Connect with us

Culture and Religion

What are the options in dealing with Leftist censorship of social media?



What are the options in dealing with Leftist censorship of social media

Aside from asserting they are a publisher and not a platform, what other steps can we take?

The metaphor of the frog in the pan of water is more than appropriate here. This week the burner was turned on high but not many noticed outside those who have been concerned about these developments. What began in earnest over a year ago with a multilevel attack on the right of self-defence has opened up to attempts by Socialist-Left in the suppression of free-speech. All of this from people who still like to pretend that they are ‘Liberal’. The question now is to develop plans to meet this threat on a number of different levels.

We are to be taken care of and controlled

There was a very prescient scene in an episode the original Star Trek series entitled ‘I, Mudd’. The crew had been kidnapped to a planet of androids. At a very dramatic point in the plot, the leader of the androids states that they will control humans by serving them.

SPOCK: I’m curious, Norman. Just how do you intend to stop them?
NORMAN: We shall serve them. Their kind will be eager to accept our service. Soon they will become completely dependent upon us.
ALICE 99: Their aggressive and acquisitive instincts will be under our control.

KIRK: The whole galaxy controlled by your kind?
NORMAN: Yes, Captain. And we shall serve them and you will be happy, and controlled.

[Our emphasis]

In essence, this is what the tech giants have brought us to. They have made social media ubiquitous to the point that everyone walks around staring at their telephones or gets their news from Facebook, Google, Twitter and YouTube. They have ‘served’ us to keep us under control.

It had to have been more than a coincidence that this threat from Socialist-Left became clear on the 75th anniversary of D-Day. That was a situation that clearly pitted Good Versus Pure Evil as Josh Hammer termed it over on the Daily Wire.

Some may say that was overly hyperbolic, but consider the threat we face. Google can alter it’s search results to favour the Socialist-Left by a few points. Facebook and Twitter can arbitrarily decide that the expression of the support of Liberty is somehow ‘racist’ or oppresses ‘marginalized communities’ and ban Conservatives for their Pro-Liberty viewpoint. YouTube can ban these expressions because they have harmed the broader community or whatever vague boilerplate they happened to be using at the time.

The Totalitarian Ten Percent

The Hidden tribes study highlighted the face that it’s really only a small portion of the population that verges into the insanity of the Far-Left. That study showed that those of that mentality comprise only 8% of the country. It was also indicated that only a small percentage have concerns over ‘Political correctness’ a figure that is trending downward.

These are the folks of the Far-Left imbued with the tyrannical ideals of collectivism. Granted they are only around 8%, we rounded up for the sake of alliteration. They are a small but extremely vocal minority that their incessant chatter and bleating drowning out the expressions of others of the rational majority. The fact is, most people have work to do or other things than to worry about than whether Steven Crowder insulted certain groups of socialists that worship the image of a mass murderer.

These are the folks with the media megaphone that try to tell the rest of the country what they should be concerned about on a daily basis, such as: Packing the Supreme Court, Abolishing the electoral college, Reparations and of course Late term abortion. Never mind that the rational majority has more important priorities such as limiting and already over-bloated government or merely getting through the day.

This has always been the case with the Socialist-Left. The self styled ‘Bolsheviks’ [Translated as ‘One of the Majority’] were a wing of the Russian Social-Democratic Workers’ Party that labels their opponents as the ‘Mensheviks’ [Translated as ‘Those of the Minority’]. The nation’s Socialist-Left has a mindset that they are the moral and intellectual elite because they tell themselves they are the moral and intellectual elite. AOC excused being factually wrong in asserting something about being morally correct. They don’t have to care if they have to use deception or morally questionable tactics since they are trying to save the planet or something.

First, they came for the gun owners

We’ve talked about this before, but it should be pointed out that this is really phase two in the Left’s assault on Liberty. Recall that it was a little more than a year ago that the liberty grabber Left dropped finally drop kicked the mask into the next century, beginning a full on assault against the basic human right of self-preservation.

