Dakota Beacon

“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.” - Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels

As fewer and fewer Americans know what is in our Constitution, and more and more of those who do know believe it is “outdated” or “irrelevant”, it seems like a good time to stop and assess whether it retains any value for us, what the value is and whether it is important to keep it.

As recently as the administration of George W. Bush, that president actually said, “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face!  It’s just a goddamn piece of paper!”  [While FactCheck.org refutes this statement, three people who were present affirm that this is factual.]  Is it just a “piece of paper”?  Or does our Constitution embody and express the highest level of freedom in a civilized society?  For 250 years we have maintained the freedom to call our representatives in Washington, to write a letter to the editor of our local newspaper, speak at public meetings, write books, question our authorities.  It has made our country a mecca for people from around the world who have lived in oppression and shackles.  The basis for this freedom is the First Amendment in our Constitution.  It seems at least worth a second look.

Currently we are living in a climate of suppression.  Our federal government, our current administration, has actually ordered (or “asked”, if you will) social and news media to censor “malinformation”.  New word.  “Malinformation”.  What is it?  Malinformation is not necessarily false information, nor inaccurate information - the latter is usually termed ‘misinformation”.  Malinformation is simply information, true or false, that is at odds with the narrative of the government in power.  In no other time in our history has the government been so blatant.  Sure, during war times people were admonished not to give aid or comfort to the enemy, and not to reveal secret information they might have had that could have jeopardized our nation’s safety.  But the extent to which Americans are now shutting down or being shut down due to government pressure is ugly and unprecedented.

Our First Amendment was never intended to protect otherwise “safe” speech, the things our government wants to hear - praise and affirmation, or sentiments which the vast majority of people agree with.  Rather, it was written and made a primary part of our law to protect unpopular speech, criticism of our government or our leaders, and yes - “hate speech”.  We are allowed, by law, to say whatever objectionable thing we want.  It is a protected right.

Unfortunately, our failed system of education has not taught our children this basic tenet for several generations now, and the thought seems to have faded into obscurity.  People have become comfortable with self-censorship and imposition of restrictions.  Parents refrain from criticising the schools they pay for and send their children to, even when they are anathema to their own beliefs.  Those who do show up and speak out at school board meetings are humiliated, seen frog-marched out and sometimes arrested for their trouble.  Whistleblowers are not tolerated.  I have myself, written a letter to the local newspaper editor, expressing simply the idea that immigrants mass imported into communities in America should be vetted as to their belief in our Constitution as the “law of the land”.  This letter was rejected.  I asked why.  The then-editor could find no insults, bigotry, or racism in my letter; he simply rejected it because he didn’t like the “tone” of the letter.  This was several years ago.  That, at least, was a private business.  One which I stopped subscribing to and which I now knew contained only the propaganda which supported that editor’s own position.    (It is interesting that this newspaper,  at that time one of the major ones in North Dakota, has dwindled to the point that it is published only twice per week now.  It is barely more than a small town weekly.  They have had to sell their building.  No one reads it or subscribes.  But that was at least a private decision.

Far more threatening is the willingness of Americans to put up with government censorship and quasi-government censorship.  This reached a real frenzy during “covid” and has not let up at all since.  During that time, anyone who objected to mask-wearing, experimental vaccines, the shut-down of our business life, schools, churches and public meetings and events, and to “social distancing”, were piled on.  Most were “unfriended” on their social media, they were chased out of grocery stores; anyone who expressed objection to this was effectively silenced.  “Karens” who felt a need to tattle on their neighbors, proliferated.  Especially dangerous was the silencing of doctors and scientists who viewed experimental vaccines with alarm and cautioned us against participating in the experiment.  This meant for some being stripped of their licenses, credentials, hospital privileges and professorships.  Some of our most renowned experts were treated this way.  Patients who did not adhere to the government/hospital (they were the same) policies were denied life-saving medical care.  Men and women in our military were kicked out for not participating in an experiment with their health.  Safe and actually effective known treatments were banned, even for those who took these medications prior, for other conditions.  Those who argued in favor of using these well-established treatments were harangued, disparaged, ridiculed.  And if they were doctors, punished.

Now we have other forbidden topics - no one dare question the theories of transgenderism.  No one dare posit the idea that slavery is not exclusive to white Americans.  No one dare question the results of an election.  People are in prison for this.  It is no wonder that Americans, once free to disagree and read about other people’s opinions and studies, have shut down.  It is not only difficult to find information, it is even dangerous to try.

All of which brings us to the question of where this path leads. Where are we going with this?  I remember a joke of Bob Hope who once said he was going to Canada and turning his watch back eleven years.  Today, we find Canada way ahead of us.  Where they once saw themselves as “the true north, strong and free”, they have been overtaken by a miasmic sickness of the spirit, brought to them by those who do not value freedom.   

