Mediaboss Marketing

On Friday's "Fox News Primetime", host Ben Domenech sounded off on how the establishment the political and corporate ruling class used the threat of a virus to consolidate and expand its power with the help of violent riots, widespread propaganda, and tech censorship.

DOMENECH: Human actions and decisions made the real-life costs of the pandemic far higher than they otherwise might have been. They unnecessarily erased an entire year of education, destroyed small businesses, and wrecked huge portions of our economy. Instead, it was Americas innovation industry that won the day, in ways the corporate propaganda press last year deemed impossible, all the way up until the vaccines were here.

The ruling class used the threat of disease to consolidate its power, and it has used lies, violent riots, re-education, corporate media propaganda and tech censorship to achieve this -- but it is a house that cannot stand because it is built on nothing but threats and the kind of shameless hubris weve had to see to believe. The Wuhan lab leak theory, dismissed by Anthony Fauci and the Washington Post and CNN, is gaining traction now is a cause for outrage at elite hypocrisy and dishonesty.

Read the rest here:
US 'Ruling class used the threat of disease to consolidate its power'; used censorship, riots: Ben Domenech - Fox News

Slavery is not just something that just happened with the people who were white to people who were Black, said Lisa Kinnemore, a member of Georgias state board of education, as it deliberated a resolution on Thursday restricting classroom discussion of racism. Black people were actually slaves to Black people. It goes all the way to back even to ancient times, slavery in Egypt and Rome and all around the world.

This sentiment an explicit rejection of the horrors of American slavery and its roots in white supremacy underpinned the 11 to 2 vote by the board to adopt a resolution to provide a framework for policy revisions on the teaching of race and sex in Georgias classrooms.

Kinnemores comments left Jason Esteves, chair of the Atlanta Public Schools Board of Education, momentarily speechless as discussed the vote with The Intercept shortly after the meeting.

Look, this wont impact [Atlanta Public Schools], he said. Were going to keep doing what were doing. This will have an effect on counties that are more conservative, that were still making moves toward equity and inclusion.

Parents mostly white have been storming school board meetings across the state over the last few weeks, heeding a call by conservative demagogues to fight against critical race theory being taught in schools. Gov. Brian Kemp wrote a letter to the state board of education last month, calling critical race theory a divisive, anti-American agenda which has no place in Georgia classrooms. Kemp echoes a wave of protests across the country over the last two months, from rich Virginia suburbanites launching a campaign to oust the state school board to a disrupted meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona, with parents protesting mask mandates unmasked, of course along with critical race theory.

In practice, these white parents havent been railing against the arcane legal theory but against the idea that students should be taught that racism is a real, current problem created by longstanding structural inequality. Local school board meetings have devolved into vitriolic shouting matches, with boards looking for ways to control public comment afterward.

The board drafted the resolution without public input and then blocked comments from the YouTube livestream. Impassioned pleas, it seems, are fit only for those on one side of this argument.

Eventually what they want is for people not to talk about it any more.

There was so much energy and excitement behind, finally, making some movement toward those issues, Esteves said. Were now seeing a complete reversal. The state board of education just took away their cover and gave opponents a weapon to use against those efforts. Eventually what they want is for people not to talk about it any more.

About three out of five of Georgias public school students are children of color. Demography projects Georgia will become a majority-minority state within the next decade. But even as Republicans continue to argue against the legitimacy of the November election, the political reality remains: a purple state on the knifes edge of flipping permanently Democratic because it has run out of racially resentful white voters.

Kemp and others have begun to implicitly draw a connection between the eroding defense of white supremacy among white voters and their own political futures by describing anti-racist education initiatives as inherently political. Basically, theyre saying the quiet part out loud.

Take Kinnemore, for example. Then-Gov. Nathan Deal appointed Kinnemore to the board in 2013 after her kamikaze run against a well-respected local Democratic legislator in DeKalb County.

