the media has routinely linked SNL skits for easy link-bait and to push their politics.

I've never seen SNL "fact"-checked, though many people really do believe the shit in their sketches is real. ("I can see Russia from my house!")

No, it's only humor which is critical of the left that gets slapped with the allegation -- an allegation which is intended to be a pretext/predicate for censorship in social media -- that such humorous pieces are "misleading."

And have no doubt: When the usual parties who pressure media companies to censor people brand you as "misleading," they're doing that to establish the predicate, to trip the switch, that will lead to the social media company censoring, blacklisting, or outright banning you.

The predicates for censorship are as follows:

"Misleads" the public about something the left has decided there's only one acceptable opinion on, from race to covid to transgenderism

"Causes harm" -- this is a big one. The minute a transgender says that your opinion makes them want to commit self harm, or somehow increases the danger of violence against transgenders, then your post must be censored.

"Promotes hate" -- You can hate on all the groups the left hates to your heart's content. There is absolutely no penalty, ever, for saying the most despicable racist shit about white people. But mention anything negative about a protected group on the left? Someone on the left will claim it "promotes hate" which then will give FaceBook, Twitter, YouTube, and Google the pretext to censor you.

"Glorifies violence" -- generally this means you can't applaud anyone for punching back against antifa. "Journalists" can praise antifa violence on social media as the same as the Allied armies storming Normandy. That's not "glorifying violence."

But when Steve Inman laughs at antifa being hit by pepperballs fired by riot-control cops, that is "glorifying violence," and is a predicate for banning.

Notice that illegal violence can be praised and that's not glorifying violence but lawful violence, both that deployed by the police in lawful riot-control situations and by law-abiding citizens in practicing self-defense, cannot be praised or even spoken of without condemnation.

That would be "glorifying violence."

A lot of assholes who pretend to be "on the right" or "libertarian" pretend it's "just free speech" when Oliver Darcy goes on a campaign to brand someone with one or more of these key predicates for censorship. They pretend that this is just speech, and not a formal act -- so-called "performative speech," per the original meaning, before social justice warrior wannabe-academics got the meaning wrong and started just using it to mean "playacting."

"Performative speech" is speech like saying "I do" at a wedding's vows, speech that isn't merely speech, but actually accomplishes a change in the world, usually of a legal nature.

Just as "I do" is not just speech, but also a legal act which concludes the rites to establish a legal contract (marriage), so too does campaigning to put the brand of any of these Censorship-Enabling Keywords to someone.

And just as a judge saying "Guilty" is not just mere hot air, but establishes a formal legal category the defendant is now official confirmed to belong to, "journalists" branding someone a "Nazi" make the target an acceptable target for actual violence and other savage conduct.

This isn't just speech -- it's a deliberate action to establish the predicate/pretext for social media censorship, campaigns to make someone unemployable, and to even justify physical attacks on someone.

And, coming soon: Actual criminal charges.

Make no mistake: When Oliver Darcy goes on his next deplatforming campaign, he will attempt to brand someone as belonging to one of these official Prohibited Categories. And having done so, his next action will be calling a social media company, or someone's employer, to demand to know what that person is still being permitted to speak, or why that person is still being allowed to perform gainful work.

That's not just "more speech" -- that is a campaign with the goal in mind, as Ya Boi Zach always says, to make you so destitute due to unemployment and isolated due to coordinated group ostracism that you put a gun in your mouth and blow your brains out.

That is their endgame. That is their touchdown-with-two-point conversion.

They've already hung at least one scalp over the mantel. They intend to collect some more.

posted by Ace at 04:46 PM

| Access Comments