EIR LEAD EDITORIAL FOR SATURDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2021
Can We Talk About the Threat of War and Green Suicide?
Oct. 8, 2021 (EIRNS)—Physical economic mayhem disrupts supply chains and businesses. Malthusian “green” ideology renders power systems unreliable and makes full development for poorer countries and communities impossible. Military tensions rise with Russia and China.
Will you be allowed to talk about these issues?
Not if the modern financial-military empire centered in the City of London, Wall Street, and Washington—through the aid of Silicon Valley—gets its way.
The ongoing PR stunt of a supposed “whistleblower” (Frances Haugen) courageously revealing to the world that Facebook isn’t doing enough censoring is just another step towards crushing the freedom of speech, particularly in the country whose protection for such freedom has historically been among the very strongest—the United States.
The Silicon Valley CEOs routinely brought before the Congress to be presented with demands for increased censorship against “misinformation” are being asked to impose control over the internet akin to that exerted over most of the legacy media. Through normalizing a discussion of “safe spaces,” “microaggressions,” and the danger of “unfettered discussion” on the internet, the centers of media and cultural influence are driving a trend under which younger people in particular are increasingly supportive of government-imposed restrictions on speech. These restrictions are laughably but ominously demanded by the legacy media, whose output is often the very quintessence of “misinformation.”
An example of what the Frances Haugen stunt seeks to impose is seen in the recent decisions by Google and its subsidiary YouTube to refuse ads and monetization to content that challenges a central tactic for Malthusian control—the “climate change” fraud, according to which humanity faces absolutely devastating and irreversible changes in the climate, caused by human development itself.
Government demands for increased censorship plainly run afoul of the First Amendment. And onerous content moderation requirements will make it all but impossible for competitors to the social media monopolies to enter the market. Facebook can afford to employ a worldwide army of content moderators to meet regulatory requirements. Can a start-up? What happened to social media app Parler, itself reaching #1 status in app stores before being banned by Google, Apple, and Amazon?
This march towards authoritarianism seeks to prevent discussion of the very real need to reject the warfare and economic devastation of a new supranational regime of financial control through a “green” emergency (9/11 anyone?). And the need for such a discussion cannot be exaggerated.
Shortly after a somewhat fruitful meeting between U.S. and Chinese diplomats in Europe, the China-hating Wall Street Journal published a report of U.S. military personnel conducting training in Taiwan. Whether or not this was actually news to the mainland government, it demanded a response. “We must resolutely define the deployment of U.S. troops in Taiwan as an ‘invasion,’ ” wrote China’s Global Times. “The mainland has the right to carry out military strikes against them at any time. ... Once a war breaks out in the Taiwan Straits, those U.S. military personnel will be the first to be eliminated.”
(If the One-China policy is respected, these U.S. military trainers would be like having Russian spetsnaz forces training militia members in Texas, or Iranian military experts working in Detroit, or the Taliban conducting IED training in Miami. How would the U.S. respond to such actions?)
Combine this with NATO’s decision to yank the accreditations of half of the Russian diplomats who work there in Brussels. The march toward military conflict is clear.
A revolutionary change in policy, culture, and self-identity is required to arrest the descent into Dark Age chaos, and to embark instead on a program of world growth driven by scientific-technological progress and earnestly sought development goals, as in world health.
It is only by virtue of the potential for individuals and institutions to develop and act on newly found courage that war is not inevitable. Will mankind meet that test?