Harvard Researchers Conclude That Margaret Mead Was Right: It Only Takes A Few To Change The World
According to the latest fake news from the US government and presstitute media, the US unemployment rate is the lowest in 17 years, but there is no growth in wages. What explains full, or overfull, employment without wage pressure? Obviously, the full employment figure is the orchestrated product of not counting the millions of discouraged workers who, unable to find a job, have ceased looking. If you are unemployed but not looking for a job, you are not counted as unemployed. As it is costly to look for a job, and after a while looking becomes very depressing, the unemployed just disappear out of the government's statistics. Will this fake news be something that Google censors out of the Internet? Don't bet your life that Google hired 10,000 people to weed off the Internet the fake US employment reports.
Who asked Google to transform itself from search engine to gatekeeper? Is there a conspiracy here against the First Amendment? What are Google's qualifications for determining what is fake news and extremist views? Is what are we witnessing here the elite's use of a private company to control explanations in behalf of the One Percent?
How does a private company get to overrule the First Amendment of the US Constitution? Is this another example of the arrogance embodied in the trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific partnerships that set up corporate tribunals to dictate environmental and other policy to sovereign governments? The elites and globalists are still determined to resurrect these agreements that destroy the sovereignty of peoples.
Why do people use Google, Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter when the companies are in a conspiracy against freedom of the press? Is the answer that Americans would rather be entertained than to be free?
Young Americans have already set themselves up for tyranny by using only digital means of payment. Digital money means that government knows every purchase, a person's holdings, and where their money is. Digital money gives government complete control. Government can freeze, confiscate, turn off your digital money at will, leaving the person totally helpless. Go protest and suddenly you can't pay your rent, your car payment, your credit card bill. People in such a plight are incapable of resistance. They are far worse off than 19th century slaves, about which there is so much protest.
Are the false war criminal charges brought against former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic an example of the fake news that google is going to suppress? Every Western presstitute, the corrupt Clinton regime, and Washington's servile European puppet states demonized the innocent Milosevic as a war criminal and sent him off to The Hague to be tried by the War Crimes Tribunal. Milosevic died, or was murdered, in his cell while awaiting the verdict. The Tribunal pronounced him "not guilty," and now 11 years after his death has again found him not guilty. Are the despicable presstitutes and politicians responsible for ruining Milosevic's life, and Serbia, examples of the extremist fake news that Google is going to censor?
Are Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, Assad's use of chemical weapons, and Russian invasion of Ukraine examples of the fake news that Google is going to censor?
Don't bet a nickel on it. Google, Youtube, Facebook and Twitter are going to censor truth so that only the elite's lies are heard.
Already those who tell the truth are slandered as "conspiracy theorists," "Russian agents," and "anti-semites," and this is prior to Google and social media going into action for the One Percent. Ironically, the only way anyone interested in truth will be able to find it is to use Russian and Chinese search engines. They exist already, and if those governments can see the opportunity, the Russian and Chinese search engines will displace Google.
Let's look at Google's censoring of the Internet from a different point of view. Let's assume that I am being unfair to Google and that Google is sincere and has in mind some workable definition of "extremism." What is extreme depends on one's point of view. For example, what extremism means to a Palestinian is very different from what an Israeli Zionist regards as extremism. How will Google monitor 10,000 people censoring the Internet for extremism? An employee affected by the Russia-gate hoax will regard any fair statement toward Russia as extremism. A Zionist will regard any criticism of Israel as extremism. Identity Politics will regard any defense of white males or "Civil War" memorials as extremism. You can come up with your own examples. What Google is doing is hiring 10,000 people whose personal agendas and biases will determine what "extremism" is.
The US Constitution protects free speech in order to protect truth. If a majority or a minority or "national security" or whatever can censor, in place of truth there will be self-serving agendas and explanations. Truth emerges from open discourse, not from censorship.
Charles Hugh Smith tells us that our rulers intend to control us "with officially generated and sanctioned fake news and 'approved' dissent." In other words, even dissent will be concocted.
My website has large readership and dedicated supporters. Nevertheless, many readers think that an individual website can't have much impact, so why contribute to it. They are wrong. Harvard University researchers in a recent study published in Science conclude that "even small independent news outlets can have a dramatic effect on the content of national conversation."