One Joe can spout off, the other cannot

So today I noticed that a lot of my news feeds are full of Joe Rogan. Not in a good way sadly. MSM and a little crowd of people are going after Joe Rogan. Now I am a fan of the Joe Rogan Experience podcast, mostly because it is full of common sense. Where MSM blows things out of proportion, Joe keeps it in context. Apparently, based on these articles, folks are unhappy that JRE podcast is discussing COVID and not sticking to the narrative.

As this is taking place President Joe Biden spouted off Tuesday in Atlanta towards anyone who does not share is opinions. So one Joe can spout off insulting 60+% of the country, another Joe is being attacked for simply sharing common sense. This sets a dangerous precedent if the loud little crowd wins the battle. It may seem like the issues with the JRE Podcast are about safety, they are not.

What is at stake?

This fight that we are seeing is about freedom. Right now anyone can say what they want, and this is what the Founding Fathers aimed for. If a person questions what is being said, then they have a right to ask and be vocal. Now, if what is being said is outright false then sure it is a problem. In this case what is being said has not been proven false. In fact, the facts that Joe Rogan is arguing against on his podcast are not exactly facts. Yes, I am someone who is part of the unpopular opinion. The facts we have about the Sars-Cov-2 virus are not all facts. In recent days the “factual numbers” have come under question.

This means that the fight unfolding before our eyes is about who is allowed to speak freely. It appears that if you are part of the “popular crowd” and want to speak within their confined rules, then you are free to do so. On the other hand, if you are not participating in popular speech, then you are not free to speak. This is what is at stake. We are seeing censorship play out across social media. Even more scary is that we are now seeing it spill over to general speaking. The outcome of this fight, will in fact set precedent for future free speech arguments.

So why is this so bad?

While it may not sound bad to begin with, let’s take a deeper look. One Joe can spout off, and say what he wants because of his job/title. Yet, another free individual also named Joe, is being attacked for just talking about a subject in a way others did not like. It means that articles like my discussion of the stimulus checks, could be censored or shutdown if the “popular kids” do not like it. We are legitimately trying to bring the rules of the middle school lunch room into our country. Freedom of speech and equality is something we hear far too often from protesters. Yet, when those two ideologies are being applied to the rest of us, it becomes a problem.

What is the solution?

The solution to this is not more laws or government oversight. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but those big tech companies who are censoring, are paying the politicians you want to act. No politician is brave enough to fight back against the system. Even if they were that brave, what good would it do? The issue is not that social media is not responsible to anyone. No the issue here is that you are restricted to a few popular sites. Thankfully we see this changing with Parler, Truth, QubeTV, Rumble, and the likes. No I believe the win for this fight is pulling revenue away from the sites who are censoring. This will require a change in thinking of those of us who feel distanced from these platforms.

We need to push for a system where One Joe can spout off and offend his opponents, and anyone else can speak freely too.

This is how we wind up All Hat, with No Cattle.