One finds it hard to believe this was a spontaneous movement inspired by a particular tragedy. These have taken place over the years without a similar result. The fact that it occurred at the same time that the Left also finally admitting the obvious truth of being socialists [Check the OED definition of Left] wasn’t a coincidence.

The fact is the collectivist faith of socialism requires the government to have a monopoly on the use of force. It also requires a monopoly on speech, which brings us to the main part of the discussion.

What are our options in dealing with Leftist censorship of social media?

What do we do with a situation where a small minority controls the technology and their media echo chamber that asserts they are somehow the majority and even if they aren’t their ‘political correctness’ imbues them with the ‘right’ to rule over everyone else?

Their media echo chamber is rapidly shrinking with alternative voices and sources such as this site replacing their propaganda machinery. They cannot abide this loss of control, one of the last lifelines in holding onto their last vestiges of power. Their last strongholds are corporate entities steeped in the Kool-Aid of collectivism. It is at this point it time that we all must consider our options in meeting this threat.

A multi-level response

First, let’s take a page from the enemies of Liberty on the Left in how they went after the right of self-defence in phase I of their assault on freedom. In going after a fundamental human and civil right, they took at multi pronged approach: Demonetising the NRA a top defender of Liberty whilst also attacking our rights on a Federal, state and local level. This means meeting this threat to Liberty from the Left in the same manner.

The Local level means transitioning over to other media sources as well as alternatives to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google. These are a few examples:

Minds instead of Facebook

Parler instead of Twitter

Bit Chut or Full30 instead of YouTube.

Duck Duck Go or Start page instead of google

It means we need to start organizing, such as joining the American Conservative Movement.

Options on the Federal level: Platform or Publisher?

This is the primary question in this whole situation, for reference, this is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act: 47 U.S. Code § 230. Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material

Provides for the protection of platforms as opposed to publishers:

(c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

The corporate behemoths are taking advantage of the situation in that they want to be treated as ‘platforms’ while the acting as publishers. A decision has to be made, if they are merely platforms, they aren’t supposed to be censoring content no matter what kind of vague guidelines they create.

If they are publishers, legal actions can be taken against them. Clearly the situation in which they enjoy the best of both worlds has to stop.

Antitrust actions or breaking them up

While the Libertarian mindset chafes at this kind of option, there is something about monopolistic practices that are equally abhorrent. This type of option may be needed if the Platform or Publisher question is not resolved or doesn’t result in an optimal outcome.

Monopolies tend to discourage innovation and competition, something one has to consider in contemplating this course of action.

Finally, We do not want to have the government ‘regulate’ them

Most likely the ancient Chinese strategist Sun Tzu never felt that he had to write down obvious truths of war such as not shooting yourself with Bow or doing what the enemy wants you to do. However, we are at a point where there are those who want to do this. The social media behemoths claim they want to be regulated, why is this the case?

Why are the corporate behemoths are clamouring to be regulated? As many have stated, this should be easy to understand since they have a number of reasons for this. One, most likely they would be in on writing the regulations to their advantage. Two, they would have the means to deal with the red tape and regulatory burden while upstart concerns would not, yielding them with a continued monopoly for years to come.

No, we don’t want the wolf regulating the hen-house and we don’t Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google regulating themselves and everyone else.

Make no mistake, these are difficult options

All of this brushes up against one’s libertarian sensibilities, but the publisher or platform question needs to be clarified. There is the question of monopolies not being healthy for Liberty and of course regulation of these behemoths should be off the table.

Consider one more point in all of this. These private entities are using ostensibly public infrastructure, created with taxpayers’ dollars. As well as all of this being akin to a public square of sorts, albeit with a private overlay. In essence, these entities brought this on themselves, pushing out competitors while enjoying special privileges in the Law. If the Platform or Publisher legal question isn’t resolved other considerations will have to be made.

