Conscious Choice cover

From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

 
Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.

 

“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.

 

Available everywhere for $3.99 (before discount) at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all ebook vendors, or direct from the ebook publisher, ebookit. And if you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.


Today’s blacklisted American: Democrats introduce Senate bill demanding companies censor social media

Democrats: No soapbox free speech allowed
Democrats: No soapbox allowed! Photo: GeorgeLouis

Blacklists are back and the Democrats got ’em! Two Democrats, Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) and Ben Ray Lujan (D-New Mexico), yesterday proposed a new law that would force social media companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter to immediately remove any posts on their platforms that includes medical information those Democrats disagree with.

If the companies do not do so, they will be held liable for those posts.

As has become typical of Democrats, they label any information they disagree with as “misinformation.” To make sure their definition is sustained, their bill would have the federal government determine what is correct and not correct. That definition would then be used to justify silencing any other opinions.

Such a law would essentially repeal the First Amendment of the Constitution. Free speech will be banned. Only government-approved speech in connection with health will be allowed. If such a law was upheld by the courts (a very distinct possibility in today’s legal culture), it could quickly be expanded to cover all speech on any subject.

There is some irony in this Democratic Party proposal. It essentially is doing, in a narrow focused way, what many Republicans have been demanding, eliminating the Section 230 law that defines these social media giants not as publishers but as utilities and thus protects them from any liability for anything published on their platforms.

As a publisher these platforms would have the right to decide what they publish, but would be liable if they publish something that causes harm to someone else. As utilities however they are free from liability but are required to allow anyone to post anything they want on their platforms.

Since these internet social media companies have clearly decided in the past year that they can decide what goes on their platforms — repeatedly censoring and blacklisting conservative news outlets — they no longer are acting as utilities as defined by Section 230 but as publishers, and Republicans have thus called for the end of the 230 protections.

This new Democrat bill would do exactly this, but in only one area, and as designed would not encourage open debate but instead restrict the free speech of anyone disagreeing with the government’s medical advice.

All hail our Democratic Party lords and the federal bureacrats who work for them! Their proclamations shall not be questioned, by anyone at anytime.

What this law really exposes is the false idea by some Republican politicians and pundits that changing the Section 230 will solve anything. It won’t. As long as these big social media companies have no viable competition and maintain their tight partnership with the Democratic Party, both will still rule, and will continue to do anything they want. Lawsuits won’t really stop them. Nor will law revisions.

Stop using Google as your search engine. Get rid of gmail. Use alternative video outlets instead of YouTube, whenver possible. And by God, avoid Twitter like the plague. It has some value as a video alternative to YouTube, but for news and political analysis it is a sewer and worse than useless as it encourages mindless and emotional mob rule.

As for Facebook, I never understood why anyone depended on it to begin with. Abandon it. Find other ways to talk to relatives, such as doing something astonishing like calling or visiting them!

Readers!
 

My July fund-raising campaign for 2021 has now ended. Thank you all for your donations and subscriptions. While this year’s campaign was not as spectacular as last year’s, it was the second best July campaign since I began this website.


And if you have not yet donated or subscribed, and you think what I write here is worth your support, you can still do so. I depend on this support to remain independent and free to write what I believe, without any pressure from others. Nor do I accept advertisements, or use oppressive social media companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook. I depend wholly on the direct support of my readers.


If you choose to help, you can contribute via Patreon or PayPal. To use Patreon, go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation. For PayPal click one of the following buttons:
 


 

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


 

If Patreon or Paypal don't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 

Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

12 comments

  • Gary in Transit

    At least they are on the record with what they want. They want to go back to the European dark ages where one view was dictated by the Catholic church and contrary views were not tollerated. I expect the orthodox Covid dictates will morph into the realm of climate “science”. We have been warned.

  • t-dub

    Medicine is not just a set of facts, it is part art and part science, which is why doctors “practice” medicine. That’s why when you consult with another doctor on an issue its called getting a second “opinion”. I had to consult with a surgeon yesterday for an upcoming procedure. We worked together to make choices that allow me to have a less invasive procedure as an outpatient, avoiding a hospital stay, with still an excellent probability of success.

    The government has NO place being in between me and my doctors, or in controlling what kind of medical information or opinions that we use when making the best decisions that we can for me. This is why government run healthcare is a disaster. If the government gives you your healthcare, they can also take it away.

  • wayne

    t-dub-
    (wish you well on your procedure)

    You are correct of course.
    I would however put forth the proposition that the Federal Government has been in between your Doctor and You, for about 120 years.

  • This is how intellectual inbreeding takes over a society, and unplugs the vast majority of our distributed intellect from the problem-solving process.

    Another example of how the Left views the world, as They Are Normal vs. The Evil Others … as though they are omniscient and infallible.

    That is a faith more blind, given human history and human nature, than anything coming from church, synagogue, mosque or temple. They are the cultists that they accuse us of being, just because we got behind a man who actually acted with respect for our rights (unlike They Who Know Better).

  • Cluebat

    Mr. Zimmerman, I believe you need to be a little bit more critical about the plan here.

    They say to the public that this is all about Covid-19, and controlling misinformation in social media, but I am sure that is a cover. When we finally are allowed to read the bill it will be non-specific misinformation directed first at election stories and investigations going into the mid-terms and will continue indefinitely to protect the elites.

