Why The Worldview of The People Building AI Matters

 Why The Worldview of The People Building AI Matters

By: Andrew Torba

As I wrote in my last post, I believe it is absolutely essential that people understand who is building AI and what their worldviews and values are because they will inevitably and unavoidably be reflected in the AI’s programming. Worldview matters because worldview is going to shape the development of the most important and powerful technology since the invention of the printing press, AI. I’d like to make a clear distinction between what our worldview is here at Gab and contrast it with the worldview of those in Silicon Valley.

Our enemies are not bright, cunning, or tough. They are theatre kids and effeminate midwit dorks. Like a house of cards, they will easily fall over under the slightest bit of resistance and pressure. They also hate God and humanity itself, which is why I believe our victory is inevitable.

The worldview of those in Silicon Valley who are building AI is a sick and twisted one that likens human beings to mere cattle, destined to be corralled by those who wield power and force.

Take Sam Altman for example, the CEO of Open AI, who recently tweeted the following:

language models just being programmed to try to predict the next word is true, but it’s not the dunk some people think it is. animals, including us, are just programmed to try to survive and reproduce, and yet amazingly complex and beautiful stuff comes from it.

This is a prototypical secular humanist view on humanity: “you’re just an animal, a biological computer, a clump of cells.” It’s the same argument abortionists endorse in the “pro-choice” movement and it’s an argument that falls flat on its face when contrasted with how God reveals to us His view on humanity in His Word.

The amazingly complex and beautiful “stuff” that comes from humanity comes directly from God precisely because we were made in His image. The idea of being made in the image of God is first introduced in the book of Genesis, which describes how God created Adam and Eve in his own image. In Genesis 1:26-27, we read: “Then God said, ‘Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

To be made in the image of God means that we share something of His nature and character. It means that we have the capacity for reason, creativity, and moral discernment. This is what makes human beings unique from being mere animals. It also means that we have a special relationship with God, one that is based on a shared identity and purpose.

The idea of being made in the image of God is not limited to the creation of Adam and Eve. Throughout the Bible, we see examples of people who reflect God’s image in their words and actions. For example, in the book of Exodus, Moses is described as having spoken with God face to face, and his face was said to have shone with the glory of God (Exodus 33:11-23). Similarly, in the New Testament, Jesus is described as the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15), and his followers are called to be conformed to his likeness (Romans 8:29).

The concept of being made in the image of God has important implications for how we understand ourselves and others. It means that every human being, regardless of their race, gender, or social status, has inherent value and dignity. It also means that we have a responsibility to treat others with respect and compassion, recognizing that they too are made in the image of God.

At the same time, the concept of being made in the image of God is a reminder of our limitations and our need for God’s grace. While we share something of God’s nature, we are not God ourselves, and we are prone to sin and error. Our capacity for reason and creativity can be used for good or evil, and our moral discernment is often clouded by our own biases and prejudices.

At the core of the secular humanist worldview is the belief that individuals should be free to pursue their own happiness and fulfillment, as long as they do not harm others in the process. Secular humanists reject the idea that human beings are inherently flawed or sinful, as the Bible clearly reveals to us. Instead, they view human beings as capable of making positive contributions to society, and believe that individuals have the ability to improve themselves and the world around them through reason, education, and action.

This is why we see the rise of things in our society that are tearing the moral fabric of the Western world. Things like drag queens stripping for children, men competing in women’s sports, and the normalization of baby murder in the womb to name a few. With a worldview that has no moral ground to stand on and views everyone as mere animals, anything becomes possible.

Additionally, secular humanists tend to reject the notion that humans have a special place in the natural world, or that they are somehow separate from or superior to other animals. Instead, they view humans as part of the natural world, subject to the same physical and biological laws as other living creatures.

Christian theology offers a distinct response to the secular humanist worldview, particularly in its views on the nature and value of humanity. According to the Bible, humans are not merely the result of biological and social processes, but are endowed with a spiritual aspect that reflects their divine origin. This divine aspect of humanity imbues every individual with intrinsic value, and is the basis for human rights and the dignity of all human life.

