Don't Mention It

 

Whatever you are not allowed to say must be the truth. Nobody needs to ban lies, generally speaking, because they can be disproven.

This is the secret to the “walking on eggshells” experience in the typical dysfunctional family: there is an elephant in the room, and nobody is allowed to notice it.

When speech is restricted in this way, it is a sure sign that a narcissist is involved, and up to no good.

One must not question global warming, or climate change; or else you are a “climate denier.” Because the case for global warming is obviously thin. But the premise is useful for expanding government control.

This is why you must not propose any “conspiracy theories”: because there is at least one monstrous conspiracy afoot. We can now see this much. The deep state is out to get Trump. Jeffrey Epstein did not kill himself. 

One is not allowed to say the 2020 election was stolen. Nobody objected much about anyone saying an election was stolen in the US before 2020. This is itself proof that the 2020 election was stolen.

This is why you must not “misgender” anyone: because a man of course cannot become a woman, or a woman a man. No real, sane man ever took serious offense at being mistaken for a woman, or vice versa. 

This is also why, to tiptoe through a minefield, any criticism of homosexual behaviour is dismissed as “homophobia”: because there is a legitimate case to be raised against homosexual behavior. So it must not be raised. 

And one must not criticize Islam for current violence without being called “Islamophobic,” because there is an obvious case that Islam is inherently violent, and has something to do with the terrorism we are seeing.

This is again the truth behind the common perversion of Godwin’s Law: that the first person to make a comparison to Hitler loses the argument. This proves some people are doing things they know are comparable to Hitler. Be wary of the first person in any discussion who appeals to “Godwin’s Law.”

The one apparent outlier is “Holocaust denial.” I am in no position to deny the reality of the Nazi Holocaust. I believe it is real; I know virulent antisemitism is real; but have not done the research. Perhaps in this case, perhaps in some others, the prohibition is indirect: the ban is to discourage research in the area. It is an attempt to close the book, because some of the guilty parties are still in control and do not want their guilt exposed. And some of the purported victims were actually among the perpetrators.

Just go down the list of prohibited speech to discover truth.