Someday, in the not too distant future, this website may be considered illegal in the EU. So keep reading, before it is too late!
I started this site in 2013 after the Edward Snowden psyop—which is exactly what I think that whole affair was. For several years, I had suspected that our emails and other online activities were being monitored. Of course, I had no evidence of this, but I was well aware that the potential to do so certainly existed. When I heard about Snowden, my suspicions were confirmed. I wasn’t shocked or even fearful. I was angry. I felt betrayed by my government. I felt foolish when I thought about how my fellow citizens and I ignorantly boast about our freedoms and rights.
Immediately, the corporate media began talking about the “chilling effect” Snowden’s revelations would have. People would be more careful about what they said and did online, which would cause them to self-censor. I must admit, this was my first inclination. I even deleted my accounts on some websites to reduce my online presence and ditched my “free” email account for a paid email provider.
In retrospect, I think self-censorship was actually one of the objectives of the Snowden psyop. It also let people know that they had no privacy online, and predictably, most Americans simply shrugged and kept on Facebooking.
Most people assume they have nothing to fear as long as they have nothing to hide. The media certainly pushed this idea, but behind it was an even more ominous message: In a country where citizens are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, mass government surveillance implies that we are all suspected of being guilty. Apparently, privacy and anonymity themselves were now crimes.
I was feeling the chill, but then something changed. I thought to myself, “this is exactly what ‘they’ want me to do.” My contrarian tendencies took over, and I decided that, rather than succumbing to the chilling effect and engaging in self-censorship, I would do the opposite. I assumed that everything I wrote would be put in my digital Stasi file, perhaps to be used against me at a later date. I conceived of this course of action as a form of civil disobedience. My thinking was, if they want us to shut up, then we need to yell louder than ever.
I do not consider myself a journalist, nor am I a “blogger” (a moniker I abhor). I do, however, have a certain amount of confidence in my ability to think critically and detect bullshit. I count analysis as one of my strengths, and I engage in it constantly. I have often been told that I “think too much” but I have never understood why that is a bad thing, especially when I see the evidence of too little thinking everywhere I look.
I do not expect anyone to be convinced simply by reading what I write. Thus, I try to provide links to as many references as possible so that readers can verify the accuracy of my claims. I strongly encourage readers to do their own research, especially regarding claims they do not agree with. In the internet age, it is far too easy to engage in confirmation bias, especially when it reinforces the comforting lies and blocks out the painful truths.
To be sure, there is a lot of bullshit on the internet. Maybe some of what I write even falls in that category, albeit unintentionally. And, there is undoubtedly a massive amount of misinformation and “fake news” floating around. I would like to believe that, as a species, we are still able to use our cognitive faculties to weed out the bullshit and get to the truth, or at least as close to the truth as possible. But the internet has affected our ability to discover the truth in ways that are both good and bad.
The unfettered access to more information than has ever been available to humans in the past is definitely a major benefit of the internet. But the sheer amount of information is utterly overwhelming. This makes us lazy, which in turn results in a tendency to simply aim for the low hanging fruit on the information tree: we rely on Google, Wikipedia, Yelp, Facebook and dozens of other platforms to tell us what, in the past, we had to make an effort to figure out for ourselves. This is very definitely a bad thing.
And this brings us to a critical point: for the first time in human history, we are communicating with one another through a medium (the internet), usually third-party platforms (email and social media), rather than directly. These platforms can facilitate the exchange of information, but they can also hinder or prevent it entirely.
This is the aim of the Copyright Directive bill recently proposed by the European Union. Among other things, this bill attempts to control content created by people like me through restrictions on the use of links to other websites, snippets from news articles and other publications, and all manner of copyrighted content. It essentially gets rid of “fair use” as a defense against claims of copyright infringement. This bill will force internet platforms to enforce these rules, which may result in websites such as this one being purged altogether.
Of course, this has little to do with copyright issues. This is censorship, pure and simple (read this open letter to EU lawmakers).
This is made obvious by the targeting of memes. It is not the use of copyrighted images in memes that are the problem, it is the fact that memes are so devastatingly effective in terms of delivering a message and waking people up. The same goes for links to or snippets from certain websites. This is an attempt to cut off access to information those who rule over us deem “problematic” (another term I detest).
According to government bureaucrats, we are only supposed to get our news from official sources. We are only supposed to understand and consider issues from the official perspective. Above all, we are not allowed to think for ourselves and make up our own minds. The officials will do that for us.
In the United States and throughout the world, free speech is under attack. Now, the Copyright Directive could make websites like this one illegal. This is a war on free thought. While you still can, you should be asking this question: If websites like mine are filled with ridiculous conspiracy theories, baseless assumptions, faulty conclusions and outright lies, why don’t the powers that be simply refute our claims with undeniable facts and overwhelming evidence?
They won’t because they can’t. The bastards are scared and they want to shut down the internet. As the saying goes, if you’re not catching flak, you’re not over the target. Obviously, we are getting too close for comfort.
Rewriting the rules in a shameless attempt to censor and even jail people for simply asking questions, engaging in free thought and exercising free speech clearly indicates that those seeking to maintain power and control are the ones with ulterior motives who cannot be trusted—not us.