Facebook Censorship Closes Off Information Ignored By Gatekeeper Media
Part of my morning routine involves seeing what that cat dragged in, stuff like checking emails, moderating comments to my blog and the like. The other morning, instead of my bookmark taking me directly to my Facebook page, I was required to log in.
I’ve read about accounts being hijacked. Had someone cracked the password? Would I need to create a new one, and would there be cleanup to perform, and “friends” to explain myself to?
It’s worse than that. And it reflects a disturbing and growing proclivity of the social media gatekeepers: Censorship of information that is not in goosestep with their Opposite Day “progressive” agenda.
A post had been removed from the Oath Keepers’ Facebook page because of a “community standards” violation.
And what was the offense against “community standards”? A poster that makes a true (and importantly, demonstrable) statement about the nexus between citizen disarmament and genocide, one painstakingly documented over the years by Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and further corroborated by professor Stephen P. Halbrook in his landmark “Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and ‘Enemies of the State.’”
‘Why gun control?” the poster, with a photo of Nazi soldiers forcing Holocaust victims onto trains bound for concentration camps asks. “Because armed people will not willingly load themselves into railroad boxcars.”
That’s a true statement. If the faceless Facebook censor has documentation to prove otherwise, that has not been included to justify such a heavy-handed rejection of expression that violates none of the posted “community standards”:
Our mission is to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected. Every day, people come to Facebook to share their stories, see the world through the eyes of others and connect with friends and causes. The conversations that happen on Facebook reflect the diversity of a community of more than one billion people.
We want people to feel safe when using Facebook. For that reason, we’ve developed a set of Community Standards, outlined below. These policies will help you understand what type of sharing is allowed on Facebook, and what type of content may be reported to us and removed. Because of the diversity of our global community, please keep in mind that something that may be disagreeable or disturbing to you may not violate our Community Standards.
Despite that hollow promise, evidently some knicker-wadded MILM had a case of the vapors over the boxcar graphic, and that was enough for a Facebureaucrat to presume to be judge, jury and executioner without even warning of a trial so that the accuser could be faced and a defense could be presented.
“Your page has been unpublished. Oath Keepers has been unpublished for repeatedly posting things that don’t comply with the Facebook terms,” a follow-up scolding warned, meaning other posts have also earned totalitarianist wrath, and if we keep it up we’ll become an “unpage.”
So what’s the big deal? Facebook is a private entity? If we don’t like it we don’t have to use it, right?
It’s a bit more impactful than that. With a billion users, it’s the biggest dog in global social media, and Facebook honcho Mark Zuckerberg is doing what he can to open a huge new market by kowtowing to China’s propaganda chief on censorship and surveillance, all under the auspices of a “global internet governance system.” To prove his solidarity with the concept, Zuckerberg has instituted a Chinese-style snitch program on Facebook, where indignant antis can accuse and turn in users for suspicion of arranging private gun sales, and now, evidently, for shutting down information they don’t want people to see.
That snitching, invited by collectivist “community standards,” appears to be what got the Oath Keepers “boxcar” post noticed, turned in and removed. And in the mean time, the gun-grabbers, with talking points dispatched from the Obama administration flowing down to the useful idiot level, continue to deploy “weaponized” social media posts attacking and lying about those who believe in the right to keep and bear arms, a concept evidently too “diverse” to be tolerated. Meanwhile, major media purveyors of citizen disarmament agitprop like The New York Daily News are free to commit blood libel against those resisting additional Intolerable Acts, and “community standards” are fine with that.
Here’s the major issue – the media is something like 90% Democrat and the remainder is basically “independent” or Republican squishes, with a very small sliver representing Constitutionalists. If gun owners want the truth to get out, one of the few tools available to us has been social media. If that’s closed off to us, if truthful and powerful, albeit visceral posts are summarily removed along with threats of further banishment reprisals, the establishment media will once more claim its place as information gatekeeper. Any thought falling outside of the approved dogma will be relegated to limited niche fringes with little chance of further dissemination.
What we can do about it remains to be seen. The easy thing to do is to just avoid social media altogether. If it’s used as social media, I agree. There are too many important information sharing priorities to waste sending stupid pictures and videos or playing mindless games, all the while giving up privacy and telling people who aren’t really your “friends” more than anyone outside a close circle has a need or desire to know. But if you have information that needs to be shared that will not get a fair shake let alone a mention in the media, by not using available tools to spread the word, you’re ceding a capability to the enemy. And yes, that’s exactly what those who would disarm us are.
I just found out about Gun District, an alternative to Facebook created for gun owners. I really don’t know anything about it aside from taking a quick look-see, so I’ll make a point of learning more by signing up and seeing if it provides a useful platform. In the mean time, if you are on social media, be aware that gun rights advocates are subject to snitch-initiated censorship, right down to having the Unicode consortium, including industry giants like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, IBM, Apple and others, going so far in their hostility as to exclude rifle and handgun “emojis.”
The inclination to sneer all this off by those who understand the heavy lifting ultimately happens in meatspace is understandable, but let’s not be short-sighted. Communications and intelligence are vital. And we’re being cut off by a media/sociual media consortium that, were it any other industry not vital to complete control, would likely be subjected to “progressive” anti-trust laws for violations.
UPDATE: I’m giving Gun District a try. I invite you to join me. And along the lines of snitch-based censorship, after this article was published, I found access to my blog under attack with a “report” that has caused Microsoft to warn people not to visit it.
NOTE FROM STEWART RHODES:
Hats off to David for an excellent piece. As he said, communications and intelligence are vital, and online social media is the “electronic town hall and town park” of our modern world. We cannot leave the field to the enemy, no matter what they do to try to shut us down, and no matter how frustrating it can be. The Facebook statement “We want people to feel safe when using Facebook. For that reason, we’ve developed a set of Community Standards, outlined below” reminds me of the radical left’s Orwellian attempts to shut down free speech on college campuses in the name of preserving a “safe space” which means a space where only their speech is safe. Just as we cannot leave the college campuses in their hands unchallenged, we cannot leave Facebook, twitter, YouTube, etc in their hands unchallenged – which is exactly what they want us to do. Never do what your enemy wants.