Christianity emphasizes the fallen nature of humanity and the need for redemption. While humans are created in God’s image, they are also capable of sin and evil. According to God’s Word, humans are not capable of achieving salvation on their own, but require divine intervention through faith in Jesus Christ. This recognition of human sinfulness and the need for redemption is seen as a fundamental aspect of Christian belief, and a response to the limitations and imperfections of human nature.

Christianity offers a unique view of the purpose and meaning of human existence. While secular humanism emphasizes individual autonomy and the pursuit of personal fulfillment, Christian theology holds that the ultimate purpose of human life is to know, love, and serve God. Humans are not simply self-contained individuals, but are part of a larger community of believers who share a common purpose and mission. This emphasis on community and service is an important response to the individualism and self-centeredness of secular humanism.

Humans were “programmed” to worship, serve, and glorify God. Instead many of us willingly choose to enslave ourselves to sin and desire by acting as beasts do. Reducing humanity to mere primal and biological tendencies is both intellectually lazy and spiritually empty. Sam and other secular humanists place you and I in the category of “animal” because they believe that they are the superior animal and are therefore entitled to have dominion over all of us.

This view is a grotesque perversion of God’s Word remade in their own image, as the Devil always does. The reality is we are all children of God, not mere animals reduced to the biological impulse to survive and reproduce. On this Truth we must stand.

On this firm ground of God’s revealed Truth, Gab is building Based AI.

Andrew Torba
CEO, Gab.com
Jesus Christ is King of kings

America Is a Prison Disguised as Paradise

John & Nisha Whitehead

From the OffGuardian

 If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They’ll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government.”

President Dwight D. Eisenhower

The government wants us to bow down to its dictates. It wants us to buy into the fantasy that we are living the dream, when in fact, we are trapped in an endless nightmare of servitude and oppression.

Indeed, with every passing day, life in the American Police State increasingly resembles life in the dystopian television series The Prisoner.

First broadcast 55 years ago in the U.S., The Prisoner—described as “James Bond meets George Orwell filtered through Franz Kafka”—confronted societal themes that are still relevant today: the rise of a police state, the loss of freedom, round-the-clock surveillance, the corruption of government, totalitarianism, weaponization, group think, mass marketing, and the tendency of human beings to meekly accept their lot in life as prisoners in a prison of their own making.

Perhaps the best visual debate ever on individuality and freedom, The Prisoner centers around a British secret agent who abruptly resigns only to find himself imprisoned in a virtual prison disguised as a seaside paradise with parks and green fields, recreational activities and even a butler.

While luxurious, the Village’s inhabitants have no true freedom, they cannot leave the Village, they are under constant surveillance, all of their movements tracked by militarized drones, and stripped of their individuality so that they are identified only by numbers.

“I am not a number. I am a free man,” is the mantra chanted in each episode of The Prisoner, which was largely written and directed by Patrick McGoohan, who also played the title role of Number Six, the imprisoned government agent.

Throughout the series, Number Six is subjected to interrogation tactics, torture, hallucinogenic drugs, identity theft, mind control, dream manipulation, and various forms of social indoctrination and physical coercion in order to “persuade” him to comply, give up, give in and subjugate himself to the will of the powers-that-be.

Number Six refuses to comply.

In every episode, Number Six resists the Village’s indoctrination methods, struggles to maintain his own identity, and attempts to escape his captors. “I will not make any deals with you,” he pointedly remarks to Number Two, the Village administrator a.k.a. prison warden. “I’ve resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.”

Yet no matter how far Number Six manages to get in his efforts to escape, it’s never far enough.

Watched by surveillance cameras and other devices, Number Six’s attempts to escape are continuously thwarted by ominous white balloon-like spheres known as “rovers.”

Still, he refuses to give up.

“Unlike me,” he says to his fellow prisoners, “many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment, and will die here like rotten cabbages.”

Number Six’s escapes become a surreal exercise in futility, each episode an unfunny, unsettling Groundhog’s Day that builds to the same frustrating denouement: there is no escape.

