Biden warns tech “oligarchy'' that they won't censor Democrats anymore

In 2020, as I have done on many other occasions, I warned of a “dystopian technological oligarchy.” I cited liberal Dr. Robert Epstein, senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, and his research on the impact of Big Tech. His findings were also surprising. He warned that big tech companies could shift 15 million votes to a particular presidential candidate during an election. Note that this is more than enough to sway the White House race, especially given how close the election is now.

But strangely, neither Joe Biden nor any other Democratic office holder complained about this technological “oligarchy” at the time. But somehow, Biden changed his attitude. Indeed, in his farewell speech Wednesday night, he warned that a “technological” oligarchy was seizing control of America.

What does this epiphany explain?

Well, if you're a die-hard cynic, you might think he's just angry that so many of the big tech companies have dropped censorship in favor of Democrats.

The axis of big government and big technology

Making this point Thursday in the New York Post, commentator Robbie Soave called Biden's comments “arrogant and hypocritical.” And he writes:

This should be viewed with disdain by all those who have suffered under social media censorship programs for the past four years. This program was largely forced on tech companies by President Biden, and is an example of the convergence of government and corporate power. Biden now claims he is against it.

Soave is no exaggeration. Ordinary people may not know about censorship. Therein lies its effectiveness. (However, as suppression of speech has become more common, more Americans have been affected.) For example, the average search engine user seeking political material will only see the search results presented to him. I never see it. He will not see what should be presented to him, but is relegated to “Internet Siberia”. He likely would never have known about the conservative sites he might have seen the work on if Big Tech hadn't hidden them. (For example, read our 2018 article “How Conservatives Are Being Disrupted by Facebook, Twitter, and Google Without Realizing It.”)

But Big Tech has a host of censorship techniques, from deplatforming to shadowbanning and limiting reach. I've covered this phenomenon here , here , here , here , here , here , here , and here , among others.

Note also that this was done with government complicity, as evidenced by the Twitter files and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg's recent revelations. Indeed, the FBI and other Biden officials pressured Big Tech companies to suppress speech that was contrary to their agenda. In fact, Zuckerberg confessed that censorship on Facebook has gotten so bad that it feels “like 1984.”

Biden's brazen gaslighting

As for the “Biden” claim, here's what he said Wednesday evening (obviously written by someone else):

Today, an oligarchy with extreme wealth, power, and influence is taking shape in America, literally threatening our entire democracy, our fundamental rights and freedoms, and a fair chance for everyone to advance.

If he had said it threatened “every woke left winger's fair chance to get ahead,” that would have been somewhat accurate. But as Soave points out, it's not hard to figure out who Biden is referring to, even though he didn't name names. His targets include X owner Elon Musk, Facebook founder Zuckerberg, and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos, among others. What is their “sin”? To some extent, they have separated themselves from the Democratic Party's fantasy group.

Alienated from the left, Musk became an ardent supporter of Donald Trump. Mr. Zuckerberg has vowed to eliminate Facebook's third-party “fact checkers” (or fact chuckers) and introduce an X-like information democracy. It's a “community note” system. Mr. Bezos's misconduct was more modest, simply refusing to allow the Post to endorse Kamala Harris as a presidential candidate.

But don't be fooled, Soave emphasizes. The pseudo-elites of the Democratic Party happily enabled this technological oligarchy right up until the moment they rejected leftist control. Commenters then addressed censorship by proxy regarding Hunter Biden's laptop and COVID-19 issues, among other things.

Moreover, on Twitter and Facebook, censorship decisions were not always made freely. In fact, Soave writes:

Many liberal-minded social media moderators initially balked at government officials' requests to remove jokes, satire, and controversial but clearly protected speech.

(Others were definitely on board, though, no doubt.)

Nevertheless, Soave also states:

Censorship by proxy was pursued by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and even the White House itself.

Big brother's iron fist

Additionally, some on the left have even suggested that Congress could take action and strip these companies of their liability protections. The message was clear: “Obey the censors or face oblivion,” Soave writes.

Ironically, a commentator summarized it this way:

This makes Biden's Democratic Party the ultimate oligarchy, a party that seeks the ability of those in political power to suppress dissent.

In fact, people often look at things backwards. For example, some people may complain about Musk's political commentary or work at X. The idea is that the rest of us can't afford our own social media platforms to use as Godzilla-sized soapboxes. But this is nothing new. For example, rich people always own newspapers. And who has a bigger bully pulpit than the president? Not only that, but the government has the weapons to back it up. (Therefore, the beast Uncle Sam must be kept in a cage.)

But in reality, it's not the activities of visible billionaires that we need to worry about. It is the activity of invisible billionaires. Mr. Musk is proudly flying the flag. He tells you what he believes. The real trouble are people like billionaire investor George Soros who manipulate our government and culture from behind the scenes. This is because people cannot judge what they cannot see.

Going back to psychologist Epstein's research, Big Tech likely could not have funneled 15 million votes to a single candidate in 2024 because not everything was tilted in one direction yet. This factor alone may have helped Trump come out on top in the election. And that almost certainly explains his narrow popular vote victory.

Indeed, the pseudo-elites of the Democratic Party who are now conveniently complaining about a “technological oligarchy” know this better than anyone.