What's in a name?
In a world where undeniable truths are suppressed and blatant falsehoods are amplified, the only honesty that may survive is that of the most brutal character. Just as there is no such thing as hate crimes, there is likewise no such thing as hate speech. Speech is speech and nothing other. It is free and unabridged or it isn’t. Free speech is like pregnancy. It can not be a question of degree; one is either pregnant or not. These are not difficult concepts to wrap one’s mind around. Those who dispute these statements or who pretend not to understand are simply obtuse.
I’ll cite some examples for illustration, starting with one of my favorites: I think that Mark Zuckerberg is a jew cunt. Now this is a declaration of one’s opinion. It is not a statement of objective fact, nor is it in any way presented as such. If I were to make this statement, and then further contend that it were an objective fact, it would be necessary to present evidence to support the assertion. I have neither offered nor implied such. I have merely stated an opinion.
Now opinions are part of that broad brush known as free speech. Whether they happen to be expressed orally, in writing, or held within the confines of one’s own conscience, they indisputably qualify as speech protected under the first amendment of the US constitution. There is no prescribed role for federal or state authorities to “police” speech, only the constitutional duty to protect the free practice thereof. How then can any speech be designated as hate speech? Further, why should government at any level have the authority to make such a determination? The granting of such authority to any government is a perilous act, given the certainty that any powers bestowed upon those who govern will ultimately be abused. The act of censorship upon opinion is the most vile intrusion upon personal sovereignty. Codifying censorship, whether by statute or through non government proxies, in what is ostensibly a free republic, should be classified as a capital crime. And yet here we are…
To be fair, I’m willing to have the discussion. There is absolutely nothing wrong with stating one’s opinions about what they may consider to be “hate speech”: these are only opinions. The typical arguments made in an attempt to classify “I think that Mark Zuckerberg is a jew cunt” as hate speech would be twofold. The statement offends as characterized in it’s anti-semitism and misogyny at once. Within the phrase “I think that Mark Zuckerberg is a jew cunt” the words jew and cunt are understood as pejoratives. Then one is obliged to ask: what is it that makes these words pejoratives? The answer to this is context, which demonstrates that a pejorative is determined by a subjective standard; not an objective standard. When someone, anyone, tries to classify certain speech as hate speech they can offer no objective standard by which this may be determined. The only thing that they can really tell you is that they are personally offended. I have no quarrel with those people, for they are surely free to state that they are offended. There are numerous remedies to this state of offense and not one of them entails silencing the offending party. The people I have the quarrel with are that class of professional victims who are perpetually offended on behalf of some group or other, real or imagined. Those are the true enemies of free speech.
I will let the ADL and NOW wring their hands over my choice of pejoratives, and of course any others who choose wallow in that muck with them. Y’all are welcome to it, knock yourselves out! “I think that Mark Zuckerberg is a jew cunt” is a declared opinion. It is protected speech and there is no metric by which it may be defined as “hate speech” in any legal sense. It is only hate speech in the minds of any who may take offense at those terms used as pejoratives. Oh, and I suppose Mark Zuckerberg too. He seems to rather fancy himself as the arbiter of what qualifies as hate speech. Even though he’s not a “publisher”. Fuckbook doesn’t editorialize. That’s not their role at all. They are just a platform. Only one of these last three statements are true.
Fuckbook is a platform for the professional victims and every other form of lowlife grifters. To call these people bottom feeders is a gross defamation of every species of catfish on this planet. These people are the parasites that live upon the excrement of bottom feeders. Collectively this class has the ethical character of the common street pimp, with whom they also frequently share the same flamboyant fashion sense. They are foot soldiers for the corporate Kommissars; the Dunning-Krueger Brigade of the Woke Militia; a digital force multiplier for willful deceit and manipulation. These sad dupes are like an army of spiteful mall cops. Spurned from acceptance into the true law enforcement community, they spend their days venting their scorn upon the unsuspecting mall patrons for transgressions real or invented. It requires a personality this shallow and craven to appropriate the outrage of others for the purpose of advancing one’s self.