As journalist Scott Thill concludes for Wired:

Rebellion always comes at a price. During the acclaimed run of The Prisoner, Number Six is tortured, battered and even body-snatched: In the episode ‘Do Not Forsake Me Oh My Darling,’ his mind is transplanted to another man’s body. Number Six repeatedly escapes The Village only to be returned to it in the end, trapped like an animal, overcome by a restless energy he cannot expend, and betrayed by nearly everyone around him.”

The series is a chilling lesson about how difficult it is to gain one’s freedom in a society in which prison walls are disguised within the seemingly benevolent trappings of technological and scientific progress, national security and the need to guard against terrorists, pandemics, civil unrest, etc.

As Thill noted, “The Prisoner was an allegory of the individual, aiming to find peace and freedom in a dystopia masquerading as a utopia.”

The Prisoner’s Village is also an apt allegory for the American Police State, which is rapidly transitioning into a full-fledged Surveillance State: it gives the illusion of freedom while functioning all the while like a prison: controlled, watchful, inflexible, punitive, deadly and inescapable.

The American Surveillance State, much like The Prisoner’s Village, is a metaphorical panopticon, a circular prison in which the inmates are monitored by a single watchman situated in a central tower. Because the inmates cannot see the watchman, they are unable to tell whether or not they are being watched at any given time and must proceed under the assumption that they are always being watched.

Eighteenth century social theorist Jeremy Bentham envisioned the panopticon prison to be a cheaper and more effective means of “obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example.”

Bentham’s panopticon, in which the prisoners are used as a source of cheap, menial labor, has become a model for the modern surveillance state in which the populace is constantly being watched, controlled and managed by the powers-that-be while funding its existence.

Nowhere to run and nowhere to hide: this is the mantra of the architects of the Surveillance State and their corporate collaborators.

Government eyes are watching you.

They see your every move: what you read, how much you spend, where you go, with whom you interact, when you wake up in the morning, what you’re watching on television and reading on the internet.

Every move you make is being monitored, mined for data, crunched, and tabulated in order to amass a profile of who you are, what makes you tick, and how best to control you when and if it becomes necessary to bring you in line.

When the government sees all and knows all and has an abundance of laws to render even the most seemingly upstanding citizen a criminal and lawbreaker, then the old adage that you’ve got nothing to worry about if you’ve got nothing to hide no longer applies.

Apart from the obvious dangers posed by a government that feels justified and empowered to spy on its people and use its ever-expanding arsenal of weapons and technology to monitor and control them, we’re approaching a time in which we will be forced to choose between bowing down in obedience to the dictates of the government—i.e., the law, or whatever a government official deems the law to be—and maintaining our individuality, integrity and independence.

When people talk about privacy, they mistakenly assume it protects only that which is hidden behind a wall or under one’s clothing. The courts have fostered this misunderstanding with their constantly shifting delineation of what constitutes an “expectation of privacy.” And technology has furthered muddied the waters.

However, privacy is so much more than what you do or say behind locked doors. It is a way of living one’s life firm in the belief that you are the master of your life, and barring any immediate danger to another person (which is far different from the carefully crafted threats to national security the government uses to justify its actions), it’s no one’s business what you read, what you say, where you go, whom you spend your time with, and how you spend your money.

Unfortunately, George Orwell’s 1984—where “you had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized”—has now become our reality.

We now find ourselves in the unenviable position of being monitored, managed, corralled and controlled by technologies that answer to government and corporate rulers.

Consider that on any given day, the average American going about his daily business will be monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways, by both government and corporate eyes and ears.

A byproduct of this new age in which we live, whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency is listening in and tracking your behavior.

This doesn’t even begin to touch on the corporate trackers that monitor your purchases, web browsing, Facebook posts and other activities taking place in the cyber sphere.

