::::::::
The Totalitarian paradigm via automation
What’s worse than one human being repressing the right of free political expression of another human being? A program automated repression whereby all accountability for the threatened imposition of totalitarianism is evaded by those implementing the new paradigm.
When one human being is personally corrupt enough, undisciplined enough, or perhaps simply stupid enough to conclude it is his prerogative to censor another human being, there is always hope that, that human being can be reasoned with, boycotted, or otherwise pressured to respect the rights and freedom of others. Nothing could be more sinister than hiding one’s intent to control a political discourse with “machinery”, software or otherwise.
When one American creates and maintains a website for the purposes of a political debate by fellow citizens–and others-, they are extending a defacto invitation into the 21st century’s town-square. And when the universality of the principles contained in The Bill of Right’s for freedom of expression is questioned, the issue of ownership of the domain and associated space is inevitably dragged into any debate about impending censorship, with libertarians (and almost always the owner) rightly claiming that they can legally ban anyone or anything they wish to. And indeed they can. Legally. But can they do this MORALLY? No, they can not.
There still exists an expectation of “freedom of speech” by people, wherever they are, so long as the venue is perceived as public. The facts cited by Rob Kall as to just how few websites allow unfettered free political speech clearly proves one thing beyond any doubt: The very real threat to civil liberties presented by “privatization”. When each and every square foot of the town square is bought and privately owned, it’s no longer a town square, and you’ll soon have nowhere left to stand on a soap box but your own living room. Rob Kall may have shown the lack of freedom remaining on the internet elsewhere, but he utterly failed to justify his own threat of censorship on any moral level. And it is a fundamentally immoral act because a fundamental human right is being repressed and/or threatened. Those who’re most dangerous to freedom are unfortunately within and among us, claiming to respect it, yet remaining invisible as fascists until they sense a personal separation over some issue. Daily Kos is an excellent example of “group think” achieved by technology, relegating actual majority-held views to literal invisibility because the owner, Markos Moulitsas, insists he’s not only right about impeachment being a mistake, and 9/11 as an inside job as fodder for “whackos”, but he’s managed to create and to utilize a systematically endemic thought police whereby the very members actually end up censoring their own majority view points to Markos’ apparent satisfaction. There is another level of onerous repression beyond even software which “warns” one; when citizens become blind adherents and followers to maintain their otherwise God-given right to free speech. That is precisely what this site (and apparently other associated sites according to Kall) will soon attempt to generate; brain-dead adherents tolerant of their own censorship via fear inducing software and the thinly veiled threat to study “patterns”. I am not your lab-rat to study Mr. Kall. I find you increasingly to be behaving as an ass as you level false charges against those who disagree with you, calling us “haters” and “bigots”. But Mr. Kall, a Bigot is first and foremost, someone ignorant of facts, and secondly, unwilling to endure them. I suggest you look first to yourself before you go around using words you obviously lack a full comprehension of.
I’ve been called a “hater” by Mr. Kall for my clear unequivocal condemnations of Jewish Supremacists aka Zionists, and have actually been cited as “an example” of what Mr. Kall intends to ban from his little kingdom. Of course Mr. Kall, you have every legal right to do whatever the hell you want with your website, even to lie, to censor others, and to revise reality in any way which you see fit. But never for one minute believe that you have a moral, ethical right, to censor or even threaten to censor the free political speech of others. The freedom of speech granted in the Bill of Rights was rightly understood by it’s authors as an absolute right based on a fundamental human right, given by the Creator himself. It was also understood by them to be protective of highly unpopular speech because that is what –historically- has always required protection. Mr. Kall, you have fallen victim to your own power, little though it may be. That such limited power is still able to absolutely corrupt someone to rationalize what can never be made morally right only demonstrates a solitary truth about you, and this website: You have fallen down:
"OpEdNews "THINK TWICE" Time-Out
One or more inappropriate words are in this main body of the Diary:"
I've thought Mr. Kall. I have thought a lot.
Remember George W. Bush as you now surround yourself with loyalists, yes-men, and the remaining unprincipled authors willing to become your subjects for the “study” of “patterns” in your little Kingdom here. Remember that falling down can go on for years when you’ve silenced those who’d right you.
This is to be my last post at opednews.com. I do not agree with you and will not pretend I do. I dislike Zionism and further more, I dislike Zionists themselves. I will never apologize for my dislike. I will not accept being labled a "bigot" and neither will I remain in any paradigm other than the hard-reality I find essential to meaningful political discourse.
Mr. Kall, You’re clearly intent upon becoming unremarkable and I find that more disturbing than anything else you’ve said to me. Goodbye Mr. Kall.
-Jay Esbe
