The effort to play the trump card endangers journalism, democratic norms | opinion.

0

One does not have to be an astute observer to see how the elites in the media, Hollywood, the federal bureaucracy, academia, international institutions, the foreign policy establishment and Silicon Valley are united in their opposition to President Donald Trump. His shamelessly insulting personality and his brazen attack on the status quo have caused mass insecurity during a pandemic. Even from a conservative perspective, it is understandable that this intersectional resentment, a kind of bipartisan alliance, would challenge Trump.

But Trump is just one man, and in their jealousy to remove him from office, these interests throw their principles overboard for what they consider to be the greater good. A mentality that pursues the goal-justifying the means to defeat the ever Machiavellian Trump could lead to a favorable outcome at the ballot box next week. But the long-term effects could do more harm to liberal democracy than anything the president could achieve.

In recent weeks, big tech units have censored an offensive story about the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop because they believe it will hurt his father’s chances of winning the presidency. Facebook’s communications director, Andy Stone, said his platform would censor the article regardless of its truthfulness. Although the former vice president and his troubled son did not deny the legitimacy of the contents of the laptop, which was published by the New York Post and other media, renowned journalists have done the work of the Biden campaign and speculated without evidence that it was a Russian disinformation operation.

Some left-wing outsiders, such as Matt Taibbi, Michael Tracey and Glenn Greenwald, have claimed that the media response to the Biden leaks is the real scandal. Although Hunter’s suspicious foreign dealings and his father’s potential knowledge of these acts are certainly worth reporting, they are unlikely to be a big change for the race. The reaction of the technology companies reveals a more insidious threat to our democracy. It shows the rise of a political elite that likes to control information and act as a de facto truth commission for the public, for which they have a growing contempt.

One particularly disturbing statement reveals the extent of the decline of the Fourth Estate. In a Washington Post statement, Professor Thomas Rid wrote: “We must treat the Hunter Biden leaks as if they were an operation of foreign intelligence – even though they probably are not.

Rid is by no means a partisan hack. He is an academic with the most substantial references. He is a professor of strategic studies at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University. His point of view is apparently omnipresent in all major American institutions. Journalistic research must be abandoned if the administrators of the written word appointed by the companies do not like the impact their results can have on the minds of the masses. These elite actors have internalized the axiom that “ignorance is strength” and allow their hostility to Russia and other rationalizations to throw long-standing principles overboard.

Some commentators, such as Michael Anton of the Claremont Institute, have put forward the theory that the Democrats are trying to turn the election into a color revolution against Trump. The proposal has proved controversial and Anton has even received an ominous death threat from a think-tank official. They claim that the Democrats have set the course by creating organizations staffed with liberal officials who claim to be impartial and independent in order to influence popular narratives about the election.

Take, for example, the Transition Integrity Project (TIP), led by long-time Democratic staffer Rosa Brooks and staffed with a “non-partisan” group of Republicans and Democrats who not coincidentally all share the hatred of Trump. Before she branded herself a crusader for election protection, Brooks openly outlined ways to remove Trump from office-even the idea of a military coup loomed just a week after his inauguration. Recently, Brooks wrote an editorial for the Washington Post discussing the results of TIP’s “war game” simulation of the election, which predicted that his supporters would bring “street violence and a political crisis” unless Biden won big.

In this scenario, the Democrats in TIP’s “war game” were prepared to take unconventional measures to remove Trump from office. The influential Democratic agent John Podesta, who played Biden, refused to give up the election after the defeat. He then called on Wisconsin and Michigan to send pro-Biden voters to invalidate the election, while blue states threatened secession to remove Trump from office regardless of the decision of the American people.

Now imagine if a group of predominantly Republican agents had done the same before President Obama was elected in 2008. Imagine if they had orchestrated lobbying to warn that Obama’s victory might not be legitimate and that, according to their forward looking analysis, if he won, it would cause widespread violence. And imagine if some of the world’s most powerful corporations and highly respected journalists defiantly refused to report on potentially devastating details about his Republican opponent.

What would that look like? Would such a chain of events raise cries of fascism from the left? Would the Democrats agree with such obscene gaslighting and hypocrisy if the shoe was on the other foot?

The idea that the operations against Trump are a color revolution may be a bit far-fetched. But it seems likely that the various institutions that support Biden are working together to fight an opponent that they all despise for practical reasons. Trump’s policies are inherently destructive to the status quo, and the institutional powers that will lose out in the midst of chaos are likely to oppose him out of self-interest.

In a desperate rush to defeat Trump, however, these interests have overstepped their bounds and have displayed behaviors that threaten our Republic. Assuming that their joint efforts are successful, they will lead to a permanent loss of freedom of speech, serious journalism, checks and balances, and other fundamental American values. Is the victory worth it? This cure is perhaps worse than the disease.

Gavin Wax is president of the New York Young Republican Club, chairman of the Association of Young Republican Clubs, digital director for the Young Republican National Federation, associate fellow at the London Center for Policy Research and a frequent guest at Fox News. You can follow him on Twitter at @GavinWax.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author….

Share.

Leave A Reply