Stingray devices mounted on police cars to warrantlessly track cell phones, Doppler radar devices that can detect human breathing and movement within in a home, license plate readers that can record up to 1800 license plates per minute, sidewalk and “public space” cameras coupled with facial recognition and behavior-sensing technology that lay the groundwork for police “pre-crime” programs, police body cameras that turn police officers into roving surveillance cameras, the internet of things: all of these technologies (and more) add up to a society in which there’s little room for indiscretions, imperfections, or acts of independence—especially not when the government can listen in on your phone calls, read your emails, monitor your driving habits, track your movements, scrutinize your purchases and peer through the walls of your home.

As French philosopher Michel Foucault concluded in his 1975 book Discipline and Punish, “Visibility is a trap.”

This is the electronic concentration camp—the panopticon prison—the Village—in which we are now caged.

It is a prison from which there will be no escape. Certainly not if the government and its corporate allies have anything to say about it.

As Glenn Greenwald notes:

“The way things are supposed to work is that we’re supposed to know virtually everything about what [government officials] do: that’s why they’re called public servants. They’re supposed to know virtually nothing about what we do: that’s why we’re called private individuals. This dynamic – the hallmark of a healthy and free society – has been radically reversed. Now, they know everything about what we do, and are constantly building systems to know more. Meanwhile, we know less and less about what they do, as they build walls of secrecy behind which they function. That’s the imbalance that needs to come to an end. No democracy can be healthy and functional if the most consequential acts of those who wield political power are completely unknown to those to whom they are supposed to be accountable.”

None of this will change, no matter which party controls Congress or the White House, because despite all of the work being done to help us buy into the fantasy that things will change if we just elect the right candidate, we’ll still be prisoners of the Village.

So how do you escape? For starters, resist the urge to conform to a group mind and the tyranny of mob-think as controlled by the Deep State.

Think for yourself. Be an individual.

As McGoohan commented in 1968, “At this moment individuals are being drained of their personalities and being brainwashed into slaves… As long as people feel something, that’s the great thing. It’s when they are walking around not thinking and not feeling, that’s tough. When you get a mob like that, you can turn them into the sort of gang that Hitler had.”

You want to be free? Remove the blindfold that blinds you to the Deep State’s con game, stop doping yourself with government propaganda, and break free of the political chokehold that has got you marching in lockstep with tyrants and dictators.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, until you come to terms with the fact that the government is the problem (no matter which party dominates), you’ll never stop being prisoners.

Support the Off Guardian

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at john@rutherford.org

Political and Cultural essay : Then and Now. Part 1 of 3 repost

 

