Members of America’s Ministry of Truth — Musing on the Arbritrary Authority of some institutions

You might also like…

George Orwell’s 1984

Written as a direct response to the author’s mistrust of government entities and other authoritative organizations and regimes, through his observation of the Spanish Civil War, Orwell came to terms with the power that these kinds of entities had, extrapolating that in how he saw citizens giving up personal agency to those who sought control through tyrannical means.  

The dystopian classic follows a socially low-ranking individual named Winston who navigates his frustrations with the all-seeing eye of Big Brother and The Thought Police—or what we today would call the Feds, NSA, and Big Tech. In sweeping policy and law, individuality is prohibited in this world and enforced by capital punishment as individual expression is seen to be an act of rebellion against authority. Illegally though, Winston journals his harsh sentiments towards the ruling political party anyway while clandestinely engaging in a forbidden love affair with an alluring woman by the name of Julia. Eventually, passion and aggressive free-thinking lead to both their imminent downfalls as their love and rebellious acts are uncovered.  

That’s not even the spoiler. 

Published in 1949, this novel came out during the great unrest in Europe as reconstruction began after the fall of the Nazi Reich that led to the new war of democracy and capitalism fighting against communism and authoritarianism. From the chaos of the Spanish Civil War, the Soviet Union, and the Hitler’s rise and fall to power, great hate and distrust to authoritarian sociopolitical movements were justified as Orwell wrote Animal Farm and 1984 shortly after, declaring to everyone the dangers of political suppression and totalitarian power. 

There’s a powerful message here. 

It may seem obvious, but I’m going to push back and argue that it’s not as overt of an idea as one might think. We live in an Orwellian world today, creating a very real 21st Century Dystopia. Despite Orwell's uncanny foresight in his warnings of rising technological advances mixing with corrupt political leaders in unchecked, unbridled government control, we still have concepts like China’s Social Credit Score that the United States is reverse engineering into its own Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) credit scores that incentivizes businesses for falling in compliance with radical, socialistic policies that in all honesty could easily expand into an American version of China’s social credit system.  

With thematic elements like psychological and physical manipulation, censoring of information and history, advanced technology, and restrictions on language littering Orwell’s dystopian vision, all of this easily parallels modern day concepts like Covid-19 Fear Porn, Outrage and Cancel Culture, Big Tech, Postmodernism, and Fact Checkers. It is also something to note that it is no coincidence that after Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter the Biden administration announced a new “disinformation governance board” under the DHS umbrella creating a real life Ministry of Truth.

Fact Checking is a Business

Fact checking is an industry that organizations have used to grab clout and authority out of thin air, and like any savvy business individual, these CEOs saw a gap in the market and filled it, raping their way into our culture. 

You disagree?

Let’s dive a little deeper and think about how their “fact-checks” are used. Like any useful idiot on social media, it doesn’t take much to copy and paste, propagating what they deem as unarguable facts because how can anyone argue with a “fact”? We’ll ignore for a second the very real fact that these same copy-and-pasters are often the very people that abide by the asinine principle of postmodernism, calling into question as to whether or not objective knowledge is even attainable. Sounds like old school Catholicism if you ask me, and if there’s one thing we learn from Martin Luther and his 95 theses, it’s that you should never be afraid to question an authoritative claim. It’s like fact checkers opened a copy of 1984, plucking their name right out, making their job one of the most dystopian, double-speak titles in modern existence. 

But I digress and will give credit where credit is due.

Fact checkers aren’t solely targeting certain groups, but not only do they disproportionately attack conservative groups in an Orwellian fashion, they partner with censoring techniques and campaigns to push narratives and agendas they deem newsworthy. The fact of the matter is, a fact checker is a title that gives an arbitrary sense of authority that makes anyone who argues against it sound like a fool because they’re “arguing against facts”. 

It's quite brilliant if you think about it. 

Sinister, but brilliant.

It’s just like the agreeable statement of Black lives mattering, but if you disagree with the openly Marxist organization of BLM Inc., it’s as if you are saying that you actually don’t care about Black lives after all.

Again, double-speak.

