Lux Lucet

Writing in his History of Protestantism, J.A. Wylie introduces his readers to a 12th century reformer by the name of Arnold of Brescia. According to Wylie,

Arnold took his stand in the streets of his native Brescia, and began to thunder forth his scheme of reform. His townsmen gathered around him. For spiritual Christianity, the men of that age had little value, but Arnold had touched a chord in their hearts…the suddenness and boldness of the assault seem to have stunned the ecclesiastical authorities; and it was not until the Bishop of Brescia found his entire flock, deserting the cathedral, and assembling daily in the marketplace, crowding round the eloquent preacher, and listening to his fierce sermons, that he bestirred himself to silence the courageous monk…Arnold was seized, sent to Rome under a strong escort, and burned alive (Except taken from Ryan Denton’s Christ in the Wild Facebook page).

For Protestants unfamiliar with Rome’s long history of torturing and murdering anyone who stands against the ambitions of its prelates, this quote probably comes as something a shock. But for Rome, its treatment of Arnold of Brecia was business as usual.

Now the reader may be asking himself why I’ve elected to begin this installment on the activities of the Tech Left with an historical account straight out of the middle ages. What has this account to do with our current day Silicon Valley censors?

Hopefully the connection between Rome’s actions against Arnold of Brescia and the activities of Facebook, Google, Twitter and Apple aren’t too hard to see. For both the medieval Roman Church-State and the current day tech masters of the universe have this in common: They both seek to enforce the existing political, economic and social order by snuffing out the voices of anyone who dares challenge received opinion.

In truth, there’s little difference between the medieval Church of Rome and our present day techno tyrants. Yes, what Rome did was worse in that they physically arrested Arnold and brutally murdered him. At least for now, the Tech Left merely deletes your YouTube channel and bans you from Twitter.

But while no one currently is being burned alive, at least in the West, for writing a blog post challenging the Establishment opinion, Arnold of Brescia’s brutal execution serves as a stark reminder of why the preservation of free speech is so important, of why the framers of our Constitution prohibited Congress from infringing upon this right in the First Amendment, and of what could happen in the future if Americans, and in particular Christians, look the other way and remain silent while the Deep State, through its Big Tech proxies, attacks the free speech rights of conservatives, libertarians, and even progressives, who challenge the worldview put forth by the corporate media.

In last week’s installment, I discussed what Christians should not do in response to the Big Tech crack down on free speech. We should not:

1. Fear: God is in charge, even of the Deep State.
   
2. Forget that the problems we face ultimately are a spiritual battle.
   
3. Fall for the lie that the Tech Left’s attack on free speech is merely a matter of private companies doing what they want with their own property. The Deep State, the permanent government represented especially by America’s intelligence agencies, is the one running the show.
   
4. Not attempt to solve Big Tech censorship by calling for government regulation of the internet. To do this is to call for even bigger government to solve a problem created by big government in the first place.
   

Today in what I intend to be the final installment of this series, I would like to discuss what Christians should do about the Deep State’s use of Big Tech to regain control of the narrative – when I speak of controlling the narrative, I mean by this the ability to provide the context that gives meaning to current events;  as John Robbins has noted, events do not explain themselves, but themselves must be explained; by its ability to provide the context, the interpretive framework, the narrative through which the public views political, social and economic issues, the mainstream media has proven to be a powerful tool in the hands of elite interests which they use to further their own agenda by controlling what people think. 

For probably the first time in my life, the mainstream media, and by extension the elite interests who run it, lost narrative control during the run up to the 2016 Presidential election.  The result was President Trump.  By seeking to shut down down independent journalists and pundits, especially those with large audiences who write and speak on the big social media platforms, the elite are attempting to regain control of the narrative, and thus their ability to control the public’s worldview.

Big Tech Censorship and What Christians Should Do About It

First and foremost we should pray. That may seem so obvious that it need not be stated. But given how easy it is to have confidence in our own strength while relegating prayer to an afterthought, it would be remiss of me not to mention it.

If we’re going to be salt and light to our dying culture, Christians must approach the issue of social media censorship in the same way they are called to approach all problems.

The Bible encourages us to pray for those in positions of authority, and that includes those in positions to made decisions regarding free speech on social media. As William Tyndale, another victim of establishment deplatforming, was being burned at the stake for publishing his English language New Testament, he cried aloud, “Lord, open the King of England’s eyes!”