Kinnemore, who is Black, lives about a mile due south from my house, in a community that is about 90 percent Black, in the shadow of the largest memorial to the Confederacy in America. I note in passing that the keepers of the Stone Mountain carving have been open to recontextualizing the monument despite the wailing of Lost Cause revisionists, because the redolent racism of the carvings history is noxious. Those white supremacists are Kinnemores audience. Her political existence is a 4Chan-style trolling operation designed to elicit pain from Black parents for the amusement of white supremacists.

Her appointment is in no way an attempt to build support for conservative politics among nonwhite voters. Republicans do not have a plan for that here. Instead, they hope to preserve the racial biases of young white voters intact as long as they can, staving off losses as older white conservatives die and younger ones change after contact with the real world.

The resolution contains language barring instruction in ways that suggest that racism is acceptable. But it also says the state school board believes that no teacher, administrator, or other school employee should offer instruction suggesting that meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created by a members of a particular race to oppress members of another race; (or) that the advent of slavery in the territory that is now the United States constituted the true founding of the United States; or that, with respect to their relationship to American values, slavery and racism are anything other than deviations from, betrayals of, or failures to live up to, the authentic founding principles of the United States, which include liberty and equality.

How one teaches the political dimension of slavery on the crafting of the Constitution, with the three-fifths compromise, the ramifications of the Civil War, the lingering effects of Jim Crow, the Trail of Tears and the reservation system, turn of the century anti-Asian discrimination, the civil rights movement, and the many, many other facets of white supremacist ideology on America is a lesson left to the readers imagination.

The resolution does not itself impose standards for the states schools,Georgia educationboard chair Scott Sweeney said. It does not mention critical race theory per se. This is not something going directly after critical race theory. What it is trying to do is draw a distinction between divisive ideologies in finding their way into standards. This is a foundational statement more than anything else. With regard to divisiveness, for example, can you imagine any supremacist ideology making its way into standards? I cannot. So, this is agnostic with regard to those types of divisiveness.

The nature of racism today is what is left unsaid and unexamined. One has to assume there is no white supremacist ideology baked into the current curriculum for his statement to be considered true.

The boards vote drew swift condemnation.

The nature of racism today is what is left unsaid and unexamined.

The prohibitions outlined in the resolution would undermine Holocaust education in Georgia, said Allison Padilla-Goodman, vice president of the southern division at the Anti-Defamation League. Indeed, it could prohibit teaching that the Nuremburg laws were taken from Jim Crow America. The resolution is fundamentally contradictory. It claims to respect First Amendment rights and strongly encourages educators, who teach about controversial public policy or social affairs issues, to explore them from diverse and contending perspectives. Yet, the resolution clearly would prohibit a teacher or student from talking about systemic racism or inequity in America. And the resolution is so vaguely written that it undoubtedly will come under constitutional challenge and may suffer the same fate as President Trumps divisive concepts executive order.

Discussions about race and its place in our history and in current events are an important part of education and one that Georgia educators will continue to address, added Craig Harper, executive director of the Professional Association of Georgia Educators. The non-binding resolution adopted at a special called session of the State Board of Education does not prohibit educators from continuing to teach and discuss all aspects of our history as they do now. The board members conversation highlighted the importance of including more people and perspectives. Our many communities and educators, who have valuable insights and expertise, must work together to determine how Georgia will address these critical issues moving forward.

Esteves expects teachers to gear up for a fight.

Teachers can speak out and talk about how this limits their ability to have really important conversations in their classrooms, he said. School boards can affirm their commitment to equity and inclusion. They can resist any efforts to disrupt or pause equity initiatives.

Original post:
Georgia Board of Education Votes to Censor American History - The Intercept - First Look Media

Home to the largest Confederate memorial in the country, the state of Georgia took another leap in whitewashing history. The majority-white Georgia Board of Education passed a resolution declaring slavery and racism are inconsistent with America.

