Voices in the world of the established media have been trying to convince people that dissenting voices on the coronavirus narrative (its causes, its effects, the proper ways of dealing with it) endanger public health, and, therefore, are justifiably censored. And, though both moral and medical rebuttals can be raised in response to this deleterious position, those rebuttals have yet to gain traction inside mass consciousness, despite a year and a half of appeals.
We are talking, in large part, about a scientific debate that is being censored. That is, there is no absolute consensus on those facets of the COVID situation that are the most salient, like what factors increase the virus’s transmissibility, the proper measures to be taken in dealing with it, and even where it came from. And why should anyone be surprised by that? No scientific “truth” exists without at least some contention. It is, after all, the prerogative of the scientific exercise, to constantly challenge, constantly test, what has been accepted as natural law, is it not?
Well, this is the matter at hand. Science, that which has helped us to make so many discoveries about the natural world, and to apply those discoveries in fruitful and interesting ways, is being viciously curtailed by the media giants of our day, who are now denying a voice to those whose positions regarding COVID, though not indefensible, diverge from the established ones.
In rushing to censor individuals whose claims about COVID might “endanger public health,” media and tech giants are potentially endangering the well-being of millions, or billions, of people, because they are blocking the people of the world from what may in fact be true about COVID, information that could, indeed, save lives.
These tech giants claim to be helping to bring people together like never before. Yet, not only have their platforms become emotional cesspools, sources of mental strain and even mental illness for their users, and what might be called anti-connection, but, now that so many have had much of the communication that they engage in relegated and/or accustomed to virtual communication, these companies want to add censorship to that miserable state of affairs.
It begins to look like a total end run on free speech, does it not?
NO ONE has the right to censor information like this, certainly not when the solutions that have already been posed for the problem have themselves harmed and possibly killed plenty of people. Perhaps we need to be speaking out about this a lot more. But first, we need to be doing our own research a lot more, especially when dissenting voices are out there.
By Sha’Kim Bush
Thank you for reading!
Please follow my blog for more, and share this with your friends! We could use a lot more people in helping to bring this madness to an end.