Subsequent history suggests that God heard Tyndale, for it was Henry the VIII, the same king under whose rule Tyndale was put to death, who later broke with Rome and put England on the path to becoming a Protestant nation.

Let us follow William Tyndale’s example. God has not changed since Tyndale’s day. If he heard him, should we not have confidence that he will hear us too?

Second, Christians must understand that the locus of the problem of social media censorship is ultimately not Silicon Valley or the Deep State. The problem is spiritual. It cannot be emphasized too strongly that what we call Western Civilization is the product of the widespread preaching of, and belief in, the Gospel of justification by belief alone beginning with the 16th century Reformation.

As John Robbins has noted, the Bible is the verbal and plenary inspired Word of God. As such it is the authoritative textbook on all subjects, including matters of politics, law and economics. When at the time of the Reformation men began to look at these disciplines through the lens of Scripture, they found that the Bible demanded limited, constitutional, transparent government, something almost unheard of in the entire history of mankind.

It is from the Reformation, not from Classical Greece and Rome, the Renaissance or the Enlightenment that we get the concept of a government of limited powers.

But as the faith of the Reformation began to fade from the West, so too did the Reformation’s political philosophy. It is no accident that the humanist philosophy of the 19th and 20th centuries produced the modern regulatory state, one facet of which is the surveillance state which began in earnest in the US after the conclusion of World War II with the founding of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 1947 and the National Security Agency (NSA) in 1952.

Today, most Americans likely would be shocked to find out that the United States has seventeen (seventeen!) intelligence agencies. Once they got over their shock, many of these same Americans likely would acknowledge that, while it’s regrettable that our federal government engages in so much espionage, our dangerous world requires such surveillance in order to protect our freedoms. But such thinking is far from the mind of God.

John Robbins’ comments on espionage are instructive here.

A related foreign policy question is the matter of spies, for perhaps the predominant function of embassies today (and perhaps whenever they have been used) is espionage. Ancient Israel used spies, but only during war and for short periods of time. Just as there was no standing army, so there were no standing armies of spies and diplomats. God commanded Moses to “Send men to spy out the land of Canaan,” one from each tribe (Numbers 13:2). Ten of the spies were worthless; two were useful. I suspect the same ratio has always held. Moses also sent spies to Jazer (Numbers 21:32), a Canaanite city. Joshua sent two spies to Jericho (Joshua 2:1).

Some of this spying was commanded by God, and perhaps all of it was, but we are not told that all of it was done at God’s express command. But spying was used exclusively during wartime. Spying on other nations was not a normal, peacetime practice of either the Hebrew republic or the monarchy. It seems clear that spying on one’s neighboring governments during peacetime, even more than maintaining embassies that harbor spies, is a form of prohibited foreign intervention. It can hardly be argued that God’s command to Moses justifies the regular use of spies, for the command was very specific: Spy out the land of Canaan. Espionage, except during wartime, is not a proper function of government (Robbins, The Sine Qua Non of Enduring Freedom).

If it is true that, “Espionage, except during wartime, is not a proper function of government,” and it is, then one must conclude that the activities of the CIA, the NSA and the whole alphabet soup of intelligence agencies are sinful and ought to be ended.

By the way, this includes the activities of the FBI which reports the to Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the Department of Justice. The FBI is the federal government’s domestic spy agency.

Eliminate the NSA, CIA and FBI and you cut the heart out of the Deep State. Admittedly this is a radical proposition, but one that is needed if Americans are to have any chance of defeating the Deep State and reclaiming their lost liberty.

Third, explore legal action in the short term. Admittedly, eliminating the Deep State is a long term job. “But,” someone may ask, “What about the here and now? What about the ongoing destruction of free speech on the internet? Were not just supposed to sit here and wait around for the abolition of the CIA, are we?”

Perhaps there is some legal action that could be taken against the Big Tech firms that would fall short of creating a whole new government agency to regulate the internet. Perhaps there is not. This is a question that is outside my area of expertise, but one worth exploring.

Fourth, Christians must remember that the social media war on independent, conservative and libertarian commentators is really our war too. It is no accident that the First Amendment contains both a prohibition on Congress prohibiting the exercise of free speech and the anti-establishment clause which bars the federal government from setting up a state supported church.

Freedom of speech and religious freedom – and as was outlined in Part 2 and Part 3 of this series, this goes double for Christians – are intimately interlinked.

