Displaying posts published in

January 2023

The Caesars of the Information Age Donald Trump has been unbanned, but Silicon Valley censorship is still a menace to humanity. Brendan O’Neill

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/01/26/the-caesars-of-the-information-age/

I thought I would feel some relief when the social-media giants came to their senses and let Donald Trump back on their platforms. Yet now that it’s happened, now that Meta has decreed that Trump has served his time in the virtual wilderness and may once again post on Facebook and Instagram, I just feel unnerved. Unnerved by the extraordinary power these people wield over who may and who may not engage with the billions of souls who gather online. Unnerved by their supranational authority to grant or rescind a licence to speak in the global town square. Unnerved by the historically unprecedented dominion this small clique of the woke rich enjoys over the liberty to utter.

The unbanning of Trump feels less like a victory for freedom of speech than a triumph of Silicon Valley Caesarism. It sends the message that it is for these Emperors of the Information Age to decide who may enter the modern arena of discussion, who may have to be expelled, how long they should be expelled for, and under what conditions they may be permitted to return once their punishment is complete.

Indeed, even though Meta’s statement on readmitting Trump to Facebook and Instagram is justified in the language of freedom of speech – ‘The public should be able to hear what their politicians are saying’, it says, with staggering gall, given it spent the past two years preventing the public from hearing what Trump was saying – it also says it will keep a tight leash on Trump. If he violates any of Meta’s protocols, he’ll be suspended again, they warn, for anywhere between one month and two years. So the politician may speak to the people, so long as he says nothing to offend the arrogant hip capitalists who control 21st-century public discussion. Their message is crystal clear: ‘We’re still in control, and we always will be.’

Trump was banished from social media in January 2021. Following the Capitol Hill riot of 6 January, virtually all of Silicon Valley decreed that he should be unpersoned, blacklisted, silenced. He was kicked off Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Spotify and Twitch. YouTube, Reddit and TikTok brought in stiff restrictions on the expression of pro-Trump sentiment. Google and Apple removed the Parler app from their stores, so that the virtual masses wouldn’t be able to access the one platform that was still allowing Trump to speak.

Gadi Taub should celebrate being ‘cancelled’ Ruthie Blum

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-729794

“Taub should celebrate his cancellation and continue to remind the majority of Israelis that their “lying eyes” are far more reliable than the false truths of democracy-doomsayers with a less-than-noble agenda.”

Israel’s radical daily Haaretz is calling on the public to “join its struggle for democracy.” The self-described “newspaper for thinking people” has always aimed its content at a certain type of high-brow reader, but it long ago ceased pretending to be a professional broadsheet, opting instead to serve as a proud vehicle for left-wing activism. 

Its current campaign is focused on delegitimizing the new government in Jerusalem, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The slogan of its ad – “Democracy doesn’t end with elections” – is perfect for the endeavor. 

It also reveals the true nature of the Saturday-night demonstrations in the streets of the country’s major cities. Though ostensibly about Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s plans to reform the judicial system, they’re actually an expression of disappointment at the loss of the November 1 Knesset elections to the Right.

The best way to obfuscate this inconvenient fact is to pull a twofer: denigrate the victors who won through a democratic process, and accuse them of posing a threat to democracy by virtue of their being in the majority. It’s a neat trick that has some fellow travelers fooled and many others intimidated.

British universities putting ‘trigger warnings’ on Shakespeare, Greek tragedies for being too dark According to ‘The Telegraph,’ several British colleges have placed warnings on ‘Beowulf,’ ‘Hamlet’ and some Greek tragedies.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/british-universities-putting-trigger-warnings-shakespeare-greek-tragedies-being-too-dark

British universities have reportedly begun putting trigger warnings on great Greek and Shakespearean tragedies for students who may be sensitive to their dark content. 

U.K. outlet The Telegraph reported Wednesday that the University of Derby and several other British universities have deemed celebrated tragedies like Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” as “potentially upsetting” for students.

As such, university staff have attached “trigger warnings” to a school literature module that covers classic tragedies, cautioning students that the works are “obsessed” with suffering.

One British university has placed a “trigger warning” on a class featuring works of Shakespeare, thanks to the stories’ dark content. (The Associated Press)

The Telegraph added, “Athenian dramas concerning the deaths of mythical kings, and Arthur Miller’s classic Death of a Salesman, are also on the reading list for the module, which has been given a blanket advisory on how the tragic could be troubling.”

The outlet provided the text of the warning provided by professors for their students, which stated, “Tragedy is a genre obsessed with violence and suffering, often of a sexual or graphic kind, and so some of the content might be triggering for some students.”

The “trigger warning” provided an additional note from the class instructor: “If you feel that your engagement with particular texts or themes is going to present challenges, do speak to me in advance of the class.”