    “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

    We had a nice republic there, for awhile. VDH only roughly covered the situation is his recent article about our “Descent Into Madness”- we have gone full Bizarro in Superman terms.

    #SorryNotOptimistic

  • Edward

    t-dub wrote: “This is why government run healthcare is a disaster. If the government gives you your healthcare, they can also take it away.

    Most likely, however, is that they will not allow an alternate in the case that their government-approved method, procedure, or treatment does not work for you. Notice how government forbade anyone from using hydroxychloroquine for Wuhan flu. How many hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved had they not imposed that ban?

    Once we are disallowed from complaining about poor healthcare, it won’t matter at all how poor the government’s healthcare system or policies are. No one will be allowed to tell them, but they already don’t care. As time marches on, this carelessness will extend into every other aspect of life, commerce, and governance.

    They’re from the government, but they’re not here to help.

  • wayne

    Murray Rothbard
    The American Economy and the End Laissez-Faire: 1870 to World War II:
    Lecture 12, “The Great Cooperation”
    https://youtu.be/f8rIfQJKYV4
    1:29:29

    “Public housing, planned cities, government power plants, and coerced unionism were all part of the great cooperation between corporations and government through WWI and WWII. Milton Friedman proposed the withholding tax in WWII. Statistics came into being. Cartels were created to manage many industries, e.g. railroads and food. Unions were pro-war forces. Fascism was considered great. Civil liberties were dropped. Coolidge continued as a Morgan man…..”

  • Gary in Transit

    They should call it ‘The Rand Paul STFU Science Integrity Act’

  • MarkG

    This is one of those proposals that only works as long as they hold power. They haven’t stopped to think what would happen if Donald Trump had been able to kick people off of social media for making incorrect statements.

  • Edward

    Under normal circumstances, we learn by questioning. In the case of Wuhan flu, however, we are not allowed to question. We must accept unconditionally what the government tells us, even when it tells us contradictory information. In a year and a half, we have learned virtually nothing about controlling the Wuhan flu, and this is a major difference between this disease and every other modern disease. Ebola, SARS, Bird Flu, and others have also been deadly, but we were able to question and research, and those diseases were easily quashed. Wuhan, has flourished, and measures that were supposed to prevent additional waves of spread failed to prevent them. However, we are disallowed to point out that the measures taken were responsible for the additional waves, that the solutions were themselves super-spreaders. We may even be required to go back to face diapers.

    Medications that showed efficacy were banned from use and research. The CDC recommended face diapers but requires quarantine for all exposed to Wuhan virus whether or not either party wore face diapers. We are not allowed to ask why wearing face diapers does not matter despite the insistence that face diapers prevent spread. What a contradiction this is.

    If we are unable to question why the supposed solution fails to work, then how are we to find a working solution. Since we are unable to find any working solution, Wuhan is able to spread unchecked, unlike our other modern diseases. Those in charge of our medical system have completely destroyed our ability to fight disease. The experts think that they know the solution, but they don’t. When their solution fails, they only insist that we apply more of their solution rather than find a real solution. This is why they are talking about bringing back face diaper mandates.

    We are living under a new normal of circumstances. In the last dozen years, the government has told us what to buy, what to wear, how to worship, where to go, and now what to say. The Supreme Court has removed all limits on the control that government has over us, and governors have been allowed to overuse their emergency powers in order to impose overbearing and ineffectual solutions to the emergency. Had the solutions worked, the emergency would not have lasted so long — assuming it is even an emergency, since it is declared by the very same governors who have taken total control of our lives despite the problem being so much less than it had been. This total control is a bad thing, but now that our freedom to speak has been abridged, we are not allowed to complain about it. It seems that this totalitarianism is here to stay.

    Welcome to Obama’s America, land of the formerly free.

  • Edward

    The whole point of the First Amendment is to prevent the government from telling us what we can and cannot say. We are supposed to be able to ask whether the government was right the first time, when it begged us not to use masks because they don’t work, or if they were right the second time when it mandated mask use, or the third time when it said that two masks were better. We are supposed to be able to ask: if masks work then why is a second one better rather than a waste of a mask? We are supposed to be able to ask: if the various solutions work then why don’t they work or why no one was allowed to use medications that showed that they saved lives, and why no one was allowed to test other medications for life-saving abilities. We are supposed to be able to ask: why were infected people sent into nursing homes, which are full of people with comorbidities? We are supposed to be able to ask why the least vulnerable were protected and the most vulnerable were infected. Why change from methods that worked for well over a century to new methods that do not work at all?

    And we should get answers, not censorship.

    Face diapers didn’t work the last time, so why should we expect them to work this time? Lockdowns didn’t work, and now we are learning that the vaccine is also failing to protect us. But controlling what we say and hear is going to work?

    Controlling what we know and what we cannot find out seems as though the government does not want us to discover that it is less than perfect. It is as though the government does not want us to learn that its solutions have failed every time, that the government thinks that if it increases the application of non-solutions then they will eventually work.

    With a success rate like this, aren’t you glad the government does not design or build the airplanes you fly on? Aren’t you glad the government is not in charge of your health care?

    Oh, wait.

Readers: the rules for commenting!

 

No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.

 

However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.

 

Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *