Patches Sewn Together
With Random Thoughts
What happens when your views do not align with the views of a political party and their administration of it’s policies?
Traditionally, conservatives have aimed for a smaller, deregulated government and desires to preserve the political philosophy and regulations articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Typically, there is an aversion to rapid change and a strong belief that traditional morality, such as articulated in the Bible, needs to be preserved.
So, what happens to an individual or organizations when their views are held in dispute by those in power? Where the content of their beliefs does not represent the views of the current Government and often considered to be ideologically incompatible?
Furthermore, these same powers will give their support to keynote speakers and leaders known to hold views that seek to create, promote or increase animosity towards or harassment of a particular class, or groups, or person.
With the protection of the new regime, Big Tech has become the gatekeepers of the flow information, restricting free speech of millions of Americans. Twitter banned the official President of the United States (POTUS) account.
Parler was a growing haven for millions of conservatives to share information. Parler was censored and destroyed by it’s ideological competitors, Apple, Google, Twitter, Facebook, and Amazon, and then warned that Parler won’t be the last. As Amazon was canceling Parler’s web-hosting — supposedly for violation of their contract promoting violence — they were selling “Kill All Republicans” tee-shirts, and it turns out that while Twitter and Facebook were canceling Parler, the actual mobs was coordinating their attacks on Twitter and Facebook.
But it did not remove House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s accounts when she called for “uprisings” against the Trump administration. Facebook and Twitter did not target Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez when she claimed that allegedly marginalized groups have “no choice but to riot.” These platforms did not act against Kamala Harris when she said the riots “should not stop”.
When Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA militants were throwing Molotov cocktails at federal buildings, setting up “autonomous zones,” and burning down cities. They condemned Trump for holding up a Bible standing in front of a church — without mentioning the fact that that very church had been set on fire the night before.
Twitter and Facebook suppressed a mainstream newspaper for publishing the China payoffs scandal to Hunter Biden story, as well as suspending hundreds of individuals’ accounts. Twitter eventually said it was a mistake weeks later and restored the New York Post account, but only after the election had taken place.
It’s worth noting that Amazon deplatformed Parler after members of Congress demanded it. That makes it a real First Amendment violation as well as a violation of the right to free speech, which the First Amendment exists to protect.
So, somehow, competitors are being shut down in a coordinated fashion by effective monopolies with governmental support.
This is a problem and needs to be challenged, because the government is taxpayer-funded entity, and this is where Christians money goes to as well, two-thirds of Americans profess to be Christians. While 35% of those consider themselves to be highly religious, and only 10% hold to a Biblical worldview. meaning, actually understand or engages in a Biblical worldview. Belief in one sovereign God and belief that Jesus is God,’— are basic truths that are taught in the Bible. But a worldview is based on a proper understanding of the history of the world, as revealed in the Bible, God’s relationship with the cosmos, the world and all of humanity is the center of absolute truths.
There is ‘confusion’ because you have a lot of people are taking on the same label for themselves and saying ‘we’re Christian’, but very little knowledge of what is taught from the Bible.
We are faced with two issues, first, when new Administrations’ policies were mandated and if you don't subscribed to our views your opinion is cancelled, you’re banned, or you are fired and you are replaced, and that is pure authoritarianism.
With this new agenda, there is no room for open communications, or differing opinions and disagreements. Under this ideology, you could never change who runs the government, there would be no democracy, there would only be one party, one view and that is all, and that's wrong because it means truth officially becomes subject to the official narrative of the government. No second narrative will be permitted, no speaking outside of what the government says, is eliminated.
If the government gets this kind of status to decide and no one is allowed to dispute, then why have a document called the Constitution, that legalizes the freedoms of political and religious communication. Declaring no government, federal, state, or local, can create laws or regulations which inappropriately restrict freedom of individual’s rights of open communication. That is the freedom that voters have in a democratic society to share political opinions and communications. In other words, it s a protection against a one-party state, this is a democracy and the law says so and the courts actually said that that right is in our founding Constitution.
Yes, we all agree, it is also unlawful for a person to discriminate against another person on the grounds of their religious or political conviction.
But, unfortunately they have “hired censorship fact checkers” and a cancel culture claiming that their actions are justified, simply motivated by the questionable content of those that do not represent the views of the vast majority of a enlighten civilization.
Well, the question really becomes, what are the views of the vast majority of an enlighten civilization? Who decides? How is it measured?
The truth is, in most cases, it can't be measured. Indeed, last I checked, the vast majority, that is society at large, agree on very little.
The truth is, the public is composed of a wide range of identity groups, cultural groups and faith groups and the public agree on very little, and the reigning government shouldn't get to decide what they do agree on. In fact, an agreement is not a valid ground to cancel anyone's views in a real, diverse community.
But was convenient to say that because it is yet another way to cancel everyone who disagrees with you. The day that disagreement becomes justification for harassment is the day that we lose democracy.
How is it that we got to a point where government officials think it's a good idea to ban anyone who disagrees with them. How did their approach become so akin to an authoritarian regime like the Chinese Communist Party where you can expect, under those conditions, for dissent to be cancelled and de-platformed. That's what they do, it's not what we do supposedly, until now.
The CCP could well be, the Nazi regime of the 21st Century, say that out loud and straight away you're seen as a nutt, invoking anything that happened in the forties in Germany - but already, they have literally got mass concentration camps.
China has been accused of committing crimes against humanity and possibly genocide against the Uyghur population and other mostly-Muslim ethnic groups in the north-western region of Xinjiang.
Human rights groups now believe China has detained more than one million Uyghurs against their will quietly over the past decade in a large network of what the state calls "re-education camps", and sentenced hundreds of thousands to prison terms.
There is also evidence that Uyghurs are being used as forced labour, human organ harvesting and of women being forcibly sterilised. Some former camp detainees have also alleged they were tortured and sexually abused.
They are a threat to world peace and they are authoritarians. They've got all the trapping of real disaster. And shockingly, the CCP have their paid sympathizers squarely embedded in so many places in around the world, including in positions of influence and influential institutions like WHO, but also including the US Government.