"As political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends correspondingly to increase. And the dictator…will do well to encourage that freedom. In conjunction with freedom to daydream under the influence of dope, the movies and the radio, it will help to reconcile his subjects to the servitude that is their fate". -   Aldous Huxley Introduction to ‘Brave New World’ The Great Generation The generation that fought World War II was arguably the finest produced by this or any other nation. Those who fought did so to save their country’s freedom and to secure a better future for themselves, their families and their people, the British.  Many of those who did and are still with us are bitter and despairing, when they contemplate the changes which have occurred in the country they loved. Certainly, there is no denying that on the whole, its people are materially much better off now than they were then. Social relations show a sometimes welcome relaxation. People have readier access to healthcare and to education. Foreign travel is no longer the prerogative of the better off; and so on. But in many other important respects, the future that those who went to war had hoped for has never arrived. Changes for the Worse And there has been so much change for the worse. The country’s method of government, the elective dictatorship, never truly represented the people so much as the ruling elites. Now, in key areas of life, it represents them even less as these elites have changed to those of the liberal left and power shifts to Europe.  Additionally, other, heart-rending changes have occurred which have brought alienation and decay to the land. Changes which were unwanted and unasked for by most of its people and have crept up on them unawares, engineered or allowed to happen by the political elites. Views Now Held By the BNP Though they were conscious of much social and economic injustice, the war-time generation were united by a strong sense of community and of loyalty, arising from a common history and culture, religious background and notions of morality. The importance of all this is that they had views which are now not much different from those now held by the BNP.  Those who fought the Nazis would today find themselves, very often, vilified as ‘fascist’ and ‘bigoted’ by the current ruling power elites in politics, the media and elsewhere. Invasion Threat Then and Now In the war, inspired by their great leader, Churchill, who epitomised the national spirit, they had fought, in his words, to ‘save Christian Civilisation’ and to keep their islands from invasion so that their nation could continue its way of life unmolested in this, the ancient homeland of their ancestors. Then, they were inspired by their pride in the tremendous achievements of their ancestors in every sphere of human endeavour, including their pioneering struggles to create a free, fair and decent society for themselves and their descendants. Now, their love of country and their natural and humanly normal affection for their own people and their ways are officially despised and if not actually illegal, then almost so. Now, the British  must watch as their nation’s great past is ignored or traduced by their own leadership, or its very existence denied, while the elite state teaches their young people a perverted, truncated version of history  designed to give no real idea of the continuing story of their people in these islands and which dwells too much on that which can be held to their country’s discredit. An Evil Policy of Deliberate Deracination By this means our rulers hope that our youth will be deprived of any real knowledge of or regard for their ancestors and of any idea of themselves as their heirs, in order to crush their sense of belonging to the land of their forefathers, its towns and communities. The Goal This, they hope, will facilitate their apparent goal; the creation of an atomised, essentially empty and inhuman society of rootless, anonymous, connectionless individuals; producers and consumers feeling no real attachment or loyalty towards anything outside themselves and their family, friends and ‘partners’ except perhaps consumer brands, football teams or entertainment stars.. Filching our Freedoms Now, that independence from Continental domination from which they had saved their inheritance with the blood of hundreds of thousands is stealthily filched from them with lies and subterfuge, as their country is surrendered by their rulers to a European Superstate recognisably in the mould of continental tyrannies from Napoleon to the Soviet Union. Like its forerunners, this latest doomed creation of the internationalist power elites is hostile to everything distinctively British: British institutions, British freedoms under the common law, British ways, the British character, the British nation.. … Our cultural Bedrock                                At the time of World War II, though weakened by the false perceptions that it is incompatible with the modern science it had created and that the horrors of war meant that God must be absent, the British interpretation of Christianity still held powerful sway in the land they knew. It remained the unspoken assumption of the best in thought and action for nearly everyone, and lay behind the honour of public, and the decencies of private life. Christian ideas about the individual and Christian principles of morality moulded the institutions and the laws of the state and the behaviour required of its members. Now, their state is ‘morally neutral’, which is to say actively anti-Christian in practice, in the interests of a Marxist - inspired,  politically correct vision of society. Now, that war–time generation sees how the religion of their forefathers is routinely set aside by their political masters, and contempt for the creed that helped make the British surely one of the most successful peoples in history, a society at once decent and rumbustious, charitable and self reliant, traditional and innovative, spiritual and commonsensical, is fostered both covertly and openly by those in charge of the public culture. Our Culture Pushed Aside In our schools and elsewhere it is diminished as just one faith among many, whilst the faiths of ethnic minorities are ‘celebrated.’ Thus many British schoolchildren come home to their parents having celebrated Hindu and Islamic festivals, with Easter being ignored. Christmas is renamed ‘Winterval,’ Christian symbols are banned in the workplace and Christians are otherwise forced to adopt the diktats of Political Correctness Christianity is at the very core of British  culture, civilisation and achievement. Britain was the birth place of the Industrial Revolution, a Revolution which would not have taken place without Christianity. Uniquely Christian ideas about a rational God and his lawful universe were the origin of the modern scientific method, which requires the belief that the universe can and should be understood and predicted. Non-Conformist attitudes about the dignity of labour allowed scientific ideas to be turned into technology. Christian stress on the importance of the individual lay behind the growth of personal liberty, without which a modern economy is impossible, and of Parliamentary Democracy. All these developments have lifted hundreds of millions out of ignorance, poverty, disease and oppression and have been instrumental in the rise of the status of women. Marxism Patronises Then, because of Christianity, people were dignified and esteemed as equal in the sight of God. As such, and through the ancient traditions of their ancestors, they were held responsible for their own actions, knowing right from wrong. Now, the patronising Marxist idea holds sway that environment is responsible for all, and that indeed there is no right and wrong, only different, equally valid ‘values’. Thus the worst offender is excused as either ill or a victim of some imagined oppression, and he or she is diminished as a mere creature of environment rather than a sovereign person of free will and choice. Then (1941), at the height of the war and deprivation, England had 359,000 recorded crimes. In 2001 at a time of unparalleled prosperity, there were 5,200,000. Our Common law –The Guarantee of Our Freedoms Then, the common law allowed everything that was not expressly forbidden. Now, as Britain falls increasingly under the sway of the EU, Continental law takes precedence. This forbids everything that is not expressly allowed. Thus British freedoms, so prized in the past as infinitely superior to Continental ‘rights’ are being circumscribed as European EU law takes precedence. Now, ‘Human Rights, a device for removing swathes of behaviour from democratic control, are handed down from the liberal left internationalist power elites and interpreted by them. The call  to moral behaviour of traditional religion and the duties and rights growing out of the people’s own common law are being supplanted so that morality has become , too often, not that which free individuals owe to God, to themselves and to others but what is required by their rulers and what they think they can get away with. Pornography Rules Then, pornography was to be found only under the counter in seedy back streets. Now it is to be seen nightly on National Television. Then, popular songs were about love, tenderness, romance and marriage. Now they are about sex, selfishness aggression and anger. Then, divorce and single parenthood were a rarity. Now, Britain has the highest divorce rate and the greatest proportion of unmarried mothers in Europe, as that bulwark of freedom against the state and transmission of tradition, the family, is attacked by  leftism and unrestrained capitalism. Then, children were innocent and allowed their childhood.  Now, our children are taught about anal sex in schools. Sexual relations are peddled by ‘opinion formers’ as morality-free zones: like drugs, just another consumer requisite in a material society based on self indulgence and emotional incontinence,  rather than self discipline and duty to others…. The Sanctity of Life is becoming History Then, the sanctity of human life was a given. Now, the genetics industry treats human tissue from the unborn as raw material and thousands of babies are murdered in the womb. Some who could live outside their mothers’ bodies have their heads drilled through in partial birth abortions. Now the euthanasia movement gathers strength. So what will follow? This latter will, as has already happened elsewhere,  lead to the pressured  suicide of old people who are made to think they are a burden, and to the killing of others whether they want it or not if medical professionals think their ‘quality of life’ is insufficient. Thus the most repellent aspect of the Nazis,  the killing off of those deemed unworthy of life, is creeping in at the back door with the individuals ‘right to choose.’ And with it will come all human beings as less than they were; as expendable. It’s a Free Country?  No Longer Then, when someone did or said something that another might have found somewhat offensive, both might well have said, as many did,  ‘Well, it’s a free country.’ Now, one never hears this once popular rejoinder. People know that we are no longer free. Read part " of this article at this link part 2 Then and Now

