Anyone who is paying attention should know exactly what I’m talking about, but here are three recent examples.
- Paypal considers (then walks back) a proposal to “fine” users $2,500 if they promote “misinformation.”
- California is making it illegal for doctors to disagree with politicians.
- Blackrock and other asset managers are forcing companies to follow their ideological agenda.
It seems like this is the consequence of several different trains of thought that have been festering on the left.
- There is no truth, and therefore no point in debate. Everything comes down to an exercise of power.
- Words are violence.
- Oppressive attitudes (racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.) are so deeply ingrained in the system that the only remedy is to tear it all down.
- There is no right to free speech. People who are seen as upholding the current system must be silenced.
Anything else?
QUOTE: What’s behind the totalitarianism on the left? Anyone who is paying attention should know exactly what I’m talking about, but here are three recent examples…
I don’t know if I’m seeing “totalitarianism” from the left, per your commentary. As I understand, totalitarianism is a form of government that requires complete subservience to the state. Several of the the examples you cite are focused on private industry practices. As such, the law allows for private industry to operate with autonomy unless their practices break the law. I’ve not seen a violation of the law in the instances you’ve mentioned. Even with the example about California government, it seems that it’s within their purview to make such policies relative to public safety.
As for PayPal, it seemed the “intent” was to limit misinformation. In some cases, misinformation can lead to dangerous outcomes. For instance, some died due to misinformation about Covid and some of its “alleged” cures (e.g., hydroxychloroquine). Some stormed the US Capitol Building under the misinformation of the 2020 election was stolen. Some have made death threats to law enforcement and congressional leaders based on misinformation. So, I can see why they might be concerned and wanted to take action to limit it. That said, PayPal may have had good intent but their method of addressing it may have been flawed. But, I wouldn’t call it totalitarianism because there were other options for users who didn’t want to submit to such users rules.
As for California, it will be interesting to see how this stands up in court. Yet, what seems at issue is: “It shall constitute unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”. ISTM the statute isn’t an absolute and allows for discretion…via a board review of allegations. As well, there must be evidence provided to substantiate allegations. If proven that it is indeed misinformation, it seems that it would be good to restrict it (especially in cases where it can put public health at risk).
Overall, albeit there is disagreement as to the means, I don’t think it lives up to the assertion of totalitarianism by the left. Seems the right is the one that’s leaning in that direction, especially in the past few years.
From Brittanica.
The definition you cite still doesn’t fit what I see happening with the left.
>In some cases, misinformation can lead to dangerous outcomes. For instance, some died due to misinformation about Covid and some of its “alleged” cures
Florida has discovered that government-approved “information” about Covid has led to the deaths of many young, healthy people — who were coerced into taking a vaccine they didn’t need, based on faulty science and outright lies.
The idea that PayPal, or Twitter, or any other collection of woke script-kiddies can decide what constitutes “information” or “misinformation” is patently absurd.
QUOTE: Florida has discovered that government-approved “information” about Covid has led to the deaths of many young, healthy people — who were coerced into taking a vaccine they didn’t need, based on faulty science and outright lies.
Wouldn’t that be classic “misinformation”? As such, there SHOULD be consequences (especially given it was government approved). Seems some deaths resulted when hydroxychloroquine was touted as Covid cure by some noted government officials.
Yet, it would be interesting to know the details relative to the Florida claims…how many deaths, conditions that led to their deaths, was it bad information, did people totally follow the recommended guidelines or was it combo of issues? Knowing that could make a HUGE difference in understanding “if” it was the deaths were the result of the information.
QUOTE: The idea that PayPal, or Twitter, or any other collection of woke script-kiddies can decide what constitutes “information” or “misinformation” is patently absurd.
Given it’s THEIR PLATFORM they have ALL rights to decide what’s appropriate or misinformation (as long as their judgment falls within the confines of the law). If someone doesn’t like it…they don’t have to use their services or they can start their own.
>Given it’s THEIR PLATFORM they have ALL rights to decide what’s appropriate or misinformation
We have a fundamental disagreement here. When someone provides a service to the public, they are subject to more strict scrutiny. E.g., if I run a train, I can’t only transport Republicans. If I run a telephone service, I can’t disallow speech that I don’t like.
The mom and pop cake shop can decide what they want to do, but once a company gets to such a size that it is essentially a public utility, it has to follow different rules.
This is particularly true when they’re coordinating their efforts with the government. We now have strong evidence that the government has been telling social media platforms what kinds of rules to impose.
QUOTE: We have a fundamental disagreement here.
Agreed!
QUOTE: When someone provides a service to the public, they are subject to more strict scrutiny. E.g., if I run a train, I can’t only transport Republicans. If I run a telephone service, I can’t disallow speech that I don’t like.
Social media platforms and private companies are allowed to remove offending content when done in accordance with their stated policies and that removal does not raise a justiciable First Amendment issue or a real risk of civil liability.
Content-based restrictions on speech have been permitted within a few traditionally recognized categories of expression: Misinformation, Defamation, Fraud, Perjury, Hate Speech and Speech that Incites Imminent Lawless Action, Harassment and True Threats of Violence, and Advertisements.
QUOTE: Florida has discovered that government-approved “information” about Covid has led to the deaths of many young, healthy people — who were coerced into taking a vaccine they didn’t need, based on faulty science and outright lies.