What is the Job of a Fact Checker?

On paper, a fact checker’s job is to correct perceptions among citizens, as well as discourage politicians from spreading false or misleading claims. That is from the dystopian institution, Wikipedia itself*. If you just analyze this statement one layer deeper, fact checkers have political motives as they “correct perceptions among citizens” and “discourage politicians.”

In the simplest of terms, fact checking is propaganda. Facts aren’t propaganda, just fact checking.

With this in mind, it doesn’t take much brain power to become a political fact checker, independent fact checker, a fact checker for CNN, the Washington Post, or become a member of the NBC Fact Checker Unit because they really do suck at their job.

That’s on the surface though.

In an industry meant to silence dissent in the most Orwellian of fashions, facts really don’t matter to these people. I only say this because how often do they fact-check popular opinion? (and feel free to fact-check me on this). There is clear bias when PolitiFact, one of the news arms of the Democrat Party**, not only boasts of Brian Stelter’s laughable ability to defend former Governor Cuomo’s nursing home scandal, but also touts that they have grossly neglected important fact-checks on Dr. Anthony Fauci – the same Fauci who has flip-flopped like a fish out of water*** on absolutely every Covid19 policy and recommendation since the beginning of the pandemic, and who has become a puppy murderer****.

Just because an opinion is popular does not mean it’s free from fallacy.

This is something so many forget or even fail to recognize. Argumentum Ad Populum or the Appeal to Popularity is a basic logical fallacy that is used to either ignore dissent or “fact-check” and silence, and when you combine that with the appeal to authority you have a recipe for pure propaganda.

Let’s take the controversial 2020 Presidential Election for example.

When it comes the Dominion Voting Systems and whether they can be trusted in US elections, on November 12, 2020 there was a joint statement from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a branch of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), stating that “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.” First of all, “most secure” is subjective. Five percent secure is technically more than one percent, and hypothetically speaking, if every election from the beginning of time has been only one percent secure and the 2020 was five percent, yes, it was “the most secure election.” The term “most secure” does not mean “completely and absolutely secure without absolutely no fraud.”

But again, I digress on that hypothetical thought.  

Their statement though, along with that one phrase of being “most secure” was used by Biden supporters to justify and silence any questions people had concerning the validity of the election (and miraculously still is). What everyone fails to mention – either due to their incompetence or the fact they were hiding it – was that Dominion Voting Systems, the company that was being audited and questioned as to whether their machines were secure enough for a United States Presidential Election, this company had members on the CISA council who came out with the statement.

Conflict of interest? 

Where were the fact checkers on this one? 

*As of August 5, 2022

**Another reference to The Party in Orwell’s novel. 

***Here’s another link just in case that one magically becomes a broken 404, and this is just the masks! 

****Thank you Steven Crowder who was WAY ahead of the curve on this: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/show-notes-fire-fauci  

We Are Being Deceived

Outlets like NBC News turn a blind eye to electoral fraud, the “mostly peaceful protests”, Hunter Biden’s laptop, and so many other damning things to the kings and queens of the Democrat party. They have whored themselves out for their narrative and agenda because print media is a dying industry. I’m not absolving any Republican either for the passive part they have played. I’m not even absolving myself of any consequence because every American has allowed this Woke Left subversive culture to destroy the true liberal values and ideals that America was built on.

Orwell’s 1984 was in fact a fiction, but it’s no longer that way, and as over used as that term may seem to some, it still needs to be echoed.

Fact checkers, joint statements, cancel culture, big tech, all of these themes are straight from any dystopian novel and are steeped in Marxist ideology. History repeats itself and horrendous fiction is allowed to come to pass because people don’t educate themselves. Who’s picked up The Communist Manifesto and knows what Karl Marx truly said? Who’s read about postmodernism and the tenets of identity politics? Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals? Who’s picked up 1984?

We have failed as a country, letting the ideals of American Liberty slip between our fingers because (both literally and metaphorically speaking) we are fat, weak, and we’re too dumb to educate ourselves. We are completely reliant on the popular opinions found on Tik-Tok and the authority of others in the Government to tell us what and how to think.