The Takeaway

It has been said that the founding documents aren’t a suicide pact. Letting these essentially corporate monopolies run roughshod over our Liberty will mean an end to freedom. That dreadful result is not desirous of the Conservative or Libertarian mindset, no matter how principled the path leading up to it.

These are just some ideas and opinions on what we can do moving forward. It was not meant to be all-inclusive, rather is meant to ‘start a conversation’ on the Left’s incessant attacks on Liberty. These items may not be all we can do, but we must do something. It’s not hyperbole to say our freedom depends on it.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement



Culture and Religion

Democrats turn Mexican Independence Day celebration in Chicago into political statement against Trump



Democrats turn Mexican Independence Day celebration in Chicago into political statement against Trum

The long-standing tradition of cruising in Chicago streets for Mexican Independence Day had a double meaning this year as hundreds of revelers circled Trump Tower in Chicago waving Mexican flags and honking in celebration and protest.

The change in venue from the normal “cruising” in Hispanic neighborhoods was prompted by law enforcement’s decision to block off roads normally used for the occasion. The disruptive and sometimes violent celebrations were relocated after 10th district police blocked 26th St. in the Mexican neighborhood of Little Village.

The motivation behind the blocked streets in Hispanic neighborhoods was clear: To move the celebration downtown where it could become a protest. We know this because the official police statement declared their reasoning was for cleanup following a parade… but there was no parade scheduled for the streets in question. This was clearly a political move orchestrated by leftists in the Mayor’s office.

Cars and trucks with Mexican flags have been cruising Hispanic neighborhoods for Mexican Independence Day since the mid-80s. It wasn’t until far-left Mayor Lori Lightfoot sought to weaponize and politicize the celebration that the venue was changed to the streets right in front of Trump Tower.

Expression of cultural pride is one thing. Waving Mexican flags defiantly at Trump Tower has turned the celebration of Mexican Independence Day into a political statement, just as Democrats want it to be.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

The non-existent Evangelical Dark Web



The non-existent Evangelical Dark Web

There’s lot of talk about there being an Evangelical Dark Web. This is supposedly the “Christian” version of the Intellectual Dark Web, which comprises of secular thought leaders like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Joe Rogan, Dave Rubin, The Weinstein brothers, Sam Harris and several others. They all come from different backgrounds, have different political ideologies and disagree on most issues. Their unifying factor, however, is that they believe in freedom of speech and want to engage in open and honest conversation about their differences.

What the IDW does that’s different than virtually anyone else is that they embrace the discussions. They are okay with disagreement. They enjoy the intellectual exercise of talking though philosophical differences of opinion. They’ll engage honestly with those that they disagree with. Podcasts like The Joe Rogan Experience, The Rubin Report and Ben Shapiro’s Sunday Special all exemplify exactly that: Just talk to people.

When I launched my podcast, Conversations with Jeff, this was my inspiration. I thoroughly enjoy Dave Rubin and Joe Rogan, especially, because they are curious, will talk to anybody and they enjoy the intellectual exercise of talking things out in a long-form conversation. You can look through my guest list for CWJ, and you’ll see a wide range of people who I’ve had on. I’m a Cessationist Calvinist, theologically. However, I’ve hardly had any Calvinists on my show… Steve Camp is the only one that comes to mind. I’ve had on Brannon Howse and Andy Woods who are both strongly opposed to Calvinism. I’ve had on charismatics like Dr Michael Brown, Stephen Black and Ken Peters. I’ve even had on a non-Christian like Trevor Loudon. I enjoy the process of just talking to people. This is what the IDW is all about.

Earlier this year, I began talking to a small group of people about launching our own version of the IDW, even naming it the Evangelical Dark Web. Some feelers were put out, and then all of a sudden a big polemics blog started running with the terminology. Which is fine by me… I care more about fixing things than getting credit for anything or any form of self-promotion.
However, what ended up happening is that the EDW turned out to be nothing like the IDW. The group that identifies as the EDW are just a bunch of people who agree with each other. There’s no engaging in differing opinions. There’s no open dialogue. It’s literally a bunch of anti-SJWs who’ve hijacked the name Evangelical Dark Web and redefined it into something that bears NO resemblance of the Intellectual Dark Web. Sure, there may be some differing theology, but that’s ignored and not dealt with. They don’t want to talk about they disagreements, they only want to talk about what they agree on.

You see, these guys aren’t engaging with those they disagree with. They’re only talking trash about people with differing opinions… and sometimes they’re just talking trash about people they don’t consider to be in their little group, even if they agree on virtually everything! Sounds more like a clique to me.

Let me share some anecdotal evidence for you.

First, take a look at the EDW’s podcasts. Who are they talking to? People that agree with them on virtually everything. You’ll be hard-pressed to find a podcast with any of these guys that engages in a non-hostile way with anyone they disagree with.

Second, when I had Dr Michael Brown on CWJ, I strongly opposed his charismatic beliefs throughout the entire podcast. However, it wasn’t hostile and we engaged with each other’s arguments. I then got a text message from a guy who runs one of the supposed EDW podcast networks that said, “Your support of Dr Brown is the death of any claim of discernment on your platform.” I never said that I support him. I only had him on my podcast, and we spent an hour of the show going back and forth on our disagreements! THAT is the DEFINITION of the EDW/IDW mentality. Engage with each other’s arguments! The simple fact of discussion does not mean endorsement. However, this is the problem with those that claim to be a part of the EDW. They don’t want to engage with those they disagree with. They’ve turned the EDW into something that’s the complete opposite of what it’s supposed to be.

And third, I’ve invited so many people on my show Conversations with Jeff. The funny thing is, the majority of the men that would be considered a part of the EDW (or in that theological tribe) have turned me down or sometimes even put unrealistic conditions on them coming on my show.

Here are a few examples of some of the responses I’ve received from these supposed EDWers:

“As long as you are friends with *******, Jeff, I cannot come onto your program.”

“Being on your broadcast would be contingent upon you taking down those negative articles you have about me.“

After publicly criticizing me for not having anyone from his “camp” on my podcast that I’ve publicly disagreed with, I invited this next person on my show. He responded with:

“So no, I cannot possibly, in good conscience betray those good men by participating in a debate/discussion/podcast hosted by a person whose sole reputation is of a trollish controversialist known entirely for sowing discord among brethren and blasting fire upon their Gospel efforts.”

And the examples go on and on. This is not how things are supposed to be in a supposed EDW.

So here’s the deal, there is no such thing as the Evangelical Dark Web. People can claim to be a part of it, but it’s non-existent. The supposed EDW is nothing more than a theological tribe that continually preaches to the choir and doesn’t allow their positions to be critiqued. They don’t welcome disagreement, they avoid it all cost… unless it’s them disagreeing with someone else.

So where do we go from here? Let’s create an ACTUAL Evangelical Dark Web. One which engages with each other, even if we disagree. Understand that talking to someone does not equate an endorsement. Be honest. Stop playing these behind the scenes games of manipulation. Be a part of the conversation, instead of just yelling at each other from a crowd of a like-minded individuals.

So let me take the lead on this one… My podcast Conversations with Jeff is open to anyone who is a part of the greater conversation in evangelicalism. Whether we agree or disagree, I’d be happy to have you on. Whether we are friends or on different teams, I’d be happy to engage with your positions. And on the flip side, if you’d like to have me on your podcast, I’d be happy to come on and discuss anything you’d like. You can ask me whatever you want. This is how the EDW is supposed to go. So I can only hold myself to that standard. I hope the rest of you follow suit.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

The Evangelical Dark Web



The Evangelical Dark Web

The battle for the soul of the evangelical church in the United States spans across the remaining denominations that have not openly fallen into apostasy. The United Methodist Church was saved by the African delegations from rejecting biblical ministry standards. The Southern Baptist Convention struggles to reject critical race theory. Many denominations have split over the encroachment of liberal or progressive theology such as the PCA. This constant fight to maintain the doctrine of the church from false teachers is never ending, dating back to the divinely inspired writings of Paul. The Evangelical Dark Web is the latest decentralized movement in the fight against false teachers infiltrating the church.

