Joe Biden, whose administration has admitted it is engaging in censorship via Facebook, recently said that the social media platform was “killing people” by not removing COVID “misinformation.” His party would certainly know a lot about misinformation, too — after all, the Democrats have been peddling it since 1840.
So asserts commentator Trevor Thomas, introducing the topic with item seven of the Democrat Party’s 1840 platform:
Resolved, That congress has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several states, and that such states are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs, not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts by abolitionists or others, made to induce congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people, and endanger the stability and permanency of the union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend to our political institutions.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
“For six consecutive party platforms — from 1840 through 1860 — Democrats used their party platform to promote the institution of slavery,” Thomas then informs. “In addition to keeping the horrific institution legal in the U.S., as a result of this deceit, hundreds of thousands of Americans would die.”
It should be mentioned that respecting states’ powers is a constitutional imperative; the problem is that antebellum Democrats advocated it in the name of promoting an evil institution. Moreover, today’s Democrats advocate trampling states’ powers in deference to what former presidential candidate and ambassador Alan Keyes has called “the slavery issue of our time”: prenatal infanticide (a.k.a. abortion).
The Democrats appear to tacitly agree with Keyes’s assessment, mind you. That is to say, consider the following passage, asking yourself whether it seems a reasonable summary of the “pro-choice” position:
If each person will only agree to mind his own business, and leave his neighbors alone, there will be peace forever between us…. I am now speaking of rights under the constitution [sic], and not of moral or religious rights…. It is for women to decide … the moral and religious right of the abortion question for themselves within their own limits…. I repeat that the principle is the right of each woman to decide this abortion question for herself, to have an abortion or not, as she chooses, and it does not become a pro-lifer, or anybody else, to tell her she has no conscience, that she is living in a state of iniquity…. We have enough objects of charity at home, and it is our duty to take care of our own poor, and our own suffering, before we go abroad to intermeddle with other people’s business.
Now consider that the preceding was presented by Michael Pakaluk, a philosophy professor at The Catholic University of America. The academic explained how he formulated the above argument, stating, “I arrived at that quotation by taking one of [antebellum Democrat politician] Stephen Douglas’s defenses of slavery, and substituting ‘abortion’ for ‘slavery’; ‘woman’ for ‘state’; and ‘a pro-lifer’ for ‘Mr. Lincoln.’”
Pakaluk then a little later asked “pro-choice” proponents, “Doesn’t the similarity between your defense of abortion, and Douglas’ defense of slavery, bother you in any way? Does it raise in your mind any suspicions at all that you might just be on the wrong side?”
The point here, however, is that antebellum Democrats and today’s Democrats are on the same side in terms of argumentation — in both cases, in defense of evil institutions. And saying that it’s okay to enslave a person outside the womb and kill him within it is, to say the least, in the nature of deadly misinformation.
Thomas also mentions that for the sixth year straight, sexually transmitted disease rates have reached record highs. He then cites InfoWars:
According to the latest data, 2.5 million Americans had either chlamydia, gonorrhea or syphilis infections in 2019, with chlamydia cases rising 61 per cent and gonorrhea cases spiking 42 per cent among young people aged 15 to 24.
The research shows that gay and bisexual men account for nearly half of the primary and secondary syphilis infections while syphilis infections among newborn babies also quadrupled between 2015 and 2019….
In addition, a recent CDC study found that more than four out of 10 “women” who identify as transgender and live in big cities have contracted HIV.
Two thirds of black “women” who identify as transgender and over a third of Hispanic transgenders also have HIV.
This is a direct result of leftists birthing and buttressing the Sexual Devolution, which the Democrats now represent politically (though Republicans, lamentably, do today accept too many of its tenets).
Speaking of which, there’s the MUSS (Made-up Sexual Status or “transgender”) agenda. Despite having no basis in science whatsoever, Democrats claim that a boy can become a girl and vice versa. They peddle this misinformation even to children, insisting that using puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and even having mutilative genitalia alteration surgery are rights and thus encouraging a state of being associated with a very high suicide rate.
Moving on from suicide to, possibly, negligent homicide, with “their Wuhan Virus–driven lockdowns, rampant fear porn, and foolish and ignorant devotion to masks — along with policies that (again) directly put the most vulnerable among us in harm’s way — Democrats did little to nothing to ‘slow the spread’ of the virus,” Thomas also writes. “What’s more, their lockdown and mask policies have wrought untold damage and death throughout the U.S.”
All this said, it would certainly be wrong to state that the Democrat Party lied and people died — “lied,” after all, is past tense.
Having today’s leftists as the Ministry of Truth is like appointing the Taliban as Ministry of Antiquities. Their censorship’s goal is not to save us from misinformation, but to ensure that we miss information that contradicts their misinformation.