Is Mark Zuckerberg a jew cunt? Well, that’s only a matter of opinion, but we can say for certain that Mark Zuckerberg is the Security State’s little bitch. That is a fact. He is the Security State’s bottom bitch. In the vacant space once inhabited by a soul, Mark Zuckerberg harbors a secret kink for Gestapo uniforms and leather. When the Security State summons his little nipples grow stiff and he squeals, “Yes Daddy?” He takes instruction so willingly, eager to serve his Daddy. He maintains a giant stock of poppers by his bedside, so when that call comes in the middle of the night he can cue up the B-52s’ Hero Worship, crack a couple and then get on his knees, assuming the position for Big Daddy. All the purple haired faggots on Fuckbook are the rest of the hos. They take their orders from the Bottom Bitch. You know. The jew cunt.
I’m sure the observant reader has noted the drop of yet another pejorative. Yes, that’s right, I said faggots. F-A-G-G-O-T-S, faggots (pl.). Deal with it. In an age where the worst thing one could call a person is a “white man”, I feel that I am at liberty to tag people by whatever name I see fit. Damn the consequences. Who is actually offended by this? When I use the word faggot which letter of the LGBT(Q) alphabet, specifically, is offended? Is it just one or all of them? Does Q represent the universal faggot? I think we should know these things, damn it!
I have a few things to say to all the letters of that glorious queer rainbow. Are you offended by my use of the word faggot as a pejorative? If the answer to that question is yes then my advice to you would be: get over yourself. What entitles you to such special privilege that none may ever call you disparaging names? Is that in the constitution? And further, what is the basis of your privilege? It is my understanding of the constitution that your rights are already accounted for as a citizen. There are no provisions that specifically exclude any citizen on the basis of their sexual orientation. Likewise there are no provisions of extra-constitutional or special rights accorded to you for your orientation.
If I have no interest in a person in any sexual manner then I don’t CARE what their kink is. It’s not going to happen, therefore there is no need to even consider it. If one does not place these matters out upon one’s sleeve, then who would know, much less care? I understand what’s really going on. It’s not about your orientation. It’s not about whether it is a choice or something that you are born with. It is all about forcing others to accept your behavior as normal. If you want to be accepted as normal then you will need to do it the same way as everyone else: become the norm. You are not the norm. That is a fact. There is no value judgment attached to this, it is just a cold, hard fact. Mathematics. Look into it. Numbers are not so easily perverted as words.
The minute that any force, much less a clearly demonstrable minority, has the power to throttle the truth, then the subject is not about anyone’s rights any longer. Then it is reduced to a question as simple as truth or lies. When truth is censored then all that is left are lies. What motive could anyone have to censor truth other than to foment falsehoods? That would be a good question for Mr. Zuckerberg to answer, but we dare not hold our breath for that.
It is only in the imaginary world of Fuckbook, Shitter, Screwtube, Gaggle and all the rest of the tech Barons that these self-appointed social justice warriors are anything even approaching a majority. While they may have become common, they are not the norm. Not even close. Yet they have managed to insert themselves into the key elements of our institutions. The Fuckbook platform has happily participated as a facilitator for this infiltration and continue to provide cover for them. Bottom Bitch gonna look out for number one, but she got to keep Big Daddy happy. Dem hos gonna do just what dat Bottom Bitch say!
Put up against the free and open exchange of ideas, a free and unfettered public dialogue, their ideas will not withstand the light of day. This is their reason that truth must be silenced. This censorship is the redoubt of cowards and tyrants, but Mark Zuckerberg is neither of these. I think he is just a jew cunt. Doing the bidding of Big Daddy. Someday, when Big Daddy has finally tired of his Bottom Bitch, they’ll nail him to a cross and upon the crown inscribe: Mark of Zuckerberg, King of the jew cunts. You can call me a racist, a homophobe, a madman even. I’ll take no offense at any of these because y’all have thrown the terms around so much they no longer mean anything. They’re as worn out as Kim Cattrall’s mattress. I will assure you of one thing: you will see Zuckerberg on a cross before the Department of Justice ever even attempts to touch him for his treasonous role in the 2020 election fraud. You can change the name to whatever you like, Mr. Zuckerberg. You’ll always be Fuckbook to me.