Canada gives us a roadmap to our own future.  Where once debate was a part of their institutions, and although only a parliamentary system, at least people had a vote to some extent, now they really do not.  The reality now is that Canada is run by thugs.  Some of them are immigrants, who never learned about free speech and how that works.  Journalist Ezra Levant was arrested in his own neighborhood in Toronto for being on a public sidewalk and videoing an antisemitic demonstration there on his phone.  He was told he could not stand on a sidewalk in his own neighborhood because someone didn’t like it, so he was not welcome.  

Truckers who objected to the covid shutdowns found that their bank accounts were seized.  It goes on and on.  There is a two-tier justice system there.  It resembles what we are seeing emerging here in America.  Famously, Jordan Peterson became a celebrity when, as a university professor, he was told he must use certain language and pronouns which he knew to be inappropriate.  He was fired, he has been to court, where his rights were shown to be non-existent.  He has been ordered to attend “training” for diversity and inclusion.  

The rest is history - Peterson is an international spokesman for free speech as a result.  He has a granite steadfastness when it comes to the natural right of self-expression.  Not everyone has his gifts or those of the courageous Ezra Levant.  But Canadans are expected to mouth the government's views on everything and must not go astray.  Recently, an extremist organization which has gained great power in Canada has brought a lawsuit against a small town council.  

The town of Emo, Ontario (pop. 1,300) was hauled into court by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario because the town council did not vote to support a request by the Borderland Pride organization to proclaim June, 2020 “Gay Pride Month” and fly an “LGBTQ2” flag for a week “of their choosing”.  The mayor, Harold McQuaker, observed that no such celebration was required for the ‘straight” community. This little hamlet almost never got such requests and besides, there is no public flagpole in Emo.  The council took a vote and the vote was “no’.  

But it turns out that there is no such thing as an actual vote in Emo because the only acceptable vote is “yes” on this one.  The no vote resulted in a lawsuit by the Borderland Pride organization against the town of Emo before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.  The Tribunal - a court of last resort in Canada - found for Borderland Pride, fining the town council $15,000 and the mayor personally $5,000.  

One can easily speculate on the fallout from this finding - what sane person would ever run for mayor again (unless he is assured the support of groups like Borderland).  Why even have a town council?  Why hold elections?  What is the point of pretending that the people have any say at all?  It is obviously a sham.   At the least this horrific judgment would have a chilling effect on anyone running for office.  So, then, how do citizens vote for their principles?  Mr. McQuaker probably reflected the political and social views of Emo citizens - after all, he was elected mayor.  Same with the council members.  They entertained the motion, they voted in good faith and because the vote didn’t go the way Borderlands wanted and demanded, they were sued in a court of law and were found “guilty” and fined for their service.  

Dr. Jordan Peterson has made an international career out of this Tribunal’s abuse of his rights and has made a strong case against what he has termed “compelled speech” - in his case using pronouns he knows are not appropriate; in the case of Emo, forcing some kind of recognition these council members did not believe in or thought correct or in the best interests of the citizens.  When does this stop?  

It is a serious issue because it goes beyond simply mouthing words we don’t mean or flying] a flag we disapprove of.  We are entering the territory of thought control and thought police and courts to enforce thought.  Speech and thought are closely connected.  How many times will you have to say something before it naturally falls from your lips?    Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, was often quoted as saying, “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth.”  

One of the best courses I took in school was “Current Events”.  Students had to read newspapers every night, peruse news magazines and other media then available and discuss these stories the following day in class.  One of the most compelling groundswells of news then was the cultural revolution in Red China.  The daily news was full of the dictats and “thoughts” of Mao Tse Tung, the abusive behavior of Red Guards and the sad plight of their targets.  We learned what a “struggle session” was.  We were properly horrified by the idea that people could be punished for their very thoughts.  It seemed foreign to us all at the time (and it still should).  Now we are seeing this kind of thing play out in the West.  DEI is, in fact, a spin-off of this doctrine.  

We are on the slippery slope of a cultural fun house when we embark on this path.  We are in danger of actually losing truth in our pursuit of “acceptability”.  When the truth is no longer acceptable and cannot even be spoken, we are in a world of trouble.  It is worse than the fact of some special interest group on the fringe of society bullying a town.  It is the beginning of thought control.  Forcing someone to say something he knows to be false over and over is a form of mind control and, in fact, mental torture.  Canada’s Human Rights Tribunal is okay with this.  That should scare the hell out of us.

Comments?  Email (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) and put "Dakota Beacon" in your subject line!