The alternative media industry is about to be crushed by ruthless Technocrats bent on transforming the global society into a Utopian Technocracy. (Technocracy is fully documented in my book, Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation)
For anyone who thought that the threat of Technocracy was non-existent or overblown, they will soon find out just how wrong they were. Furthermore, those who thought Technocracy was benign or benevolent will soon feel the sharp iron teeth digging into them.
The big three social media giants, Google, Facebook and Twitter, are in process of purging en mass popular anti-media personalities and materials. You know the names. It is draconian and ruthless, leaving no room for appeal or reconsideration: “here today, gone tomorrow.”
Unfortunately, many of those who are being targeted will take down countless others (many of whom are innocent bystanders) as they themselves crash and burn.
It is unfortunate because many have collectively adopted the same sloppy and reckless treatment of the truth that they hate about the mainstream media: half-truths, un-truths, a-priori accusations without adequate proof, etc.
This delights the Technocrat steam-roller because all they need to do is point to those journalistic indiscretions as they crush them, as the rest of the world cheers them on. It doesn’t matter how much truth was presented along the way, they are banned for their non-truths.
If there is any take-a-way from this, it is the need to return to responsible, fact-based, well-researched investigative journalism. What we say must be so well documented that it is totally defensible before any opposing group. American’s don’t need fist shaking rants of anger. They simply need the truth, and alternative media has been sending a mixed message for a long time.
Another aspect of “crash and burn” that should be addressed is the use of disinformation and misinformation for the sole purpose of aggregating resistance into one place so they can be nullified.
A perfect example of this was the “Hundred Flowers” campaign started in then-Communist China in 1956. The Communist Party of China (CPC) and Mao Zedong himself publicly encouraged “The policy of letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend is designed to promote the flourishing of the arts and the progress of science.” After all the non-ideologues were identified, Mao ordered their elimination or reeducation in labor camps. Problem solved. To Mao, that was an easy and efficient way to get rid of his detractors.
This writer has observed agents of misinformation and disinformation for over four decades. It is usually pointless in trying to expose them because they have already fortified their defense perimeter in advance, as an intentional part of their campaign. In the end, when it is too late to matter and the damage has been done, they are exposed for who they are. By that time, nobody cares anyway.
Psychologist Irving Janus nailed it in his 1972 book Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. He stated,
“I use the term groupthink as a quick and easy way to refer to the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive ingroup that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action. Groupthink is a term of the same order as the words in the newspeak vocabulary George Orwell used in his dismaying world of 1984. In that context, groupthink takes on an invidious connotation. Exactly such a connotation is intended, since the term refers to a deterioration in mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgments as a result of group pressures.”
“The more amiability and esprit de corps there is among the members of a policy-making ingroup, the greater the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against outgroups.”
Progressives and Technocrats have been guilty of Groupthink for decades. Various elements of their conservative opposition have been just as guilty. The result: two ideological, opposing “Groupthinks” fighting each other, where the stronger Groupthink ultimately vanquishes the weaker.
In any case, the fact remains that the real and present danger to society is Technocracy, and it is ascending with great power and influence right before our eyes.
In the meantime, cooler heads must prevail to salvage the aftermath. It’s time to get back to the drawing board and figure out how to stop it.