If Big Tech is allowed to silence Alex Jones and others for their political opinions, Christians have good reason to suspect that sooner or later they also will find themselves in the crosshairs of the Deep State.

Fifth, one of the best ways of fighting back against Big Tech is to keep embarrassing them over their own clear double standards.

For example, back in early August when Apple, Facebook, YouTube, Pinterest and Spotify all colluded to ban Alex Jones from their platforms, one of the charges brought against Jones was that he engaged in hate speech. For example, one tech company stated at the time, “Apple does not tolerate hate speech, and we have clear guidelines that creators and developers must follow.” Oddly, Apple provided no examples of what Jones said that supposedly violated their “clear guidelines” for hate speech. One would think if the guidelines were clear, Apple would have no trouble coming up with examples, but they declined to do so.

Likewise, YouTube found Jones in violations of its “Community Guidelines,” accusing him of, you guessed it, “hate speech,” yet failed to provide any specific examples of said hate speech.

But while Big Tech firms are quick to remove those who challenge the establishment narrative, accusing them of vague “hate speech” violations, they are quite indulgent toward others who very clearly produce racist or violent content.

The New York Times, a publication that simply cannot contain its glee at the deplatforming of Alex Jones, recently hired Sarah Jeong as an editorial board member. Not long after her hiring, it became public that she had a fairly substantial history of making racist tweets directed at white men. Since the Times was aware of her online behavior before they hired her, this suggests that the paper’s disapproval of hate speech is not a matter of principle, but depends on who’s hating and being hated.

Twitter did not suspend Jeong either. In fact, it gave her a blue Certified Account check mark. And this in spite of numerous, specific and clear examples of her use of racist language.

But Alex Jones is a hater who for the good of society must not be allowed to appear anywhere on social media.

David Knight, a libertarian leaning pundit affiliated with Jones’ Inforwars organization, also had his YouTube channel banned, and this without any warning. When I click on the Subscription link for Knight’s channel on my Youtube account, I get the above notice.

At the same time, a video by an artist named Childish Gambino depicts the singer shooting a hooded victim in the back of the head and gunning down a church choir with what looks like an AK-47 machine gun.

And while libertarian leaning commentators such as David Knight have their channels taken down, or routinely have their videos demonetized – demonetization means that the videos, while still available for viewing, are not eligible for advertising – Childish Gambino’s video has 393 million views as of 9/16/18 and counting.

His video also enjoys full monetization. When I watched the video for myself, it was preceded by an advertisement from Spectrum inviting viewers to sign up for its internet service. Apparently Spectrum has no problem associating itself with depictions of violent murder, while YouTube feels it must protect advertisers from the frightening prospect of appearing to approve of the opinions of independent conservatives and libertarians, whose videos are routinely deemed “not advertiser friendly,” thus disqualifying them from receiving advertisements. This prevents independent conservative YouTubers from receiving any compensation for their work on the platform.

Additional examples of Tech Left hypocrisy and double standards are not hard to find.One such example is the tendency of Silicon Valley executives to support laws forcing Christian business to serve homosexual couples, even if doing so violates the Christian beliefs of the business owners. 

When Indiana governor Mike Pence signed into law the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a bill that protected the property rights of business owners who did not wish to serve same-sex married couples, Apple CEO Tim Cook tweeted, “Apple is open for everyone.  We are deeply disappointed in Indiana’s new law.  Around the world, we strive to treat every customer the same – regardless of where they come from, how they worship or who they love.”

But while Cook supports the use of the law to require Christians to violate their own consciences by forcing them to serve gay couples, he himself wishes to reserve the right of his company not to serve Alex Jones and his listeners because he disagrees with their politics.

This is rank hypocrisy, and Christians need to point it out.

A sixth course of action for Christians is to stay on the social media and continue to challenge received opinion. For example, those who shape America’s foreign policy have for years attempted to overthrow Bashar Assad, the President of Syria. And this in spite of the fact that there is no sound Biblical reason nor basis in international law for the United States to be involved in the country. As people concerned about the truth, it is imperative for Christians to continue to expose the lies of the neoconservatives and Deep Staters who control our government’s foreign policy apparatus.

Shining the light of truth on their dark deeds makes it harder for them to carry out their plans. And who knows what evil deeds speaking out my prevent?

Christians are called by Christ himself to be salt and light. And this includes being salt and light on social media platforms.

