“There can be no democracy, no accountability, when people only have controlled explanations that serve the ruling agendas.” — Paul Craig Roberts
The Post-Truth Era
In 2016, the Brexiteers suddenly won the Brexit referendum.
In 2017, Donald Trump suddenly became the president of the United States.
It was the end of the world.
Suddenly, terms like “the post-truth era” became popular. Wikipedia, “Post-truth”:
The term garnered widespread popularity, in the form of “post-truth politics”, in the period around the 2016 United States presidential election and the Brexit referendum. It was named Word of the Year in 2016 by the Oxford Dictionary where it is defined as “Relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief”.
At the universities, countless seminars, conferences, etc, were organized on the topics “Post-truth”. Even some philosophy conferences were discussing “The Post-Truth Era”. All newspapers were writing about it.
These scientists and philosophers did not mention that some scientific investigations had been suppressed and some scientific truths had been banned or ignored already a long ago. (See, for example, the discussion “Should Scientists Study Race and IQ?” in Nature, v 457, February 12, 2009: “YES” and “NO”.) That was my opinion in my presentation “The Post-Lies Era” (2017). I concluded:
“To those, who regard utilitarian justifications of suppressing science as valid, I suggest reconsidering our attitudes concerning the history of science. For example, perhaps the theories presented by Giordano Bruno and Galileo Galilei were insulting to religious people, there was a danger of religious unrest, etc.
In sum: why not to consider a utilitarian justification of the inquisition, if our present practices are correct. Perhaps, the execution of Giordano Bruno was a political correctness.”
These scientists and philosophers also ignored the fact that science corruption was enormous and had been convincingly shown already before 2017. Just one example: “Science Is Often Flawed” (2015).
European politicians and mainstream media never mentioned the arguments of the Brexiteers. This information was totally suppressed. One of Brexiteers’ main arguments was that the European Commission was an undemocratic, unelected institution not responsible for the consequences of one’s decisions. Hundreds of millions of people in Europe have never heard about it.
It was also never mentioned that in the U. S. some 3 or 5 companies (or perhaps even 3 or 5 people) were owning 90% of the establishment media. And the whole mainstream media was against Trump. If anything at all, there is one thing concerning which Trump was absolutely right, and he repeated it every day:
Thus, it is not so clear when the “Post-truth era” began and who’s responsible for it. It rather seems that the propaganda of the “post-truth era” is itself an essential part of that era, a cause or implementing it.
Censorship Is Coming
Certain scientific ideas, schools, investigations and results have been suppressed or censored already a long ago. It has been total: scientific funding, journals, encyclopedias (including Wikipedia), popular science, and mainstream media — the whole infrastructure of science.
As noted above, the investigations on race and IQ have been suppressed a long ago (see Eintalu 2017 or my essay “The Post-Lies Era” on Medium).
Alternative medicine has been suppressed a long ago. It has been belittled and expelled from the Wikipedia (see, eg, Gale & Null 2018). Even the Chinese traditional medicine has been despised, despite one representative of it — Tu Youyou — has earned the Nobel Prize in Medicine (see, eg, Gale & Null 2020 or Liu, W & Liu, Y 2016) for discovering the antimalarial drug.
“Climate Sceptics” have been suppressed a long ago.
There is a whole new discipline investigating what research directions are censored in Wikipedia (see, eg, “Wikipedia”).
Concerning the vaccines, a lot of negative information has been suppressed. Did you know that Gates Foundation was sued in India because of human rights violations during human experiments with new vaccines? Read, eg, this: “Accountability of International NGO-s 2017”. Western mainstream media is silent.
But it was not enough.
2019–2020 are the years of increasing censorship in the Western world. The new era has begun — the Dark Era. And it concerns science as well.
In the article “Internet Speech Will Never Go Back to Normal” (2020), the United States scholars even openly described how the censorship actually worked in the U. S. and they suggested that the U. S. should learn from authoritarian China and to make the censorship even stricter:
“In the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of the network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong. Significant monitoring and speech control are inevitable components of a mature and flourishing internet, and governments must play a large role in these practices to ensure that the internet is compatible with a society’s norms and values.”
One may guess that it is because of the coronavirus pandemic. People’s lives are at danger, and spreading false information should be hindered.
However, what is this?
Larry Romanoff’s article “China’s Coronavirus: A Shocking Update. Did the Virus Originate in the US?” Global Research (2020), has been labelled as “false information” by Facebook’s “independent fact-checkers”. And I am not sure, but it seems that this article has been altogether blocked on the internet.
It is absurd and contrary to reason and against any good style of scientific reasoning. It is more like the medieval times or the Soviet Union.
Facebook’s official explanation was that this article contained false information. But the content of that article was misdescribed. Thus, it was Facebook itself who was spreading false information. And it was also making logical mistakes. Because that article was a question, not the answer. And the facts presented in this article actually did prove that it was technically possible that the virus SARS-CoV-2 originated from some U. S. bio lab. It was said neither that it actually happened nor that such an event had been proved.
What we are witnessing is politically motivated censorship on Facebook. Facebook is one of the main Western social media platforms, and it has one billion users worldwide. All these people are cut off from some facts and well-posed scientific hypotheses because of political reasons.
But composing an initial list of plausible alternative explanations of the event is the essence of any scientific, objective method of searching for the truth.
The origins of the virus SARS-CoV-2 have been called as the most censored scientific issue on the Earth.
After the coronavirus pandemic began, the well-known Norwegian virologist Birger Sørensen has been unable to publish his investigations in scientific journals. He says that because of political reasons. Thus, he has published his discoveries shortly in the local newspapers.
Western mainstream media did not tell that climate scientist Michael Mann lost one lawsuit in 2019 because he never presented the raw data of his “hockey-stick” graph. UK Academics advocated silencing dissent on climate change. In 2020, Wikipedia administrators started to discuss the deletion of the chapter “Hockey Stick Controversy” (related to the theme “Climategate”), and they managed to do it. Thus, an overview of the conflict between different scientific schools has been eliminated, a chapter on the history of science has been deleted.
The most used encyclopedia in the world Wikipedia also banned references to some investigative journalism journals and Wikileaks — whose materials presented have been 100% authentic in so far. Etc.
There are countless other examples of the increasing censorship concerning certain scientific investigations or claims. It is not a snowball. It is the censorship avalanche. But we must stop our list somewhere.
However, then, the U. S. presidential elections begun. In 2016, all the establishment media was against Trump, but then, he could use some social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. However, in 2020, Google (particularly Youtube), Facebook and Twitter seemingly composed a cartel against Trump. All Western mainstream media news were silent about one article published about Biden’s close relative’s corruption. Social media applied censorship, and Twitter even eliminated the account of that newspaper that published these materials. Only some alternative media and investigative media journalists were writing about this.
Then, the propaganda war started about the rigged elections. Again: Western mainstream media and main social media platforms established censorship about possible violations during the elections (but they were never silent about Belarus’s election fraud).
What is this?
Facebook has blocked an informed article explaining in details possible faults of the voting machines and -programs.
Officially, it seems that Trump lost the elections.
It was the end of the world.
Western Civilization No Longer Exists
Paul Craig Roberts
“The Dystopian Western World”
TheAltWorld, December 21, 2020
I am not sure about what Roberts is talking on the rigged elections in the U. S. as I cannot check it. These elections, however, were definitely suspicious from the very beginning (during the coronavirus pandemic, during the riots, using regular mails for voting, etc.)
Roberts’s other viewpoints are remarkable nevertheless, for example:
“As the second decade of the 21st century comes to an end, democracy and free speech no longer exist in the Western World. In all its respects, Western civilization no longer exists.”
“Except for a few Internet websites unknown to the majority of the people in the Western world, the only information people in the West receive is controlled explanations that serve the agendas of the Establishment.”
“There can be no democracy, no accountability, when people only have controlled explanations that serve the ruling agendas.”
“…even in the West’s most famous universities — Oxford and Cambridge — censorship is entrenched.”
“… to ensure that no truth can emerge that might be declared by some ignorant student ‘offensive’.”
“The use of political commissars to control what can be spoken was the way Stalin controlled Russia. This Stalinist practice has now been institutionalized throughout the Western world in schools, universities, media, corporations, and government.”
“Oxford University declared that the university is reserving 25 per cent of its annual admissions to those unqualified to be at Oxford.”
I am wondering about why Facebook has banned sharing the links to the journal TheAltWorld. It seems to me that the reason for this censorship is the very fact that articles like that are talking about the very same censorship.
Are Roberts’s views “racist”, “supremacist”, etc.? I do not think so — if the terms and concepts are correctly used. From his views, it follows, for example, that if there are 10 times more gifty yellows than gifty whites in some country, then the elite universities of that country should admit 10 times more yellow students than white students because the country and society need educated gifty people.
To my mind, Roberts’s article “The Dystopian Western World” should be compulsory literature at the universities. Students should discuss it to form their own opinions. Unfortunately, even sharing this article on some social media platforms is hindered, which seems to confirm Roberts’s pessimistic views.
I am not sure about all Roberts’s claims and even not always about his motives; nevertheless, his basic claims are exactly what I think, and these views have been expressed very clearly. For example, some other thinkers, some perhaps leftist thinkers, may have other examples and other motives, but they are making the same general claims. See, eg, Caitlin Johnstone, “Yet Another Major Escalation In Establishment Internet Censorship,” 12 December 2020, and her other similar essays.
Western mainstream media is like a Göebbels’s propaganda machine now.
December 30, 2020
- Belluz, J. & Hoffman, S. (2015) “Science is Often Flawed. It’s time we embraced that.” Vox, May 2013.
- Ceci, S. & Williams, W. N. (2009) “Should Scientists Study Race and IQ? YES: The scientific truth must be pursued.” Nature, v 457, February 12, pp 788–789.
- Durden, T. (2020) “UK Academics Advocate Silencing Dissent On Climate Change & COVID-19.” ZeroHedge, July 31.
- Eintalu, J. (2017) “The Post-Lies Era.” Estonian Annual Philosophy Conference XIII. Facts, Disputes, and Arguments in the Age of ‘Post-Truth’. 11.–13. May, Tartu University, Kääriku.
- Eintalu, J. (2017) “The Post-Lies Era.” Medium, October 10.
- Gale, R. & Null, G. (2018) “Wikipedia: Our New Technological McCarthyism. Part I.” Global Research, May 02.
- Gale, R. & Null, G. (2020) “Wikipedia’s Culture of Editorial Chaos and Malice.” Global Research, June 19.
- Goldsmith, J. & Woods, A. K. (2020) “Internet Speech Will Never Go Back to Normal. In the debate over freedom versus control of the global network, China was largely correct, and the U.S. was wrong.” The Atlantic, April 25.
- Johnstone, K. (2020) “Yet Another Major Escalation In Establishment Internet Censorship.” CaitlinJohnstone.com, December 12.
- Liu, Wenxiu & Liu, Yue (2016) “Youyou Tu: significance of winning the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.” Cardiovasc Diagn Ther, 6(1), pp 1–2.
- O’Sullivan, J. (2019) “Breaking News: Dr Tim Ball Defeats Michael Mann’s Climate Lawsuit!” Principia Scientific International, August 23.
- “Post-truth” Wikipedia.
- Redmayne-Titley, B. (2020) “The ’Dominion’ of Election Fraud?” The Unz Review, November 17.
- Roberts, Paul Craig (2020) “The Dystopian Western World,” TheAltWorld, December 21.
- Rose, S. (2009) “Should Scientists Study Race and IQ? NO: Science and society do not benefit.” Nature, v 457, February 12, pp 786–788.
- Sharmeen Ahmed (2017) “Accountability of International NGOs: Human Rights Violations in Healthcare Provision in Developing Countries and the Effectiveness of Current Measures.” Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law, v 22, n 1, Article 6.
- Sørensen, Birger (2020) “The Most Logical Explanation Is that It Comes from a Laboratory.” Minerva, July 02.
- “Wikipedia.” Skeptical about Skeptics.
- “Wikipedia: Articles for Deletion/Hockey Stick Controversy.” (2020)
https://archive.vn/nk1S4 (archived Jan 2021)