Julian Assange loses his Internet. Facebook under attack. This is a tintinnabulation for Internet power. Is #MeToo going to be next?

You can feel a tide turning. First Facebook gets smeared in a targeted and coordinated media and government assault with other Big Tech distancing themselves from them, and now Julian Assange has been grounded. Freedom and liberty are being made to be bad things, as if the truth, and the obedient middle classes will be given a scary story about bogeymen, as if their own governments aren't spying on their citizens (that's right, China: we have human trafficking and illegal arms dealing, but let's make sure those jaywalkers are put in their place!).

I do not agree with Apple's Tim Cook's assertion that Facebook should have regulated itself. It would not have mattered. They allowed anyone to have a presence to a global platform to say or show whatever they wished, and their success placed that target sign on their backs.

Assange is a spoiler. He is both cunning and naive. I do believe he is a chess master, but never realized it was a game of Go he was playing -- he may have honestly believed that if he showed the world how they are being lied to, abused, and subjugated by their governments, people will revolt.

No, sorry, Julian, they are way too busy gossiping about the creepy Game of Thrones and making kissy faces in their selfies to get up and march in the streets, and when they do march in the streets, it is to demand the government has given them too many rights and should nanny them as they take their rights away.

You will not hear me bad-mouth Assange or WikiLeaks, as that is the closest thing we have to journalism left, and I do believe he has planted seeds that is too late for the governments or media to pull out and kill, despite their best efforts, but he will pay a dear price for it.

The problem is there is a crackdown on liberties in the Western world -- idea-shaming didn't work. Journalism didn't work. Trying to get people to retreat won't work because the Internet wasn't something people did strictly for work -- it was always about fun and adventure without the effort that hinges on vanity and greed. Take that away, and people will become angry at those who spoiled their fun and games, and will retaliate in a devastatingly passive aggressive way. They waited about a decade too long to strike, and it will get away from them.


Because social media shortened attention spans and loyalties. The world has become more mercurial. Remember how loyal people were to the Clintons after Trump's victory? Then came #MeToo and made them seem bitter and icky -- and Hillary is no longer a rallying cry, just a crybaby.

The wavelengths around the world have shifted and changed -- and you have old schoolers trying to wrest control with outdated sensibilities. The pendulum keeps swinging wildly with a world that is both perpetually self-entitled and offended, and that creates an unstable environment.

I would not be surprised if wars and skirmishes break out. It is already beginning to get ugly in Kosovo, for instance, and with a connected world, people become inspired faster than they ever did before. All it takes is One to bring chaos to the Infinite, and all order is lost.

Assange is being punished for kicking the hornet's nest. Facebook is being punished for unleashing an entire hornet's nest to sting whoever they desire. Both are being demonized with dread tales about their alliances and "sinister deeds". Unfortunately, those doing the smearing and accusing are doing a lot worse than both put together.

WikiLeaks, Facebook, and #MeToo are all threats to the old order, and so far, two thirds are under attack, meaning expect #MeToo to be under fire as well.

It will be very interesting to see how it all plays out, but that Assange is still standing for over five years is shocking...

Memo to Gizmodo: You know nothing, and spew whatever partisans tell you to spew; so stop using a narrative that suggests you know anything.

The Internet meltdown is just beginning. Journalism is feeling the rot of its own demise, but their slayers have been infected with the same virus they used to fell their old school rivals.

Power struggles for ideological control are never pleasant wars.

Julian Assange is the much maligned face of WikiLeaks, and I have said repeatedly, they are what journalism should and could have been if they weren't owned by sheltered relics.

Journalism faltered when it began to use market research and focus groups to get a feel for their public, and the Big Brother/Big Data equivalent of social media is also doing them in. For all the bluster of using AI and algorithms to "read" people's minds, there are huge holes with this narrative, and this will not be the forum where I address them.

But back to Assange.

Twitter played censor and temporarily deleted his account because Assange is very much a spoiler: people want to play make pretend and brag as they show off at cocktail parties how brilliant and successful they are, even if their lives are a train wreck -- and people such as Assange find the dirty laundry and air them.

He has ruined countless obnoxious narratives, particularly for Stepford candidate Hillary Clinton, an empty shell who tried to use bluster and a façade of fated queen to win a silly race.

All WikiLeaks did was air some dirty laundry.

She then instructed the faithful little people who are always looking for a sure thing and now were scared, that WikiLeaks was in a collusion with Russia, and the airheads parroted this as if this were fact.

There was a huge confirmation bias: WikiLeaks has also aired Russian dirty laundry. They are equal opportunity offenders.

But don't tell that to Gizmodo.


Their stenography of partisan propaganda was amusing, particularly this authoritative little jab:

For reasons unknown the official Twitter account of Julian Assange, the leader of disgraced transparency organization Wikileaks, has been deleted.

No, they were not disgraced: they were smeared by the Man and there is a huge difference. The Democrats, who were so lazy and arrogant that they honestly believed they could vote-shame an entire country to dance to their tune, got introduced to a dose of reality.

Once upon a time, if you were a thorn in the Establishment's side, you would get smeared with labels such as heathen and heretic -- or Commie. Then that trick no longer worked, and that brand was tainted -- so the Establishment put on a different mask, but played the same tune, just altering a few of the words, and changing the key.

But the actual tactics didn't change. If you do not march lockstep and refuse to accept an authority's decree by asking hard questions, you still get a villain's label.

Gizmodo is merely marching to a falling Establishment's orders.

Using the phrase "disgraced" makes too many unwarranted assumptions. It never questions whether the shaming label is accurate, or a war propaganda tactic. It states something with the cocky air of authority, but with no proof.

Assange has been an enemy to many Establishment types in an era where people think they are rebels, when they are actual dutiful followers. The entire "Resistance" movement is a sham -- resisting what? A democratic result that did not go your way?

You do realize there are more elections coming up, right?

And you have to get off your backside and vote for the candidate you want because following someone on Twitter or liking their Facebook page doesn't mean anything.

And for all those howling the loudest about "resisting" -- I bet the majority of those tantrum throwing brats never bothered to vote in November 2016.

Resist is a very good idea.

Resist your own laziness. That would be great for starters. Start resisting your arrogance, as well. Stupidly following someone's else narrative is a great thing to resist. Your lack of skepticism is also on the list of things you need to actively and enthusiastically  resist. Resist your compulsion to be manipulated by partisan propaganda. Resist littering your social media feeds with agitprop, and go look for independently verified primary sources, you lazy cowards.

Resist your own shortcomings first before you go resisting the result of an election.

This is the first resistance movement where the resisters have themselves as their own oppressors and enemies. Well played, children.

And Gizmodo should also resist their own horrid shortcomings before furthering someone else's self-serving smear-campaigns.