Category Archives: politics

Free Speech

Posted on by
Reply

Christopher Mims had a piece up in his Thursday Tech column concerning the “usefulness” of good-guy bots to help combat filter bubbles, hate speech and harassment, and state-sponsored disinformation, along with other troll-ish speech.

Mims, unfortunately, is operating from the false premise that speech should be censored. Apart from obvious attempts to incite criminal violence, of course it should not be. Free speech must be free, bad speech—whatever that is; the definition varies from person to person and time to time—can only be answered with more speech.

As one commenter on Mims’ piece noted further,

The idea of algorithms controlling which information is disseminated to the people strikes me as the fast lane to the Orwellian world of Big Brother or perhaps Wells’ future in the Time Machine.
…
Ensuring that our political and educational systems prepare people to maintain their common sense and independence is probably a better defense than leaving it to the machines.

Climate Change and Wildfires

Posted on by
Reply

Much is being made about how anthropogenic global warming is causing all those wildfires in California.  Cliff Mass had a different view [emphasis in the original].

there is a lot misinformation going around in the media, some environmental advocacy groups, and some politicians.   The story can’t be a simply that warming is increasing the numbers of wildfires in California because the number of fires is declining.  And area burned has not been increasing either.

And [emphasis added]

[N]ow we get into the real interesting questions that many are not considering.   What is driving the ups and downs in wildfires?  There are so many factors that must be considered, such as:

  1. The fact that extensive fires are a natural historical part of the ecology of the region
  2. The impacts of a huge increase of human population, creating increasing vulnerability while humans are starting most of the fires.
  3. Climate change that causes warming and changing the precipitation patterns (both wetter and drier) that influence fire frequency and size.
  4. Mismanagement of our forests and wild areas, allowing tree and debris-choked landscapes
  5. Invasive and often highly flammable non-native species brought in by man (e.g., cheatgrass and Eucalyptus)

Clearly, climate change is only one possible factor in controlling fire frequency and may not be the most important.

Indeed, our climate has been warming for the 4.5+ billion years of Earth’s existence.  Our sun has been heating up for the 4.5++ billion years of its existence.

But the, actual facts have never interested global not-warming deniers.

 

h/t Watts Up With That?

Courage of One’s Convictions

Posted on by
Reply

Ben Shapiro offered to donate ten stacks to Progressive-Democratic Party candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign for a House seat from a New York district if she would debate him on “all the topics under the sun.”  Shapiro also offered to debate her for charity.

Ocasio-Cortez’s response was to call Shapiro a cat-calling man with bad intentions and to refuse to debate him.

It seems the face of the Progressive-Democratic Party hasn’t the courage of the Party’s convictions.

The Face of the Progressive-Democratic Party?

Posted on by
1

Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT) and House of Representatives candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY) are the ideological face of the Progressive-Democratic Party, pushing for socialism to be inflicted on our nation.  We can have the political debate, except for the rest of the face of the Party.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D, CA) is openly pushing for violence against Republicans and Conservatives.  And we have Antifa verbally assaulting Conservatives Candace Owens and Charlie Kirk.  While they were not, this time, violent, the Antifa thugs were openly racist in their verbal assault, and they sought to completely shut down political debate concerning the direction our nation should take over the present next election cycle.

Progressive-Democrats’ silence on Antifa (and Waters) not only contributes to their desired goal of “no debate; it’s settled,” it shows that Progressive-Democrats actively condone the tactics being used.

Remember this this fall.

Naked Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

Now Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook is being blatant about censoring inconvenient truths.  He and Connecticut’s Chris Murphy are peas in a pod.

Elizabeth Heng is a Republican candidate for Congress from a California district centered on Fresno.  Her parents are emigres from Cambodia who also had escaped the genocide of the ’70s that Pol Pot had tried to inflict.  Heng tried to run a campaign ad that touted that fight, that survival, and her parents’ recovery from that terror.  When she put her ad on Facebook, Zuckerberg and his censorship algorithm-programming IT experts said Nope.

We don’t allow ads that contain shocking, disrespectful, or sensational content, including ads that depict violence or threats of violence[.]

Because an illustration of triumph over murderous adversity, when it comes from a Conservative, is shocking, disrespectful, or sensational.

No.  As Heng tweeted (because Facebook showed itself not reliably available to her, I speculate)

It’s unbelievable that @facebook could have such a blatant disregard for the history that many people, including my own parents, have lived through. I’m sure it is “shocking” for people to hear about this kind of injustice, but this is reality.

Once again, an illustration of the Left’s view of free speech.