Sunday, 2 October 2011

Google+ Terrorist-Bogeyman = Fascism

This post is part of a ongoing series of NymWars posts, but what's all this fuss about? It's all about the painfully slow journey to technological utopia. Google recently created a slight temporary obstacle, which obstructs the route to utopia. The problematic nature of Google needs to be explained but there are bigger issues requiring our attention. Initially regarding this post I wanted to write about how Google+ executives employ the bogeyman of hypothetical antisocial behaviour to curtail freedom on its G+ network. After reflection I decided to address the bigger issue regarding safety, the prevention of harm, the monster of fear and terror.

Beyond the realms of Google+, regarding usage of terrorist or antisocial threats to limit freedom, I will expand the notion of evil propagandistic falsehoods. I want people to consider all aspects of scapegoating, the usage of bogymen (unrealistic and often implausible fears), to purposefully and unjustly restrict our freedom.































Today in the news it was reported how an English politician (Theresa May) wants to abolish Human Rights. Theresa justifies her nonsense in the name of deporting terrorist suspects. She wants to scrap Human Rights not because of actual convicted terrorists but due to terrorist suspects! What happened to the notion of innocent until proven guilty?

"I'd personally like to see the Human Rights Act go because I think we have had some problems with it. I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, the sort of problems we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects."

I want you to consider how Google uses the fictional bogeyman named antisocial behaviour to scare people into surrendering their freedom, but more importantly I want you to consider how corrupt Governments utilize the so-called terrorist threat in an identical manner. When Google+ insists upon real name usage to limit antisocial behaviour this is no different to standard methods of tyrannical population control. Tyrants utilize fears to justify enslavement of the populace.



When Google insists its policies are for our protection, this propaganda is identical to scenarios where fascist Governments insist authoritarianism is for the protection of citizens. It is the archetypal scenario of Nurse Ratched insisting R. P. McMurphy needs to be lobotomised for his own good to help him. If anyone needs lobotomising then maybe the world be a better place if we lobotomised people such as Theresa May. Incidentally Theresa May somewhat resembles Nurse Ratched.

People should have the freedom to define their own identities in cyberspace, but the Google+ identity rules are anti-freedom. When Google+ states "real names" encourage people to be more polite; Google is making an unjustified statement based on no evidence. The excessive focus on safety, via real name usage, is a bogus focus because safety without freedom is very unsafe. Politeness without freedom is slavery.

Is Terrorism Really A Major Threat?

The humiliation which people suffer due to airport security is a appropriate example of how the cure is worse than the disease. Obviously the cure is worse than the disease because there never was a disease regarding terrorism. Likewise with the issue of pseudonyms on the internet; pseudonyms were never a cause of antisocial behaviour. People will be antisocial whether or not they use a real name or a pseudonym. Terrorism is identical to the Google+ naming rules. Terrorism is a fictitious construction for the purpose of oppressing people. The terrorist threat is severely exaggerated, it is excessively and ridiculously exaggerated.

People in the USA are apparently 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than die in a terrorist attack. I cannot confirm the following statistics, apparently from the US National Safety Council, 2004; but the statistics seem plausible. Think about it.

■ You are 13 times more likely to die in a railway accident than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 12,571 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack

■ You are six times more likely to die from hot weather than from a terrorist attack

■ You are eight times more likely to die from accidental electrocution than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 11,000 times more likely to die in an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane

■ You are 87 times more likely to drown than die in a terrorist attack

■ You are 404 times more likely to die in a fall than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 1048 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack

■ You are 12 times more likely to die from accidental suffocation in bed than from a terrorist attack

■ You are nine times more likely to choke to death on your own vomit than die in a terrorist attack

■ You are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist attack.

# Blog visitors since 2010:



Archive History ▼

S. 2045 | plus@singularity-2045.org