The latest addition to the lexicon of totalitarianism is "Badfact."
A Badfact is objectively true, but it damages the political narratives of the ruling elite, so everyone must be prevented from thinking about it. The accuracy of the Badfact is never seriously challenged.
The most common technique for suppressing Badfacts is the "mostly false" factcheck, which is based not on disputing the accuracy of the Badfact, but on insisting that some mystical "context" is needed to understand the "greater truth" surrounding it.
With this technique, totalitarians convince their victims that thinking about the 100% true Badfact is, in essence, lying to themselves because there is a secret Deeper Truth that is more important than the deceptively simple truth they have been told to ignore.
This tactic builds on the deeply totalitarian notion of the cognitive elite - a special clergy of journalists, Party operatives, and activists who have the special training needed to handle radioactive Badfacts safely. The little people cannot be trusted with dangerous truth.
If the Badfact cannot be buried with propaganda about missing "context," the fallback technique is to attack the motives of those who present a Badfact to the public. The public must be convinced they are Enemies of the People.
This technique frightens the public into believing they will be playing into the hands of powerful and sinister forces by believing the Badfact or discussing it among themselves. They'll be walking into a trap they can't see until it springs shut and crushes them.
Suppressing the Badfact is portrayed as a heroic and noble act - a brave underdog struggle against malevolent supervillains and their nebulous but evil plans. Ignorance becomes a virtue, a courageous act of resistance against a vast and shadowy conspiracy.
Badfact is a totalitarian idea because it treats information like a dangerous resource that must be centrally controlled and carefully distributed. The public must be told what to think and who to trust.
Even more insidiously, Badfact ideology treats *understanding* as a centrally controlled resource. Only the elite can process information and achieve proper understanding. Individuals lack the training and political credentials to process information on their own.
What matters most is achieving the political goals of the anointed elite. The real, ultimate Truth is the future elites will create for us. Today's Badfacts are lies, even though they are accurate, because they obstruct the sacred mission to create a better Truth tomorrow. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I recall @MarkSteynOnline observing that free people could defeat Islamists by defying Islam's blasphemy laws en masse - they'd realize they can't kill us all to keep us from drawing Mohammed cartoons. The same is true of Big Tech's blasphemy laws against news that hurts Dems.
@MarkSteynOnline The media would, of course, understand this and loudly trumpet the need for "resistance" if some conservative tech company was suppressing left-wing news organizations or stomping on news that harmed Republican candidates. They would proudly run the forbidden news in defiance.
@MarkSteynOnline The real "resistance" is, and always was, among the enemies of collectivism and the increasingly totalitarian Democrat Party. The @nypost is a real Resistance outfit, not the shrieking nincompoop roleplayers who spent the last four years wailing about Orange Hitler.
The root of that madness is sadly easy to understand. Western politicians have lost the ability to measure costs against benefits, to weigh one problem against another, to understand that no "solution" is perfect and they always have drawbacks.
Easily stampeded by the media, eager to use crises to increase their power and batter their opponents for not taking the marquee crisis seriously enough, politicians across the free world collapsed into a singularity of opportunism and political posturing.
The Wuhan coronavirus is perhaps the worst example of "narrative journalism" to date, especially since the media's preferred narratives track so closely with the political goals of the Chinese Communist Party.
The CCP's first objective was to prevent domestic panic and political unrest from becoming a threat to its power. Global media obligingly ran with a narrative that draconian measures taken by the Chinese government swiftly brought the virus under control.
Next the CCP needed the virus to spread rapidly beyond China's borders. Global media was suddenly humming with stories about how travel bans were irrational xenophobic evil and nothing could keep the virus from spreading around the world.
One of the most polarizing things about this election is that nobody can imagine anyone voting for the other guy after listening to him talk for five minutes. "You Gotta Be Kidding Me" should be the slogan for the entire contest.
I confess I have this reaction too. Trump frequently says, and tweets, things I find exasperating. Rarely have I seen anyone work so hard to talk himself out of a job. But I listen to Biden talk and I can't believe anyone would be foolish enough to vote for him.
Biden can't even finish his sentences properly when he's regurgitating 30-year-old talking points. The man clearly is not all there. I guess his supporters are just talking themselves into ignoring it because they hate Trump, or because they know Biden's just a figurehead.
Why would hostile foreign powers and shady characters keep paying Hunter Biden millions of dollars for access, year after year, if he never delivered any?
The media/Biden campaign (but I repeat myself) framing for this story is that some shifty foreigners stuffed cash into Hunter's pockets one time, then found him passed out in a bathtub with a crack pipe and cursed themselves for fools, as if he had conned them.
But that's not what happened AT ALL. Shifty foreigners and outright enemies of the United States paid Hunter Biden huge sums to buy access, over and over again, for years. He's not some fake Nigerian prince who swindled people one time and then scurried away with the loot.
I wrote about Internet freedom a few hours before it suddenly became a massive crisis in the United States, so the post (and the Freedom House report I discussed) became an instant time capsule. The questions I asked are more urgent than ever:
"Disinformation" is treated by analysts as a menace to Internet freedom, but so are the measures employed to combat it. The worst totalitarian regimes on Earth justify Internet repression as efforts to control disinformation. We're getting a taste of that in America right now.
"Cyber sovereignty" means states like China establishing their own little Internet backwaters, ruled according to their definitions of acceptable speech, hate speech, disinformation, and sedition.
We have that too. In America, cyber sovereignty is imposed by Big Tech moguls.