Mike Benz

Well, there've been, I think, about three hearings in house weaponization on government's role in censorship.

There've been, I believe, two or so hearings in house oversight.

There've been two or three hearings in house Homeland Security.

Those are all domestic facing.

Those are about what DHS is doing on censorship, what FBI is doing on censorship, to some extent what the National Science Foundation is doing on censorship, because that's a major funding artery of this.

But no one has yet touched the State Department or USAID or the National Endowment for Democracy or this censorship mercenary army of soft power NGOs, our swarm army of the blob, in order to influence the course of domestic

politics in foreign countries, doing it to our own.

Well, it's unclear the extent to which individual advertisers are

back-channeling or are beholden, because these are things for the House Foreign Affairs Committee to turn up.

What we know is that many of these blue-chip corporations play a significant part in the private sector quadrant of the whole society.

So again, getting back to this whole society framework, that's not my framework, by the way.

That is the US federal government framework.

I, two years ago, I posted, everyone can see this on my ex account, it's at Mike Ben Cyber, simply run a search for my name and the phrase whole society.

I did like a two and a half minute super cut of just government officials citing the whole society doctrine.

Sometimes they cite it so often they apologize at the conference because everyone's so sick of hearing this.

But what it means is government, private sector, civil society, and media.

So they get private sector partners to help the government censorship goal.

They get the universities to help the censorship go.

Well, this is, yes, well, this is one of the open questions is how many of these are willing participants and enthusiastic?

How many are completely against it and only doing it because they feel economically beholden?