Dear Friends,
It seems to me, either all offensive language must be censored, else no offensive language be censored. Why no middle ground? The politically favored claim the authority to censor. They choose what offensive language is allowed and what language isn’t. Creating a feedback loop enforcing and enhancing their political favor. In other words, as long as some are censored and others aren’t, that censorship will strengthen the strong and weaken the weak… making it malignant. That some don’t instantly grasp this fundamental truth is they haven’t advanced to that level of mental comprehension. Which means, those who argue for censorship are either hypocrites seeking power, or mentally underdeveloped. Making censorship a malignant appeal to authority.
Censorship is always justified by appeal to authority. “Appeal to authority” is an Enlightenment principle that no matter the authority, they are fallible and no amount of knowledge or prophesy, can outmatch discourse. In other words, appeal to authority is a way to get around discussion. The authority is always right and those who deny it are by definition, doomed, damned or stupid. Appeal to authority however fails in that no matter how smart, learned and wise the authority is, they are certainly wrong about everything. How could I say such a thing? By looking at history. The smartest, wisest and most learned in 1000 AD, were wrong about everything. Just as the expert today, who knows everything there is to know about nothing, will be proven wrong about everything they believe in a few centuries.
Today the censoring authorities are the “experts.” Before it was the church fathers, before that it was the druidic class, and so on. There is always an all knowing expert class that seeks to control the people by controlling the cultural narrative. Today’s experts claim to have the full weight and backing of The Science, behind their edicts. Thinking those of us that balk at their omniscience and omnipotence are the epitome of arrogant. Just as the Church Fathers had the full backing of God himself. Making those who didn’t accept their authority, damned, to Hell itself. Today the experts are backed by the science, and so people who refuse to follow their edicts are doomed. To burn to death when the planet bursts into flame, any moment now, because you arrogantly drove your car to work.
I wonder why those who claim to be so wise, educated and far seeing never admit when they’re wrong? You would think people who don’t have a stake as they claim, except to promote truth, would be happy to change their position upon receiving new data. That’s how wise people act in the world. As their knowledge increases, they discard outdated notions, for updated more correct ones. Moreover, the wise understand that they’re never absolutely right. Only egoists think they’re always right. There’s always some error in human thinking. It can’t be helped because we’re flawed. So the malignant censors, who claim to be duty bound to censor our wrong think, can’t be the sages they believe, since they’re incapable of changing their minds, or admitting they’re wrong. They’re egoists.
Censorship then is an egoistic therefore malignant appeal to authority as a means to power. The censors never amend their thinking even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Take the lie, Covid came from a pangolin. The evidence points squarely to the Wuhan lab yet the experts staunchly refuse to follow the evidence. Proving they’re either under developed mentally or hypocrites who’re gaslighting us. We know that no matter how smart and educated the politically favored are, they are certainly wrong about everything, as will be proven in a century or less. While claiming to be the authority we must appeal to before we speak. To insure we don’t “misinform” others. Proving the malignant censors unwise, egoistic hypocrites and profoundly mentally under developed.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