Calling an emergency meeting, the state board of education met Thursday to weigh in on critical race theory. A manufactured crisis of conservative origin, K-12 public school students are not learning critical race theory.

YouTube comments during the meeting questioned the validity of the so-called emergency. The resolution adopted similar language as proposals in Republican-controlled legislatures across the country.

Merely symbolic, the resolution serves as a statement of values from the states top education body. But it does not change curriculum or teaching standards for the time being.

By passing a resolution that falsely affirms slavery and racism were exceptions and inconsistent with American values, the boards resolution ignores history. The Tulsa Race Massacre commemorated just a few days earlier is a prime example of the harm done by state-sanctioned white terror and the whitewashing of history.

Governor Brian Kemp congratulated the board on the latest move. Running for re-election, Kemp jumped on the anti-critical race theory bandwagon to keep ginning up support. Kemp and company see critical race theory as being anti-American but have no problem with burying dissenting opinions and views.

As a part of his bid for governor, Brian Kemp bragged about rounding up undocumented immigrants in his truck. He also refused to apologize for taking a photo with a known white nationalist during the 2018 election. The same supporter previously threatened a Black woman veteran at a Stacey Abrams event and threatened violence against Muslims.

Pushing back on efforts to bury history, actor Tom Hanks outlined the importance of learning about the good, the bad, and the ugly of Americas history in an essay for the New York Times. Hanks wonders how different the country may have been if people learned about events like Tulsa in elementary school.

Many students like me were told that the lynching of Black Americans was tragic but not that these public murders were commonplace and often lauded by local papers and law enforcement, wrote Hanks. The truth about Tulsa, and the repeated violence by some white Americans against Black Americans, was systematically ignored, perhaps because it was regarded as too honest, too painful a lesson for our young white ears.

Conservatives continue to distract from conversations of equity and justice by focusing on protecting people from feeling bad about racism. But people, students included, wouldnt have to worry about feeling bad about racism if they werent racist.

Hanks also called out the willful ignorance of those who insist racism is inconsistent with Americas founding principles.

When people hear about systemic racism in America, just the use of those words draws the ire of those white people who insist that since July 4, 1776, we have all been free, we were all created equally, that any American can become president and catch a cab in Midtown Manhattan no matter the color of our skin, that, yes, American progress toward justice for all can be slow but remains relentless, Hanks continued.

You can watch the state board meeting here:

SEE ALSO:

Oklahoma Governor Puts Feelings Over Facts By Signing Anti-Critical Race Theory Law

Louisiana Republican Encourages Teaching The Good Of Slavery, Not Critical Race Theory

View original post here:
Georgia Board Of Education Responds To Fake Crisis With Resolution To Censor Discussions On Racism - NewsOne

Douglas Murray, author of The Madness Of Crowds, joined The Federalists Ben Domenech on Fox News Primetime to discuss the dangers of Big Tech censorship Friday night.

These companiesthat assume the right to decide what you and I can know, read and sayare nowhere near up for the job, Murray said. My own view is that actually nobody could be, but they are especially unqualified; they talk about free speech as if nobody thought about it until a seminar they had some time last semester.

We are dealing with kids here, he said, adding these companies got everything about the last year wildly wrong and citing Big Techs censorship of the Wuhan lab leak theory.

Murray and Domenech also discussed Facebooks recent announcement that it will suspend former President Donald Trumps account for the next two years. Remember when Mark Zuckerberg said Facebook wouldnt be an arbiter for political speech? Domenech asked. Apparently he doesnt remember it either.

Murray noted Facebooks Nick Clegg, who announced today we believe his [Donald Trumps] actions constitute a severe violation of our rules which merit the highest penalty available, was a former deputy prime minister in Murrays native Great Britain. He was chucked out by his own constituents, Murray said. But now he gets to say what a former president of the United States can say, where and when. So in some ways I congratulate him for an enormous global upgrade.

It is insulting Mark Zuckerberg occupies a more powerful position than the pope in Rome, Domenech added.