Seventh, Christians should get educated about the issues of the day. All the ugliness in the world, all the bad news, can tempt us into thinking monasticism may not be so bad after all. Perhaps, we may think, it would be better to just withdraw into our Christian circles and wait for the world to go to hell in a hand basket.

But that’s not what Jesus told us to do. We’re not commanded to go out of the world, but to go into the world and proclaim his teaching. Part of that proclamation involves applying his Word to the issues of our day. And applying the Word of God to our present circumstances involves both stating what ought to be done as well as exposing the errors and outright lies of those who counsel evil.

Eighth, as Christians we must be careful to conduct ourselves as Christ’s representatives. This means, among other things, remembering Jesus command to love our enemies and to bless those who persecute us.

Disagreements involving political, economic, religious and social issues can easily become contentious. As one who reads and thinks a great deal about these sorts of issues, I know my own sinful tendency to want to curse those who curse me. But that’s not what Jesus commands Christians to do.

Please don’t misunderstand what I’m saying. This is not to suggest that Christians go mushy and exclaim, “Can’t we all just get along!” Far from it. As Christians, we know there is going to be disagreement in this world. It cannot be otherwise. But if we love those who love us, how are we any different from the leftist Social Justice Warriors of this world? If we greet those who greet us, in what way do we differ from the Antifa militants? Do they not do the same?

When we present the truth, let us do so asking that God would open the eyes of the blind and cause them to see.

Closing Thoughts

With this post I am concluding my Deplatformed series. That said, Lord willing I hope to continue to learn more about this topic and write on it in the future as events call for commentary.

For now, it is my hope that this series has been beneficial to you. Over the course of these six posts, we have examined Big Tech’s war on free speech, which was prompted principally by the deplatforming of Alex Jones.

You will notice that during this series I have said nothing about the content of Mr. Jones’ commentary. Nor do I intend to comment on it now. The reason I’ve avoided evaluating his work is that my opinion of his content is irrelevant to the issue of censorship.

Right or wrong, Alex Jones has every right to speak his opinions. And the coordinated attempt by the Deep State and the powerful Silicon Valley social media companies to silence him represents the most overt and chilling attack on free speech this author has witnessed.

As if silencing political dissent weren’t bad enough, if Big Tech is allowed to get away with its attack on Alex Jones, it is reasonable to believe that at some point Christians will find themselves in the Deep State’s crosshairs just as Alex Jones has.

For example, the main charge brought against Alex Jones was that he engaged in hate speech that violated the community standards of the social media companies. But what many American Christians do not realize is that Christians in other Western nations have been charged with violating hate crime laws merely for teaching what the Bible says about homosexuality.

On February 5, 2017, The Telegraph ran a headline that read “Preacher locked up for hate crime after quoting the Bible to gay teenager.” According to the article, a street preacher in Scotland “was accused of a hate crime and locked up in a cell after preaching from the Bible to a gay teenager.”

The preacher, Gordon Larmour, was cleared of any wrongdoing and released after spending a night in custody.

If this can happen in Scotland, it can happen in the United States. Perhaps not tomorrow, but sometime in the future we may have another progressive Democratic president or a Democratic majority Congress. Under such a regime, is it not possible that there will be a push for hate crime laws directed at those who teach that homosexuality is a sin?

To what degree LGBTQ activists and their supporters among Democrats will be successful in pushing such legislation, I don’t know. How soon such legislation could be enacted, I don’t know. To what extent the First Amendment would offer protection to Christians under such laws I don’t know.

That said, it is not impossible that Western Christians at some point in the future could face fines, jail time, or worse simply for teaching that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin as Christians have done for the past two thousand years.

One way Christians can increase their chances of retaining the right freely to teach Christian doctrine in the future is for them to defend free speech rights today, even if it’s speech by people they may not be in full agreement with.

To come back to a point that I made earlier in this series, of all people Christians should be the most concerned to defend free speech. Our is not a religion of the deed but a religion of the Word. The maintenance of our faith, as well as the evangelism of the lost, depend upon our ability to communicate the propositions of the Bible.

This can be seen in the Great Commission where Christ enjoined the disciples to teach the nations to observe all that he commanded them. Teaching requires the use of words. As the apostle Paul asked rhetorically, “How shall they hear without a preacher?”

And because Christ commanded his disciples to teach his doctrines, it would be sinful for any government to prohibit them from doing so. And because Christians are commanded to treat others as they themselves would like to be treated, Christians are to grant the same freedom of speech to others as they claim for themselves.