Battling the rise of the censorship-industrial complex
A new hypothesis about why all our sensemaking institutions seem to be failing at the same time. @alexandrosM
We often lament how seemingly every body whose job it is to figure out the truth -- media, academic journals, doctors, courts, universities, even the military, seem to have lost the plot at right about the same time, and are not even trying to do their job, instead behaving first and foremost as defenders of an emergent narrative. On occasion I've mentioned that our culture is becoming aware of the construct of a "narrative" and is developing language and memes to describe its contours. When we talk about the "current thing", or the various "derangement syndrome(s)", or even about "disinformation"/"misinformation", or even "stochastic terrorism", what we're talking about is factors that contribute to, and are a result of, prevalent narratives.
What might have previously been highly specialized discourse between academics has broken through to the mainstream. So this is my hypothesis: for better or worse, people in positions of power, increasingly conscious of the narrative-shaping power of their words and actions, are now deciding what to do, consciously or subconsciously, taking into account not just whether the action is right, but also whether it will be helping or hurting the narratives they subscribe to. In other words, instead of the story emerging according to the facts, the facts emerge according to the prevailing story. This 2016 piece in the New York Times is emblematic of this newfound self-consciousness on behalf of journalists: https://archive.is/jb9vH Its final paragraph contains this gem:
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/citizen-journalism-as-disruptive
https://open.substack.com/pub/junonews/p/candice-malcolm-wins-george-jonas-freedom-award
CPP is the latest on Carney’s chopping block
The new $50 billion Brookfield partnership puts hard-earned Canadian pensions at risk.
All eyes should be firmly placed front and centre on the current situation between Mark Carney and our Canada Pension Plan (CPP). His furtive sleight of hand is in action once again. In short, his latest method of eventually transferring our hard-earned fund over to his bedfellow Brookfield has begun.
The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and Brookfield have launched a $50 billion “Maple Fund.” Their explanation is that it will be utilized to funnel capital into critical infrastructure and other industries across Canada. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
In 1965, the CPP, introduced by the government, was initiated in order to assist people who did not have a retirement pension. Employees gave a certain percentage of their income to the fund, and the employers matched that figure. To be exact, 15% of income before taxes.
This fund consists of our hard-earned money, and we ...