As I enter the fray to defend the church, it is important to recognize that, in defending the church from the false doctrines and heretics, the stakes are eternal. We live in a Romans 1 era.

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

The country’s descent into decadence, it’s rejection of truth, is evident in seemingly every area, and the church is unimmune. The attack on the church is one that seeks to pacify the gospel with worldly ideas. I identify three false gospels, in which, the Evangelical Dark Web combats that seek to subvert Christianity. Note: these do not include cults that identify as Christian.

The Prosperity Gospel

The word of faith heresy reduces the God of the universe to a vending machine with a “name it and claim it” philosophy. It conforms the gospel to a self-help ritual so that the practitioners can get rich and stay healthy. In short, the Prosperity Gospel is about using God to achieve worldly desires.

The Social Justice Gospel

The Social Justice Gospel can be briefly summarized as antinomianism combined with postmodernism. This heresy reduces God by denying the Word. Sanctification is discouraged. Its Jesus is a brown skinned Palestinian. Its evangelism is affirming the world. Its sacrament is abortion. Its charity is entitlement programs. Belief in the Resurrection is optional, and Muslims worship the same god. The Social Justice Gospel is the troll to the Bride of Christ. It’s how the world wants Christianity to be, if people are to identify as Christian and those who practice the Social Justice Gospel always feel the need to call out Christians who hold to orthodox doctrine.

This doctrine is a parasite. Churches who partake in the parasite dwindle, and so the parasite must find a new church to infiltrate, for the Social Justice Gospel cannot survive in the world it wants to create.

The Popularity Gospel

The Popularity Gospel is most difficult to explain. It reduces Jesus to the popular kid in high school. It’s hard to describe a heresy that creates an idol out of the living God, but this phenomenon is prophesied in scripture:

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, 4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 NASB

The Popularity Gospel is an artificial image of Jesus that appeals to the masses. It’s often identifiable in those who employ a worldly definition of love when talking about a savior whose kingdom is not of this world. God is all “love” and no wrath. Its favorite verses poll extremely well. We aren’t being saved from sin; we are trusting in Jesus to protect, lead, and bless us. You are good. Jesus makes you better. This diluted gospel accepts worldly premises on goodness, judgment, love, and Christianity as a whole. Its church organizations are mass growth marketing mechanisms. Its sermons are elementary. Its commission is to baptize believers, nevermind discipleship. Discipleship requires critically thinking. With the Popularity Gospel, one just has to sit back, enjoy the entertainment, ambiance, and childcare.

Unlike the Social Justice Gospel, the Popularity Gospel is self-sustaining because marketing works, and the masses enjoy being entertained. What I described was the megachurch motif.

The Movement

A number of Christians are waking up to the spiritual battle that is going on within the Church, realizing, how many leaders are perpetuating or capitulating to the corrupting forces of the three aforementioned heresies. Just as academia in this country has largely been corrupted, our seminaries, likewise, are under attack. If the institutions that train the pastorate in this country fail, churches will struggle to find pastors worthy of the calling.

In the last few years, church leaders have responded with faith statements such as the Nashville Statement and the Statement on Social Justice and the Gospel to redress such pressing issues. But these faith statements, while a commendable effort, are insufficient in rooting out false teachers by themselves. For the Bible says:

10 As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. Titus 3:10-11 ESV

Christianity needs a united front against such heresies mentioned above as they would, in modern times, be united against the teachings of Arian. Orthodoxy must be enforced even if it means powerful figures in Big Eva get cast out in the process.

In championing the disparaging title Brian Auten and Jake Meador over at Mere Orthodoxy, this platform seeks to be theologically sound, historically literate, and culturally relevant, as called in facing the most pressing threat Christianity is facing in America today.

If you are feeling called to learn more about this important battle, join the Evangelical Dark Web

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading