True Cons: National Review Denounces “Internet Fairness Doctrine”

You knew it was coming … ACKSHUALLY, monopolies should be allowed to censor conservatives on mainstream social media platforms because muh free market principles:

“Another day, another call for government intervention in free speech on the Internet. President Trump recently took to Twitter to decry supposed censorship of conservatives. He suggested that Google and “others” were censoring conservative voices and burying good news about him in search results. Furthermore, he warned that “this is a very serious situation” that will be “addressed” — perhaps with government action.

The genesis of these tweets is an article from PJ Media. The story reports that 96 percent of Google search results for the word “Trump” returned results from left-leaning news sites. Even though the article admits the results are “not scientific,” the story confirmed the biases of many on the right and instantly gained traction. (In fairness, the author of that article has since expressed opposition to any efforts by government to regulate speech online.) …”

I’m surprised it didn’t come sooner.

Undoubtedly, there was some hesitancy at National Review to make this wildly unpopular argument because they had to know the response would be to further ridicule their marginalization.

Note: We need more leaders like Bolsonaro who are willing to throw these pundits out of helicopters.

About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. In some ways this reminds me of an old cartoon from the Soviet Union: a bunch of protesting Stalinists are carrying signs saying such things as “Up With Stalin” and “Bring Back Oppression,” while being beaten by the police. In the name of free enterprise and private property, they will defend to the death the right of the Zucks to suppress them and silence the advocates of private property.

    Not only will these so-called conservatives never really conserve anything, they lack even the sense of survival sufficient to conserve conservatism. Useless. Totally useless.

  2. The Fairness Doctrine is about as fair as The Patriot Act is patriotic.

    Everyday is opposite day with the NWO not just Wednesdays in Bikini Bottom.

  3. National Review has been irrelevant ever since they had to shut down their Disqus comment section and they know it. Ironically, the market for this type of viewpoint is tiny. If NRO had to rely on solely ‘muh free market’ to survive, they’d be gone already. These people (NRO, Shapiro, etc) really the most loathsome shills alive, right up there with antifa.

  4. (In fairness, the author of that article has since expressed opposition to any efforts by government to regulate speech online.)

    While these fifth columnist jews regulate speech online by censorship of ideas they don’t agree with.

Comments are closed.