These displays of power and of censorship, Murray concluded, show it is high time we make it clear that we cannot and will not live under the rules of Big Tech. They are not up to the job that they have taken upon their shoulders to perform.

Elle Reynolds is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.

Go here to see the original:
Douglas Murray: Big Tech Censors Are Unqualified To Talk About Free Speech - The Federalist

By Christopher M. Finan |

Can we talk?

In last weeks Publishers Weekly, I summarized the principles of The Freedom to Read, a statement essential to the ethical foundation of the library and publishing community since 1953. The statement did more than expound principles: It committed the signatories to fight for them.

Today this commitment is being questioned by people within the library and publishing communities. Many do not believe that publishers should release books that express dangerous ideas or books that are written by bad people. They reject the idea that the best answer to a bad book is a good one.

How are we to resolve these differences? So far, there have been Twitter debates. Petitions have been circulated. There has been a lot of talk about harmful books, but much less about how demands for suppression conflict with the commitment to publish a broad range of ideas. There has been little dialogue and almost no give-and-take. Yet there is strong evidence that conversation works, if not to fully resolve differences at least to build greater interpersonal understanding and lower the temperature of conflict, opening the way to further communication.

The National Coalition Against Censorship has some experience in this area. In 2017, building on groundwork by the American Booksellers Association, we launched a pilot program, the Open Discussion Project, that sought to bring liberals and conservatives together in independent bookstores to discuss the issues that divide them. This seems even more foolhardy today than it was four years ago, but we did our homework. We learned that political polarization was not new. Researchers had identified the problem in the 1970s, and nonprofits have been trying to find a solution ever since.

There were some encouraging results from experiments with groups that were small enough to let the members get to know one another. They developed empathy, making it possible for them to discuss their differences.

We were surprised by the large turnout at the initial meetings in the six stores participating in the pilot. We had hoped that the groups would be small, but 80 people showed up at the first meeting at Gibsons Bookstore in Concord, N.H. The pilot established that many people are eager to engage with those who hold different viewsnot to punish or convert them but to find a place where they can discuss their differences.

While we were unable to proceed with a national rollout of the program, two of the stores continue to hold meetings and others are considering restarting their groups. The Bipartisan Book Club, which began at Politics and Prose in Washington, D.C., includes liberals, conservatives, and libertarians. Now operated by its members, the club meets every six weeks to discuss books that present different perspectives. The topics include policing, gender identity, social cohesion, capitalism, antifa, and diversity.

More evidence of success is the response to Nadine Strossens book Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship. As the president of the ACLU from 1991 to 2008 and a prominent defender of civil liberties, Strossen has always had a busy speaking schedule. But between the publication of her book in May 2018 and the beginning of the pandemic, she made more than 300 appearances, mostly to talk about hate speech.

Though Strossen often speaks to junior high and high school students, many of her events were on college campuses where activists were organizing against racism. Instead of fearing the wrath of students, she urged those who had invited her to actively reach out to students who disagree with her. Many did attend speeches and rejected her argument that restrictions on hate speech are ineffective, but other students were convinced by her argument that the best way to fight hate is to continue to organize and protest against it.

There is so much that is encouraging about our new age of protest and its promise for eliminating the injustices suffered by people of color, women, and members of the LGBTQ community. Inevitably, this has put pressure on all of our major institutions to change. It is particularly difficult for publishers, who must balance their desire to be more inclusive with a commitment to promote free expression.

To maintain this balance, we must commit ourselves to talking about the problem. NCAC is ready to do whatever it can to help. My email is chris@ncac.org.

Christopher M. Finan is the executive director of the National Coalition Against Censorship and the author of From the Palmer Raids to the Patriot Act: A History of the Fight for Free Speech in America.

A version of this article appeared in the 05/31/2021 issue of Publishers Weekly under the headline: Talking About Censorship and Publishing

Visit link:
Talking About Censorship and Publishing - Publishers Weekly