Expertocracy's Information Ministry Will Soon Release Approved Truths List

No government wants or enjoys criticism, even as they all lie and say they welcome it. Further, everybody knows these two humble truths.

It is only when a government decides it will not allow political criticism that a state of tyranny exists. The emphasis is on political.

For example, a critic (with good reason) charges the government with theft over some new tax policy. The government moves to shut the critic up, perhaps by arresting him. A standard, everyday regime suppression technique.

That's politics. Let's now do science.

You have heard the slogan "Science is self correcting." Ignoring the question of its veracity, or whether the slogan applies to other fields of intellectual endeavor (such as politics), and focus on how it must necessarily be true that any proposition in need of correction is false.

So science contains at least some falsehoods. I use the word in its dry, logical sense, which does not necessarily imply lie, a deliberate falsehood. These may be there, of course, but there are also honest mistakes. At any rate, if science did not contain falsehoods, it would not need self correction.

Our last, and most important, word is self. Self-correcting. Not outsider-correcting. Not uncredetialed-correcting. Not anything else but self.

When the slogan originated, not much thought was given to that word. It seemed clear that later scientists coming across the work of earlier scientists, corrected, they thought and hoped, the falsehoods in the earlier work. Scientists correcting scientists.

With me so far? Now look at this headline from Ireland, of a kind increasingly common: "Social media companies should be forced to take down false content or be fined - Oireachtas report".

This report, incidentally, is part of the "Online Safety and Media Regulation Bill". Safety.

This headline begs the questions, what is false information and who gets to decide truth and falsity?

Who gets to decide is easy. You won't be surprised to hear the answer, either. Experts, given power in our expertocracy. What is "false" is that which is counter to any Expert consensus and is a proposition of political interest.

You can disagree, say, with the Expert consensus on Bigfoot's existence, but since nobody politically cares about this, your belief is not officially "false." You cannot, on the other hand, disagree with the Expert consensus on covid vaccine harm. If you do, and you have a sizable audience, and your "false" opinion reaches the ears of Experts, you will be canceled.

You can survive by criticizing the politics of vaccine mandates. Rail against those as much as you like. You cannot survive if you criticize The Science™ of them. Do that and you're a goner. This is yet another proof of the growth of our expertocracy. The form of tyranny it takes is not quite the same as it takes in other forms of government.

How many have we seen canceled over Expert disagreement in the government-caused coronadoom panic?

Who did the canceling? YouTube, among others. Blue-haired harpies and weak-limbed soybys, reading off a list of Approved "Truths", checked whether popular videos agreed or disagreed with Expert consensus. If the video disagreed, and it was popular enough, it was removed, and often its creator axed.

Same thing with other Big Tech platforms. It is not as if Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and so on, employ their own cadre of investigatory scientists who carefully digest and weigh the material in each tweet, post, or video and do the same service with scientific papers. The censors they employ haven't the intelligence for this. They can only check some official, or what they take to be official, "truth" list.

Therefore, if this Safety thing becomes law in Ireland, or elsewhere, it necessarily requires the creation of a Ministry of Truth.

That semi-official list that Big Tech now employs must become fully official. And because this list is fully official, it must be officially filled with Approved Truths. That list must grow to encompass larger swaths of Expert opinion.

This isn't a forecast on my part. It is an observation.

Headline: "The UK plans to make online 'pile-ons' a crime, in chillingly broad attempt to suppress speech". Not only are single popular voices being canceled. But mass Expert disagreement wont be allowed either.

Headline: "Big Tech announces climate change 'misinformation' to be the next censorship target".

The very word misinformation confirms the expertocracy, it confirms there must exist an official Approved Truths list.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here