Whatever Planet Jeff Zients Is On, LinkedIn Is A Satellite In Orbit

Lather, rinse, repeat. That fairly sums up my latest LinkedIn suspension (still waiting to find out if this one is permanent).

It would not warrant further commentary, but the stated rationale for my suspension does demand some discussion.

The Narrative Must Never Be Questioned, Not Even By Facts And Evidence

I was suspended for daring to challenge the official “winter of death” narrative. Seriously.

Yes, stating the empirical facts about the severity of COVID-19, supported with documented sources, is “misinformation”. Disagreeing with the official “winter of death” narrative for the non-inoculated (i.e., the “unvaccinated”) warrants cancellation.

Was the inclusion of the link to my newsletter article criticizing Jeff Zients for pushing this narrative the deciding factor in this latest suspension? That I do not know--LinkedIn rarely says anything more substantive than “it's misinformation” with regards to its acts of censorship. Even so, the irony of that data-driven jeremiad possibly being the cause of this latest suspension amply warrants this article's headline.

What I do know is that the article itself provides links to verify every claim of fact made. The claims are the conclusions derived from reviewing the data.

There is always a possibility the data is wrong. Even if so, however, by far the more reasonable response is to challenge the data in reasoned debate. Attempting to cancel a person for presenting an uncomfortable set of facts is not merely unethical, but insane. Canceling people will not change the facts.

If my conclusions are wrong, if my facts are in error, then I invite anyone and everyone to point out how I am wrong in the comments section of my newsletter. Put all the data on the table and let people form their own conclusions.

Not An Isolated Case

I am the smallest of fish in the independent media pond. I have nowhere near the readership or following of Alex Berenson or Steve Kirsch. Yet what has happened to me on LinkedIn has also happened to them--Alex Berenson had his Twitter account suspended, and Steve Kirsch has been booted from LinkedIn. Both writers have stated their cases within their own newsletters, and anyone interested in how Big Tech came gunning for them should read their own words on the matter.

Similarly, the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration have been targeted for “take down”, by no less than Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci--respectively, the heads of NIH and NIAID--for championing science and open debate. We know this from their own email correspondence.

What historian Phil Magness has discovered, with newly unearthed emails, comes not as a shock to any of us but it is satisfying to see the confirmation of what we suspected. It seemed at the time that the effort to attack and destroy both the GBD and its authors was coordinated from the top. Here at last is the proof that our intuition was not crazy.

While it is rank speculation to think that I have been targeted in the exact same fashion, my cancellation on LinkedIn follows the same trajectory as Alex Berenson, Steve Kirsch, or the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration: someone is triggered by a particular comment or post and reports it to LinkedIn thought police, who then take action against “misinformation”. The factual content of the message is irrelevant; all that matters is the “official narrative” is challenged—which is the practical, real-world definition of “misinformation”.

This is the state of public discourse in the pandemic era. Only orthodox views are tolerable, only support for the “official” narrative is allowed. My LinkedIn suspensions, Steve Kirsch’ LinkedIn suspension, Alex Berenson's suspension from Twitter, the attacks on the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration are all irrefutable proof of this.

To the “powers that be”, facts are irrelevant, and narrative is everything. Narrative is power. To question this is to invite cancellation.

All Facts Really Do Matter

Yet the facts are as they are. Censorship may silence dissenting voices, but it is powerless to alter the tiniest data point informing that dissent. Silencing dissident voices has never, in all of human history, succeeded in suppressing the truths uttered by those voices.

Canceling my LinkedIn account for pointing out the facts of COVID-19 severity will not make the disease either more or less virulent.

Censorship ultimately is simply silly. The best decisions are always the ones informed by the broadest array of facts. Suppressing part of those facts merely retards good decision-making. All facts really do matter.

LinkedIn might choose today to orbit whatever planet Jeff Zients and the rest of the medical fascists in Washington occupy, but it will not escape the consequences of that choice.