The assault on conservative speech

June 17, 2019 |

I’ve recently been covering the growing assault on conservative speech by big tech companies.  They used to deny it or blame it on their “algorithms,” but now, they’re barely even making the effort to deny their bias – and when they do, their denials are undermined by former employees who are speaking out about the culture of leftist tyranny that exists inside companies such as Google, Twitter and Pinterest. 

(If you missed what I wrote last week, much of it has been compiled into an op-ed here):

Over the weekend, the New York Times did its best to try to provide cover for censoring conservatives with a ridiculous piece about how watching rightwing YouTube videos “radicalized” a poor, unsuspecting young liberal into an alt-right monster before he realized the error of his ways (at one point, he even dated – gasp! – a Christian girl!) 

Among the dangerous rightwing radicals identified by the Times were Ben Shapiro (apparently, the only Orthodox Jewish Nazi in the world) and Dave Rubin, a gay, classically liberal talk show host whose crime is to treat conservative guests like human beings.  Rubin discussed with Fox News’ Jesse Watters what it felt like to have the paper he grew up on branding him as a rightwing radical:

This seems to be part of an escalating campaign to silence all conservatives before the 2020 election.  Andrew Klavan of the Daily Wire explains it this way:

1. Convince people that hate speech should be silenced.

2. Define hate speech as alt-right.

3. Label powerful mainstream conservatives “alt-right.”

4. Silence powerful mainstream conservatives.

It used to be an inside joke in politics that to the media, all Republicans were “arch-conservatives” or “far-right,” but there was no such thing as a far-left, arch-liberal.  This goes back so far that Barry Goldwater was a far-right arch-conservative, while Ted Kennedy was just a liberal.  But it’s no joke anymore.  It seems to be part of a concerted effort to smear and ban people just for holding views that are not approved by people in media who have managed the neat trick of simultaneously being both far-left and fascist.


Another example of viewpoint censorship: we all howled with laughter when Hillary Clinton was signed as a speaker at a cybersecurity conference.  But this is not ironically hilarious, just infuriating:

Texas Republican Rep. Will Hurd is a former CIA officer and a longtime expert and advocate for cybersecurity.  So he seemed to be the perfect choice as keynote speaker of an upcoming conference on that subject in Las Vegas.  But the organizers caved in and canceled his speech due to leftist pressure after an editor for Tech Crunch tweeted that Hurd has “a terrible voting record on women’s rights.”

For the uninitiated, that means he’s pro-life and doesn’t support the “right” to slaughter children in the womb.  Which, of course, makes him unsuitable to talk about cybersecurity.  Unlike Hillary Clinton, who is the world’s worst example of cybersecurity, but is radically pro-abortion. 

It sounds as if anyone who really wants to learn anything about cybersecurity could safely abort these politicized conferences from their schedule.


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

No Comments