MONOKULTUR

For 2 år siden blev Musk, der jo ejer Tesla, ignoreret af ‘Det Hvide Hus’ topmøde for producenter af el-biler. I stedet gav Biden direktøren for General Motors, Mary Barra, æren for at lede el-bils revolutionen. “You changed the whole story, Mary,” citerer David Sacks Biden for at sige “You electrified the entire automobile industry.” Men, som Sacks bemærker, så var det fis i en hornlygte. General Motors er meget langt fra at sætte gang i en seriøs el-bils produktion.

Sidste år tweetede Elon Musk, verdens største hjerne 

In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party.

But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican.

Now, watch their dirty tricks campaign against me unfold … 

Ikke nok med det, så havde Musk haft den frækhed at købe Twitter, åbne dens maskinrum og lade hele verden se, at Twitter, som de andre sociale medier, er den amerikanske efterretningsvæsens propagandakanal (detfor er var sådan en massiv enighed i pressen om fornuften i at støtte krigen i Ukraine). Musk gned salt i såret og insisterede på, at det skulle være ytringsfriheden, der skulle være Twitters domæne, frem for botaniseringen af debatten, gennem censur.

Staten finder sig ikke i dissens og en lawfare og administrativ chikane blev svaret

-SEC sues Musk over the purchase 

-FTC demands internal 𝕏 documents

-Biden DOJ sues SpaceX for not hiring refugees for secret rocket technology

-Biden DOJ and SEC open investigations against Tesla over a literal glass house

-Biden DOJ opens criminal investigation against Tesla over self-driving cars

-Federal investigation into Neuralink

-EOCC sues Tesla over harassment

-Massive media campaign against 𝕏

-Massive corporate boycott campaign

Staten har økonomisk støttet Musks Starlink for at få bredbånd ud til landområderne. Men FCC, myndigheden der forestår statsstøtten, har nu fundet, at Starlink ikke har levet op til kravene. Ifølge en af FCC kommissionens medlemmer, Brendan Carr, er dette ren politisk chikane, da kravene først skal være opfyldt om tre år og beskriver i en tråd hvorledes Biden har erklæret Musk krig

Last year, after Elon Musk acquired Twitter, President Biden gave federal agencies the green light to go after him. And they have. Today, the FCC adds itself to the growing list of federal agencies engaging in the regulatory harassment of Elon Musk. I dissent.

President Biden stood at a White House podium & stated that Elon Musk “is worth being looked at.” When asked “How?”, President Biden responded “There’s a lot of ways.” There certainly are. The DOJ, FAA, FTC, NLRB, SDNY, & FWS have all taken action. The FCC now joins them.

The FCC’s recent decision – like many of the other actions being taken by federal agencies against Musk – fits the Biden Administration’s pattern of regulatory harassment. It is a decision that cannot be explained by an objective application of law, facts, or policy.

First, the FCC revokes Starlink’s $885 million award by making up an entirely new standard of review that no entity could ever pass and then applying that novel standard to only one entity: Starlink. The decision does not even grapple with the evidence—it simply ignores it.

Second, rural America ends up paying the highest price for this decision. Over 642,000 rural homes & businesses would have gained high-speed Internet access for the first time ever under the deal. But the FCC just vaporized that commitment & replaced it with . . . nothing.

“Doesn’t make sense.” skrev Musk

Starlink is the only company actually solving rural broadband at scale!

They should arguably dissolve the program and return funds to taxpayers, but definitely not send it those who aren’t getting the job done.

What actually happened is that the companies that lobbied for this massive earmark (not us) thought they would win, but instead were outperformed by Starlink, so now they’re changing the rules to prevent SpaceX from competing.

