World Economic Forum throws its hat in the censorship ring
Inbal Goldberger, in a piece published to the World Economic Forum website two days ago, detailed a "solution" to online hazards. Among the obvious perversions found on the internet, Goldberger asserted that "disinformation" and "hate speech" fall under the umbrella of online abuse. However, terms like "disinformation" and "hate speech" are specious language, and as we are all painfully aware, the labels are interchangeable with "truth."
Regarding the Big Tech social media giants, empirical evidence on the efficacy or lethality of the COVID shot is likely to earn a disinformation tag, while "misgendering" or "deadnaming" a dysphoric and mentally unstable adult would be hate speech — despite the fact that nothing untrue or hateful would have been said. Campaigns against "disinformation" and "hate speech" are simply ones of censorship, directed at very particular demographics: political conservatives and those who oppose the agenda of the Great Reset perversity.
And now Klaus Schwab's group is getting in on the censorship game, continuing to repeat polarizing propaganda. Goldberger, a cyber-security expert, said:
The solution, however, is not as simple as hiring another roomful of content moderations or building yet another block list. Without a profound familiarity with different types of abuse, an understanding of hate group verbiage, fluency in terrorist languages and nuanced comprehension of disinformation campaigns, trust and safety teams can only scratch the surface.
"Hate group" verbiage and fluency in terrorist languages? Well, who determines what a "hate group" or "terrorist" is? Organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center?
Monday marks the ten-year anniversary of an attack carried out by an actual terrorist, one emboldened by rhetoric like that of the SPLC and Goldberger. On August 15, 2012, an armed Virginia man using a "hate map" published by the SPLC entered the offices of the conservative Christian policy group and think-tank the Family Research Council, looking to kill as many staff members as possible. Thankfully, an unarmed security guard thwarted the attack. The perpetrator was quoted as saying, "I don't like these people, and I don't like what they stand for." In the wake, the SPLC remained obstinate. Executive vice president Lt. Gen. (ret.) Jerry Boykin said:
Nothing speaks to the SPLC's inhumanity as much as its behavior after the shooting at FRC. Rather than remove the map used by a terrorist to attempt to kill dozens of people, the SPLC doubled down and even expanded its list to include other non-violent conservative, Christian and parent organizations who opposed the SPLC's political agenda[.]
The attitudes of groups like the WEF and SPLC are clear: opponents of global tyranny and radical Marxism are terroristic, not those who commit violence in the name of political and cultural leftism.
Image: Gerd Altmann from Pixabay, Pixabay License, free for commercial use, no attribution required