Facebook’s New Oversight Board to Decide: Good or Ungood.

Reading George Orwell’s ‘1984’ for the first time back in the late 70’s, it was hard to imagine that his warnings were anything but fiction. Fast forward to today and it seems more like a playbook for today’s globalist left and its march to domination over the lives of mankind. You can tune into the “daily hate” 24 hours a day on cable news promoting Orwell’s version of “ignorance is strength” through false reporting, manipulative editing, and a non-stop barrage of attacks on those not agreeing with them.

On May 6th, Facebook appointed the first 20 members to its new “Ministry of Truth”. The new Facebook Oversight Board will hear appeals on content removal and the new members are ready to shift away from the old standard of applying U.S. constitutional law for American users and move to an international human rights approach pertaining to free speech and censorship.

One of the new co-chairs of the board, Catalina Botero-Marino, shared an article written by former assistant law professor of George Soros’s Central European University and member of the ‘Council of Europe’s Committee on Combating Hate Speech’, Sejal Parmar regarding Facebook’s new approach to free speech. The article reads:

“Great expectations surround Facebook’s Oversight Board, an audacious experiment in platform self-regulation, with its first 20 members announced on May 6. It was a milestone in Facebook’s response to compelling calls for greater accountability and transparency. The board evokes constitutional law notions in various ways: its original conceptualization by Mark Zuckerberg as “almost like a Supreme Court;” its power to deliver “binding decisions,” as well as “policy advisory statements;” the institution-building language and framework of its charter and bylaws; and the fact that its initial membership encompasses six constitutional lawyers, including three specialists in American constitutional law, with two serving as co-chairs. Such “constitutional features” exist against a backdrop of approaches to content moderation by Facebook and other platforms that so far have been “undergirded by American free speech norms.” Facebook’s creation of the board suggests a clear and conscious turn from such a U.S. constitutional-law paradigm towards an international human rights approach in content moderation by the world’s most powerful social media company. But the nature and degree of this shift depend on how the board, in delivering its decisions within the confines of its jurisdiction, will interpret the relationship between Facebook’s community standards and values, on the one hand, and international human rights standards, encompassing international treaty law and non-binding standards, on the other.”

Facebook is following the lead of Google which in 2016, under the title of “Good Censor”, shifted towards censorship based not on American traditions and constitutional protection of free speech but a more Eurocentric model that advocates “dignity and civility” over “liberty and freedom”.

The push to make Newspeak the international language has begun and yes, you should be concerned. Consider the conversation between O’Brien and Winston in Orwell’s 1984. Orwell may be a few decades premature in his projection but it’s here none the less.

“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. . . . The process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now, of course, there’s no reason or excuse for committing thought-crime. It’s merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there won’t be any need even for that. . . . Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?”

I’ll leave it with another quote from ‘1984’:
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”