A furious howl has erupted since yesterday over Zuckerberg's statement regarding the changes in META. All the pillars of the progressive, western left in our country spoke in the same tone: "War against the facts! Triumph of the crowd! Freedom!"
This was commented on "Facebook" Christian Shkvarek.
Absolutely in ALL their statements - both Assen Grigorov, and Hristo Komarnitski, and Fori Karadjov this morning on NOVA, the main thing that Zuckerberg said about the "Fact Checkers" is necessarily and purposefully ignored. Namely - that they DID NOT do their job, but had become politicized. That they de facto became political activists, not truth-checkers and fighters against disinformation. Ergo, that they did not do at all what our liberal stalwarts are now complaining about being removed.
Naturally, it is crucial for them to ignore this statement by Zuckerberg, even though it is the basis of his entire decision. It de facto destroys the thesis on which their howl rests. However, let's imagine for a second that Zuckerberg brings back FactChecking, but takes it from the previous California communists and their equivalents around the world, and decides to entrust it into the hands of....The Heritage Foundation and its corresponding right-wing conservative organizations around the world. Instead of the local PPDB activists and former/current employees of Economedia, he entrusted it into the hands of activists from Vazrazhdane, ITN or GERB. Just imagine this situation for a moment.
Suddenly, in a second, both Grigorov, Komarnitsky and Karadzhov will magically understand the arguments against the politicized "FactChecking". As if on command, they will flip the pancake and start reciting the arguments of the conservatives at the moment - that "FactChecking" is used for political purposes, that it is one-sided, that it does not fulfill its role and that it should be abolished. For them, the question of which side to take on an issue depends solely on whose political activists control the fact-checking, not on any principled position.
And by the way, it is the same with almost all issues that you can discuss with left-liberals: from freedom of speech, to the rule of law, to democracy and the annulment of elections. They always maintain two opposing positions at the same time, depending on which side of the issue they fall on in the case. Whether the censorship concerns them or not. Whether their electoral victory is annulled, or that of an opponent. Whether their politicians or those of others are investigated and charged. These are people who understand only and only about power. They fight only and only for power. No ideas, values, principles. There is not a single case on which you will encounter a principled position from them.
That is why I have long realized that debates with them are pointless - they will never approach from a sincere, honest position and with good intentions. You can only wage war with these people, because their only principle is to screw you over/silence you/squeeze you out/remove you, without blinking an eye whether this makes them hypocrites or not.