Florida’s surgeon general announced in March 2022 that “healthy” children shouldn’t get Covid-19 vaccines — then softened that stance just 24 hours later. Florida’s Department of Health issued its new guidance about Covid vaccines for kids, which does not recommend against the shots. Instead, it suggests that some healthy children “may not benefit from receiving the currently available COVID-19 vaccine,” and focuses on youngsters with underlying conditions as “the best candidates for the COVID-19 vaccine.” If there were deaths of many young, healthy people it didn’t seem the Florida Department of Health acknowledged such as they were giving guidance concerning potential risks.
Healthy Children Ages 5 to 11 – In a clinical trial, there were no cases of severe illness among children ages 5 to 11 among any placebo recipients or COVID-19 vaccine recipients. A study conducted out of New York determined that COVID-19 vaccine efficacy declined 84%, from 68% to 12%, over a span of two months for children aged 5 to 11.
Healthy Adolescents Ages 12 to 17
The same study determined that COVID-19 vaccine efficacy declined 40%, from 85% to 51%, over a span of two months for adolescents ages 12 to 17. There is also concern for the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis in children, especially among adolescent boys. One study found the highest rates of myocarditis among males ages 12 to 15, followed by adolescent males ages 16 to 17 years old.
https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/g2-jtr_QWBT4hJpqr.pdf?utm_source=floridahealth.gov&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=covid-19&utm_term=fdoh+issues+new+guidance+regarding+covid-19+vaccination+recommendations+for+children&utm_content=press_release&url_trace_7f2r5y6=https://www.floridahealth.gov/newsroom/2022/03/20220308-FDOH-covid19-vaccination-recommendations-children.pr.html
It doesn’t matter in the slightest what you or I think about the science behind the Florida decision. Twitter should not have the right to censor what a state government decides to say.
QUOTE: It doesn’t matter in the slightest what you or I think about the science behind the Florida decision.
First, I’m trying to verify the veracity of the claim concerning Florida’s alleged discovery. Seems odd that something so striking as the “death of many young, healthy people” taking Covid vaccine isn’t mentioned by the Florida Department of Health.
QUOTE: Twitter should not have the right to censor what a state government decides to say.
If the state government is using their platform and they break their policy, as
a private company, the lawsays they absolutely have the right to censor them.
QUOTE Florida has discovered that government-approved “information” about Covid has led to the deaths of many young, healthy people…who were coerced into taking a vaccine they didn’t need, based on faulty science and outright lies.
I’m really curious about the source of this claim. I’ve not seen anything close to corroborating it. Much of what I’ve seen has been like the following…
“In the U.S., no child has died from the vaccine, but over 600 have died from COVID,” Dr. Leana Wen, a professor of health policy and management at George Washington University, said in an email. “(Yeadon’s) claim is completely untrue.”
In Pfizer’s clinical trials for children 5 to 11 years old, no deaths from the COVID-19 vaccine were recorded. Additionally, no deaths were reported among Pfizer vaccine recipients during trials for those between 12 and 25 years old. The Moderna vaccine trials had a similar result.
There is no evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine is linked to an increase in child mortality.
One person younger than 20 has died because of an adverse reaction to the vaccine, according to the United Kingdom’s Office of National Statistics. A blog took data out of context and omitted that most of the children in the data set who had received multiple COVID-19 vaccinations were at higher risk of death due to existing medical conditions.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/aug/24/blog-posting/no-evidence-covid-19-vaccine-increasing-child-mort/
Personally, I don’t think there’s any intent, even if it’s one I agree with, that minimizes or even slightly reduces the awfulness of any entity with access to my finances attempting to enforce behavioral standards that have *absolutely nothing to do with my business relationship with them,* by means of setting themselves up as an entity able to fine me for said irrelevant behaviors.
Regardless of the fact that the word totalitarianism as such only applies to governments, any such totalizing impulses by any entity, public or private, should be unreservedly decried.
What they’re doing is similar to ESG. “Behave the way we tell you or you won’t get funding.”
Financial institutions do have fines — for bounced checks and things like that. But it takes quite a dose of chutzpah to extend that to behavior.
You donate to the NRA? $100 fine.
You wore white shoes in November? $50 fine.
You voted for Trump? $500 fine.
It’s completely outrageous behavior, and if we had anything like a functional government, they would have been reined in promptly. But the politicians who have not sold their souls to the devil are cowards — scared to speak against the woke agenda.
This is precisely why Trump was and is so popular. We’ve had it with politicians who are afraid to challenge the woke. Few of them even talk a good game, and of those few, none do anything.
This is why Kari Lake is doing so well. She sounds like a fighter.
The only reasonable future for the conservative movement is jihad against the woke. Anything else is polishing the brass on a sinking ship.
Right, but a bounced check fee is related to the business you’re doing with the institution. I violated the terms of my agreement with the bank by attempting to use my relationship with them fraudulently by drawing an NSF check on my account *with them*. PNC can’t fine me for an NSF check written on my credit union.
But PayPal could just take money from me because I said something, somewhere that was captured, that they deem “misinformation”? I don’t even have to use PayPal’s service to collect money for distributing a book they think is misinformative, I’d just have to spread “misinformation,” period. There’s no analogy to that. That’s totalizing behavior.