David Sacks minder om, at medierne engang var forargede over at Nixon efter sigende skulle have haft en liste over sine fjender, men nu er ligeglade med at præsident Biden går så klart efter at chikanere Musk. Sacks mener det er ytringsfriheden, der er Bidens primære motiv og ikke, som hans kollegaer foreslår, grundet i Bidens stærke fagforeningsforbindelser. Sacks har ret, Bidens reducerede sind og hans almene mangel på format efterlader ham som en kransekagefigur ovenpå alskens korrupte og radikalt ideologiserede interesser. Men først og fremmest den forsmåede efterretningstjeneste, der vil beskytte sit ‘interagency consensus’.

“It is folly to increase your knowledge on the expense of authority” siger Sir Humpfrey Appleby. Bidens regering vil ikke geråde sig ud i sådan dårskab og censurerer således helt skødesløst, kan man læse hos Daily Wire

In an April 18, 2021, email, Facebook President for Global Affairs Nick Clegg expressed concern after Andy Slavitt, a senior White House advisor, told him that Facebook was “lagging behind” as YouTube “made significant advances to remove content leading to vaccine hesitancy.”

“Just got off hour long call with Andy Slavitt,” Clegg, the United Kingdom’s former deputy prime minister, wrote in the email. “There are some pretty serious — and sensitive … issues we need to address. A summary: He was appreciative of the data we sent thru on Friday, and confirmed that Rob F had said that they had never received so much so much data from us before.”

“Andy attended a meeting of misinfo researchers (didn’t provide names) organized by Rob F on Friday in which the consensus was that FB is a ‘disinformation factory,’ and that YT has made significant advances to remove content leading to vaccine hesitancy whilst we have lagged behind,” Clegg continued. 

Earlier this year, Jordan began releasing the “Facebook Files,” showing that the Biden administration pressured the social media giant to stifle speech the White House didn’t like, including limiting outlets such as The Daily Wire’s reach on the platform and boosting the reach of legacy media outlets.

Flaherty in emails released by Jordan earlier this year, suggested that Facebook to “change the algorithm so that people were more likely to see [New York Times], [Wall Street Journal], any authoritative news source over The Daily Wire.”

Mike Benz bruger udtrykket ‘det censur-industrielle kompleks’, den surrogatcensur på statens vegne, hvor kapital interesser flyder sammen med politiske interesser, medierne, efterretningsvæsenet og akademia. 

The Stanford Internet Observatory’s in-house podcast, Moderated Content, called its first-ever “emergency edition” the week Elon Musk completed his acquisition of Twitter in October 2022. Moderated Content draws its name from the euphemistically named professional field of removing speech off the Internet known as “Content Moderation,” in which “moderation” is the palatable word used to refer to takedowns or throttling of social media posts.

The Stanford Internet Observatory (via its parent, the Stanford Cyber Policy Center) is so prolific in the censorship space that it has its own weekly podcast discussing topics of interest for those who take down speech online for a living. The Stanford Internet Observatory (which FFO has reported on here, here and here) is perhaps the top university center at the heart of Congressional investigations and multiple lawsuits (see here, here and here) into online censorship. The center received a joint $3 million government grant from the National Science Foundation in 2021, lasting through 2026, for such troubling technocratic activities as top-down controlling rumors online and rapid-response techniques to throttle emerging social media narratives.

In its Musk-focused “emergency” episode in October 2022, the Stanford censorship center’s founder and head, Alex Stamos, openly mused about the “hellish existence” he predicted that Elon Musk, as X’s new owner, would now have, owing to pressure from censorship professionals and their government allies around the world…

(…) Throughout his remarks on the podcast, Stamos expressed hopes that pressure from Tesla investors and pressure from international governments could be used to punish Musk for re-establishing free speech on Twitter/X.

(…)Stamos also reiterated his view that Tesla shareholders and threats to the Tesla share price could secure Musk’s obedience to censorship demands. Indeed, Stamos and his co-host invoked “Tesla” 14 times in talking about the governments might be able to use Musk’s commercial vulnerability with Tesla against him to install Twitter speech controls. 

Overfor Jack Posobiec, har Musk erklæret, at han var villig til at gå i fængsel for sine principper.