USA: My Predictions for the Near Future.

 I've already said that 2016 was supposed to be Hillary Clinton's year, that she was such a despised character that even Democrats couldn't stomach voting for her.

So, Trump won in 2016, an aberration in a long line of corporate frontmen. 

The establishment had to do something in 2020, and they did, engineering a win for Biden with such audacity that it was bloody obvious there were shenanigans going on. Right from the get-go, from the primaries all the way up to the actual election, there were..... let's be charitable and call them "issues" with the electoral process.

Now Biden is in power, I expect to see the US slip slowly into the darkest of nights. I do not see sunny uplands for the US under a Biden Presidency.

The first action the establishment will take, is to ensure that Trump cannot set off on his own and create a new party. They will neutralise him as a political opponent. If they can't do it by a direct assault, i.e. impeachment, then they will go after his family.

Once Trump is neutralised, then the left will move on to neutralise Conservatives. Those that assaulted the Capitol Building will be made examples of. They will get massive show trial sentences. I suspect the "Domestic Terrorism" charge will be thrown at the poor unfortunates. "Pour Encourager Les Autres."

I also predict there will be examples of protesters clearly identified in pictures inside the Capitol Building not being prosecuted. They will be the Agent's Provocateur. (lot's of French words today!). They will be the people stirring up the storming of the Capitol, but they will not be conservatives and they will not be prosecuted, even after being identified and outed by Alt Media.

Once those examples have been made, then the establishment will go on to silence the majority.

Conservative voices will be removed from Social Media. Alternative platforms will be removed from the internet.

I predict a China-style firewall installed, "to protect US citizens from Russian interference". 

I also predict that the use of Virtual Private Networks will start to be attacked. Either to regulate them, or to take them away from the ordinary citizen. People will have the ability to see outside the firewall removed.

At that point, the establishment in the US will have complete control over the media and the narrative within US borders. You will not be able to see or hear dissenting voices.

That's the point that the US will slip into the Night politically. It will become a Soviet Socialist State. 

Then the Farms will be attacked. I'm sure entrepreneurs will be attacked or co-opted, forced to praise the state, or work for/with the state. 

Remember, Fascism doesn't always come from the Right. The Italian corporatist Fascism of Mussolini started out as Socialist in nature, then co-opted corporations into working for the state. The state became everything, everything became for and of the state. 

The globalist/corporatist movement we have rolling over the world at the moment is just more of the same just on a grander scale, everything will be for the global good. Corporations have already been co-opted to join the global warming effort, they have already been forced to pander to the BLM movement. 

Once you learn the lesson of history, what is happening in the US politically, the control of voices by the corporations, the use of Antifa thugs to promote pro-corporate protests and assault anti-corporate ones, the take over of media, the silencing of dissent on social media, then you understand we have seen this before in the Thirties.

This is not the National Socialist Fascism of Hitler and the Nazis, so the uneducated cannot identify it as Fascism. In fact those promoting it will show Nazism and say this is nothing like us. 

But Fascism comes in many forms. Not "just" Nazis. 

The Good but Authoritarian Intentions of Platform Providers

There's a great amount of debate at the moment about the banning of Alex Jones from virtually every form of online media. Now personally I think he's very clever and has tapped into into a rich mine of conspiracists, right wingers, and the like who see evil everywhere, but he's not to my taste. But I wouldn't ban him.

Taking a neutral standpoint, if it looks like censorship, smells like censorship and quacks like a duck, then it's censorship. Which is where these "platform providers" stray over a red line.

Previously they have insiststed they cannot censor output because of free speech, they only provide the platform, as a way of dodging laws relating to publishers, for instance libel.

So now if they are editing or censoring  content by banning people they don't like, then "platform providers" move to the status of "publisher" and liable under every law that a publisher is liable.

You can't be both at the same time.

In parallel with this argument is the debate about who is doing the banning, who is being banned and why they are being banned.

First let's look at why people are being banned.

I can see a good argument for platform providers banning proscribed organisations; terrorist groups and those outlawed by government. Or when output is illegal or publicises illegal acts then that is quite legitimate. The platform providers have no choice in the matter and they can rightfully argue that they are platform providers and are only following government restrictions, i.e. they are not publishers.

However, when it comes to banning people because the platform providers don't like their output, when it comes to a matter of taste and not legality, then they move over the red line from platform provider to publisher. They are not proscribing output for legal reasons, they are proscribing output based on taste or political ideology.

Under those circumstances they open up themselves to legal challenges from individuals who have been libelled on their platform, just like a publisher would be.

They also open themselves up for challenges under free speech legislation. There is no good reason why the accounts have been disabled/removed  or output prevented. Other than the owner of the platform disagrees with their output.

As for who is doing the banning, it's very interesting that all of the companies or "platform providers" are located very close together in California. It's a cartel of companies that lean to the left of politics. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, even LinkedIn have banned Alex Jones and are all in a relatively small area on a global scale.

As for what is being banned, well it seems what the left deem right wing output gets chopped over and above anything elase. Many so-called right wing bloggers have had their accounts banned or shadow-banned (had their account output disabled or unavailable to view).

It's a new McCarthyism, the left banning output they disagree with. Considering the left in America went through exactly the same in the 50's, it's highly hypocritical of them to now do exactly the same to the Right.

But hey, that's what authoritarians (for example Communists) do isn't it? Hang on a minute, the result of the McCarthy witchhunts deemed those in the media and entertainment on the left weren't Communists after all.... or was the McCarthy commission wrong?

Maybe McCarthy was right after all?

Just sayin'

Finally I'd love for someone with the money that was libelled on one of the platforms and also banned to sue the "platform providers". Because the providers can't argue successfully in both cases. They are either platform provider and allow free speech for everyone as long as the output isn't banned by government or illegal, or they edit accounts and therefore platform content and are publishers.