The purpose of the Society’s Building Blocks blog is “Critically Thinking About Things That Change Society” and it’s been a rather depressing task in the 21st century to witness all the absurdities coming to the forefront of our society that are destroying our culture and the core foundations of our country.
Part of the 21st century trends that are destroying our society and culture is the anti-American, anti-Liberty, anti-free speech, and unethical trend to literally silence, yes silence, viewpoints that bigoted people don’t like. An easy place to view this trend is on just about any college campus, social media applications, and opinion blogs. You won’t see this trend on Society’s Building Blocks.
You cannot find those human commonalities that can be used to bridge deep ideological divides if you’re not willing to freely communicate with those who disagree with you.
I very frequently visit blogs and podcasts, Ethics Alarms, Jonathan Turley, Alan Dershowitz to name a few, that are generally focused on national topics and I also regularly visit a couple of local bloggers that are specific to my area of south central Wisconsin, Blaska Policy Werkes, Caffeinated Politics, Althouse and Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos. These are generally my go-to spots that cover national and local topics from the political left and political right viewpoints; however, there are a few other blogs on both sides of the political spectrum like some on Medium and Substack that I visit less frequently. I also visit social media outlets like Nextdoor, Reddit, Twitter (X), and I even visit blatantly partisan platforms like Bluesky and Truth Social once in a while. You can find links to a few of the places I visit in my sidebar under Blogroll.
There are trends that I notice across the board; partisanship is of course one of the top trends that crosses the political divide, but the in-your-face trend that I’ve noticed that is almost exclusively a tactic of the political left is the anti-American, anti-Liberty, anti-free speech trend of intentional silencing. The trend has shown me over and over again that a vast majority of outspoken people from the political left are absolutely intolerant of opposing viewpoints and they will go to extremes to silence not just specific opposing viewpoints but they will intentionally silence the people that voice them. It’s as if they’re toddlers putting their fingers in their ears and screaming “na, na, na” to prevent them from hearing. How dare people have opposing viewpoints that liberals and progressives don’t like; the horror! I have written repetitively about the totalitarian mob’s Orwellian trend to control what people can read and hear since I started this blog in May of 2019.
The trouble is that the mob doesn’t understand the following concept…
These blatantly bigoted silencing tactics are destroying our society and culture at its core and those that stand against the trend are true American patriots opposing tyrannical anti-American, anti-Liberty, anti-free speech totalitarians.
Today’s example showing this silencing trend comes from a local blogger and previous Madison, WI Mayor, Dave Cieslewicz, on his Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos blog. Dave and I have a history and he has chosen to censor every comment I post to his articles regardless of whether I agree or disagree with his viewpoint. He is actively silencing my voice. I’ve tried to privately discuss Dave’s silencing tactic, but almost all of my communication efforts end up going straight into a black hole.
Recently Dave posted an article titled, “Two Tales of Honduras” where he compared the deportation of a “bright young woman on her way to a successful career” who happened to be an illegal immigrant to the Presidential pardon of the former Honduras President Juan Orlando Hernandez who was convicted for drug dealing. Of course the conflation of these two vastly different things was a pure partisan propaganda effort to smear those he opposes, but I digress. Dave also wrote in the article “Anyone who wants to explain to me why this was necessary or anything but a waste of taxpayer resources is welcome to give it a try in the comments section below.” Since Dave specifically wrote “anyone”, I figured that “anyone” also included me, so I submitted the following comment.
Since Dave has a history of silencing my voice on his blog, I personally reached out to Dave via email after posting the comment. I wrote in my email, “You literally asked for “anyone” to explain, I chose to explain; I respectfully ask that you allow my comment to be posted.”, I then provided Dave with the above screenshot of my comment and concluded my email with “Thank you for your consideration.” This email seems to have gone into the same blackhole I mentioned earlier and my comment has not been posted. Maybe I should be shocked, but I’m not.
Now feel free to correct me if you think I’m wrong about this; Dave writing “anyone” is openly stating a base standard, a base moral standard of sorts, that he will allow any participant to share their opinion and Dave is specifically asking for an opposing opinion. So when Dave actively chooses to exclude my opposing opinion and allows opinions to be posted that appear to be inline with his propaganda narrative, that screams hypocrisy to me.
Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform.
I really don’t state things like this lightly, but this really does appear to me to be in-your-face hypocrisy and shows a level of moral bankruptcy that seems to be at the core of 21st century progressive ideology.
If Dave didn’t continually choose to act in an anti-American, anti-Liberty, anti-free speech manner to silence my voice on his blog, I wouldn’t have any reason write about it on my blog. I once stated to Dave, “I’m rhetorically hard on you sometimes and I agree with you sometimes, and you’re welcome to do the same, that’s what comes with the territory when you’re a blogger”, but Dave seems to want his blog to be isolated in an ideological bubble.
Life comes with choices. Dave has chosen.
Choices have consequences.
Society's Building Blocks 
“Since Dave specifically wrote ‘anyone‘ and I figured that ‘anyone‘ included me”
Reminiscent of JoKe Biden’s “We The People, Just Not You People” speech, am I right?
Anywho, The Gotch has said it before, and he’ll say it again: As a well-read Conservative who refuses to tiptoe around subjects, you scare the living $#!+ out of censorious Lefties like Cieslewicz and Humphrey.
The absolutely breathtaking hypocrisy? They, et al, would be ButtHurt beyond redemption were they to think they were being silenced. Why? Because they supply their monocultured ideological claptrap (which they deem as beyond reproach) with the approval of their own consciences.
As far as scaring the living $#!+ out of ’em, keep up the (heh!) good work!
The Gotch
LikeLiked by 1 person
One Eye wrote, “I give Dave more crap than anyone and yet here I am. Gotch seems to be in the same boat.”
So you’re the deliverer of “more crap than anyone”, so answer me this genius, why is it that “I” am the one that’s silenced since you’re the crap deliverer? I’m absolutely serious One Eye, answer the question.
FYI: Dave and I have a history stretching back to February 2021 on his blog and I’m relatively sure that he was part of the old Madison.com commenting community before it was removed. I’ve asked him directly why he has defacto banned me and offered to work directly with him to solve his issue, but he refuses to answer these kinds of inquiries.
One Eye wrote, “I found your comment through the pingback. If people want to hear what you have to say they can click the link.”
Talk about completely missing the points of the blog post, also your argument is illogical! No, genius, you bringing up the fact that Dave allowed a pingback after the fact doesn’t refute the point(s) I made in my post.
One Eye wrote, “That being said your posts are long winded, generally humorless and not persuasive.”
Interesting perspective, it’s also interesting that you haven’t actually taken any real effort to refute anything I presented in my unpersuasive post. How about you come here, submit your arguments and we can have a discussion, or were you just trolling me via Dave’s blog?
One Eye wrote, “Would you want to read you?”
That’s the kind of question an internet troll would ask.
LikeLiked by 1 person