Imagine someone asks you for a sure way to determine fact from fiction, veracity from deceit, whether someone was being truthful or lying.
This from wndnewscenter.org.
The above is a question that may be asked by millions. How is one supposed to figure out which position is right, and which one may not only be wrong, but a deliberate lie?
In addition to obvious suggestions—such as finding individuals and institutions whom you trust, studying both sides of issues, learning as much as possible and using common sense—the single most important indicator of who is more likely to be lying:
The party that calls for censorship is lying.
Columnist Dennis Prager wrote:
With rare exceptions, the party that calls for censorship is lying. People who tell the truth can deal with dissent and different opinions. In fact, truth-tellers welcome debate. If this theory is correct—and I cannot imagine a valid argument against it—it means that in virtually every instance of a left-right difference, the left is lying.
That metric—that the party calling for censorship is lying—is worthy of serious examination.
Presently, there is a worldwide effort to clamp down on so-called “misinformation” or “disinformation.”
Authorities (state, national, international) are coming down hard on anyone who voices dissenting opinions or expresses legitimate concerns about a wide variety of issues: COVID vaccines, transgender surgeries for minors, “pride” indoctrination in schools, climate change, illegal immigration, “science,” the Internet of Things, Jan. 6 rally, election theft, digital currency, green energy, the efficacy of electric vehicles, social credit systems, DEI, ESG, abortion … the list goes on and on.
With every one of these issues, there are major attempts to ram through laws, “cancel” dissenters, shout down speakers, de-bank conservatives, fail students who question the narrative and otherwise force people to …if not support, then to at least shut up about the issue. Horrible things happen to those who don’t comply.
Jason Cohen wrote on this topic:
A United Nations (U.N.) policy proposal that outlines how to combat online ‘mis- and disinformation and hate speech,’ including through demonetization, is informed by work from groups that actively push to censor conservative speech online.
The policy brief, titled ‘Information Integrity on Digital Platforms,’ is intended to help develop an online ‘code of conduct’ that the U.N. plans to unveil during its Summit of the Future in 2024, calls for demonetization and suppressing the spread of what it considers ‘mis- and disinformation and hate speech.’
As examples of effective strategies, the policy proposal routinely cites organizations that have explicitly worked to censor conservatives or have advocated for the censoring of conservative viewpoints.
This silencing of opposition smacks of desperation. What are they hiding? What are they afraid of?
Leftists love to point out such wrongs as the medieval church’s treatment of Galileo and other early scientists who challenged the established orthodoxy. Yet how does this differ from the modern-day silencing by the left of anyone who questions the orthodoxy of climate change, including anything critical of green energy efforts?
An organization called Global Witness stated:
The reality of the climate crisis is an undeniable truth.
And recommended:
Facebook and all social media companies produce … plans to meaningfully reduce the spread of climate disinformation on their platforms.
And how about the medical establishment’s merciless suppression of the proven efficacy of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as COVID treatments?
Prager observed:
Based on the rule that those who censor are almost always lying, we must come to the frightening conclusion that the American medical establishment has been lying to us.
If dissent is allowed, the left loses its power.
The Media Research Center documented how the Obiden Regime is using our tax dollars to actively target political opponents and dissenters, lumping them under the convenient category of “domestic terrorists.”
We all know where that leads. History is riddled with despots, both ancient and modern, who sought to stay in power by demonizing the opposition.
Can a leftist explain how censorship today is different.
In this, the mainstream media are absolutely complicit.
What typically precedes totalitarian regimes is media compliance.
– First they heat up the situation,
– Then they increase the fear,
– Next they increase the hate (as a solution to fear),
– People become pitted against each other and manipulated into hating each other until the sides are so diametrically opposed that there can be no compromise.
The situation is then ripe for takeover and/or civil war.
Daisy Luther wrote:
What we’re seeing is not unique in and of itself.
What’s different about it is that it’s happening in the United States of America, a country that was founded based on the right to disagree with the government.
That right is enshrined in our founding document, and yet it is being trampled with enthusiastic aplomb by the aforementioned government.
An adroit commenter noted:
If we are all in danger because of them, then guess who the real terrorists are?
It was David Horowitz who may have said it best:
Inside every progressive is a totalitarian screaming to get out.