UNC- Takes on the University Echo Chamber A public university has a novel idea for creating a true marketplace for ideas.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/university-of-north-carolina-school-of-civic-life-and-leadership-board-of-trustees-11674773696?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

Progressive politics has dominated elite universities since before the term woke was coined. But one university is trying to revive the academic ideal of a campus as a haven for free inquiry and debate. On Thursday the University of North Carolina board of trustees voted 12-0 to create a new school committed to free expression in higher education.

UNC will establish the School of Civic Life and Leadership and plans to hire professors from across the ideological spectrum to teach in such academic departments as history, literature, philosophy, political science and religion. These disciplines have become enforcers of ideological uniformity at most schools. Board Chair David Boliek and Vice Chair John Preyer tell us that the idea is to end “political constraints on what can be taught in university classes.”

Rather than replacing current professors or creating faculty turf battles, UNC plans to create a discrete program with its own dean and at least 20 new professors to build a syllabus free from ideological enforcers. Students will be able to choose the new classes to fulfill university core requirements. Those who aren’t interested can stay in the existing courses.

According to a College Fix survey of 14 humanities and STEM departments at UNC, Democratic professors outnumber Republicans 16 to 1. In the English department, the ratio is 23 to 1 and in Chemistry 28-1. At private and Ivy League schools the ratios are often steeper. By comparison, at Ohio State the faculty ratio is 7 to 1 and University of Nebraska-Omaha 5-1. Partisan affiliation isn’t always a measure of intellectual conformity, but it is indicative.

Another Alternative to Biden Who can win independents in 2024?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/another-alternative-to-biden-11674765302?mod=opinion_lead_pos11

New York City Council Member Ari Kagan’s advocacy of the free society over Marxist misery is so stirring that yesterday this column wondered how we might get him to run for president. A number of readers noted that since he was not born a citizen of the United States, this would require a change to the U.S. Constitution. No one said the Kagan campaign would be easy!

As for the currently eligible candidates, the notable weakness of President Joe Biden in this week’s University of New Hampshire survey of likely Democratic primary voters had some readers suggesting that former First Lady Michelle Obama would be the best option for Democrats seeking to retain the White House in 2024.

Voters in the survey do not appear to have been asked about Mrs. Obama, perhaps because she has often indicated that she’s not interested in running. But if Democratic primary voters decide they’re ready to move on from Mr. Biden but have no obvious alternative, they may urge the former first lady to reconsider.

In 2020 Democratic voters didn’t immediately fall in love with Mr. Biden but decided he was more marketable in middle America than, for example, socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. In 2024 Democrats may decide that they need someone who is more broadly popular than their current roster of professional politicians. This week’s survey of New Hampshire’s likely Democratic primary voters showed significant support for candidates representing the left wing of the party.

Will the U.S. Really Defend Taiwan? Washington is strategically unprepared for a crisis and Biden’s policies are hampering deterrence. By Seth Cropsey

https://www.wsj.com/articles/will-the-us-really-defend-taiwan-ambiguity-china-military-tech-defense-budget-congress-semiconductors-11674765405?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

Taiwan’s ruling party has a new leader, and the change bodes ill for peace in the Indo-Pacific. Vice President Lai Ching-te, a staunch proponent of the island’s independence, took over chairmanship of the Democratic Progressive Party last week from President Tsai Ing-wen. She stepped down as party leader after the party suffered losses in recent local elections. China will now almost certainly seek to meddle in Taiwan’s 2024 election in an attempt to keep Mr. Lai from winning the presidency. If he does win, Beijing could move quickly to invade.

The U.S. is unprepared for such a crisis. President Biden broke decades of American precedent by stating twice in 2022 that the U.S. would intervene to defend Taiwan if China attacked. Usually Washington has preferred to keep the U.S. security guarantee somewhat vague. On the other hand, no American president has explicitly refused to defend Taiwan, either.

The root of U.S. reluctance to commit formally to the island republic’s defense is the complex diplomatic arrangement that governs Taiwan’s functional sovereignty. The Shanghai Communiqué of 1972, still the foundational document for Sino-American relations, allowed Washington and Beijing to disagree over Taiwan’s status as leaders in the U.S. and China got to know each other. While Beijing’s interpretation of the communiqué argues that the U.S. accepted the People’s Republic of China’s claim to Taiwan, the agreement’s text simply recognizes that, in legal terms, Taiwan and China are both part of “one China.” It thereby endorses the de jure fiction of Chinese control of Taipei while maintaining de facto Taiwanese independence.

Mr. Biden’s remarks caused a stir because a formal U.S. commitment to defend Taiwan would fundamentally violate the Chinese interpretation of the Shanghai Communiqué. American credibility is now on the line, which in theory should strengthen deterrence. China will be significantly less likely to move on Taiwan if doing so means it will have to fight the U.S. as well as the Taiwanese.