Roald Dahl: The first man down the 1984 memory hole

From The Off Guardian

Roald Dahl: The first man down the memory hole

Kit Knightly

 

The first shocking censorship of 2023 dropped last week. As covered by CJ Hopkins in his most recent column, Roald Dahl’s publishers have hired a team of “sensitivity readers”, in order to edit the next edition of Dahl’s books to remove outdated language.

According to this piece in The New Statesman:

The changes range from the removal of outright racist stereotypes to the deletion of the word “fat”, gendered phrases (be it “chambermaid”, “females” or “hag”) and references to “pink” or “white” skin. In some cases, these are minor tweaks to one or two words in a sentence. Others are far more interventionist, including entire songs rewritten in James and the Giant Peach, or new sentences added in The Witches which explain that there are myriad reasons why people might wear wigs.

While that may read like a PC nightmare, it’s more insidious than that. This is not about being woke or unwoke, it’s about the normalisation of post hoc censorship that should concern everyone.

Some have described the edits as a natural by-product of capitalism.

It’s been noted that the edits come in the wake of the Dahl estate closing a huge deal with Netflix for exclusive rights to all of Dahl’s work. So some are framing this as Netflix seeking to protect their investment by making sure Dahl remains profitable in the age of cancel culture.

But even that is a simplification – after all, Netflix is more than just an entertainment company, they have noted political ties and have relentlessly pushed state-backed propaganda in the past.

Even the choice of Dahl as the man to lead a forlorn hope down the memory hole is carefully calculated. His known racist attitudes make him controversial enough that some will be hesitant to defend his work. While the fact he was a children’s author means anyone who does raise concerns can be dismissed with either indifference (“it’s just a kids books, it doesn’t matter”) or false-moralising (“we need to protect children!”).

He’s the perfect choice to be laid down on the wire.

And if they set a precedent that it’s now ok to go back and “revise language”…what’s next? who’s next? Dickens? Twain?

What about the news. That’s the big ticket item after all, right?

What words will no longer be acceptable next year? “Inside job”? “Guantanamo bay”?

What history will be deemed “offensive”? What facts will be “potentially harmful”?

We’ve already had a little taste of this with Covid, when the death rate of the 1918 Spanish Flu was suddenly revised down in February 2020, to literally physically impossible numbers, just to make covid appear more dangerous.

Mainstream precedents would allow this process to switch from small covert examples to much larger overt ones.

In other book-related news, this week it was widely reported, that the UK government’s anti- terror program, “PREVENT” had placed (among others) Shakespeare, Tolkien and George Orwell on their list of “key texts” that could “radicalise right-wing extremists”.

Somewhat ironically, this practice of retroactive censorship is a tactic straight out of 1984.

No wonder they don’t want us to read it. It doesn’t “create extremists”, but it does give away their plans.

Neil Oliver ‘Under attack…again!!!’ from the Government

.the social contract between the people and governments around the world is broken and it’s the actions of governments, MSM and big pharma that broken it!’ To help support this channel & get extra, exclusive content every week sign up to the ‘Neil Oliver’ Patreon site, https://www.patreon.com/neiloliver Audio Podcasts, Neil Oliver's Love Letter To The World &, Neil Oliver's Love Letter To The British Isles Available on all the usual providers https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast... Check out the Instagram account: Neil Oliver Love Letter https://www.instagram.com/neiloliverl... #neiloliver #bigpharma #MSM #freedom #debate #neiloliverGBNews

.

Nick Griffin And The Irish Model For Resistance Against Cultural Erasure

Thunberg Against Wind - Theology current affairs Irreverend Episode 115

Church of England vicars with a difference as Tom Pelham, Jamie Franklin and Daniel French get together to discuss all the big stories: - Lockdown Files reveal thousands of government WhatsApp messages sent at the height of Covid crisis and Matt Hancock does not come off well. - Hancock squirms on Good Morning Britain as he attempts to excuse his rule-shattering behaviour because it was technically not illegal. - Rev. Dr. Bernard Randall is unsuccessful in unfair dismissal case against Trent College Nottingham. - Greta Thunberg protests against windfarm because it will disturb reindeer. - CofE "spokesman" says Putin is wrong in his criticisms of Church. All this, your email of the week taking Daniel to task for comments about Putin in last week's episode and much more as always! For your merchandise needs: https://irreverendmerch.bss.design Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/irreverend) or Buy Me a Coffee (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/irreverend) Links: Lockdown Files: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/f... Hancock squirms on Good Morning Britain: https://thehighwire.com/videos/bill-g... Bernard Randall: Rod Dreher (https://www.theamericanconservative.c...) and Bernard Randall ( and Bernard Randall) https://thecritic.co.uk/my-fight-for-... Thunberg Against Wind: https://dailysceptic.org/2023/02/27/g... Church "Spokesman” hits back at Putin: https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/article... Notices: Find links to our episodes, social media accounts and ways to support us at https://www.irreverendpod.com! Thursday Circles: http://thursdaycircle.com Jamie's Good Things Substack: https://jamiefranklin.substack.com Irreverend Sermon Audio: https://irreverendsermonaudio.buzzspr...