Censorability

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The censorability of a concept, movement or ideology is its vulnerability of being censored by its opponents. The durability of a movement can be predicted based its censorability; for example, if the fragmented tea parties have a censorability lower than that of a traditional political party, then tea parties may have a brighter future.

Contents

Equation for Censorability

Censorability expresses vulnerability to censorship. It is possible to determine the censorability of a concept, movement or ideology x, in a given environment E, over a particular period of time t, using the following mathematical equation where c is the number of occurrences of censorship of x and o the number of uncensored occurrences of x.

E_x(t)=\left ( \frac{c}{c+o} \right ) \!100%

The higher the percentage the less resilient the concept, movement or ideology x is to censorship, thus censorability can be quantified on a scale from "0%" to "100%", where "0%" reflects an ideology that can completely withstand efforts to censor it, while "100%" indicates easy suppression through censorship. A perfect score for censorability is "0%", reflecting maximum strength.

The score is dependent in part on how the ideology or movement is expressed. For example, if a unique statement or outward sign is required as an essential part of the ideology, then it will have higher censorability than if its articulation is varied.

Examples

Ideologies can be rated for relative censorability as an indication of long-term strength.

Since empirical data for x, E, and t are currently unavailable for the examples of censorability below, we have assumed values of c and o which will produce the correct answers as determined by faith and logic.

Concept or Ideology Censorability
(Scale 0% to 100%)
Comments
Pro-Life ~0% Virtually impossible to censor; it is manifested in many intrinsic ways. Pro-aborts have tried with every power imaginable to censor pro-lifers for 40 years, and even distorted translations of pro-life references in the Bible, and yet pro-life sentiment grows stronger daily.
Freedom 10% The desire to be free is an innate characteristic of most people. History has shown that repressive regimes are eventually overthrown, no matter how much they try to indoctrinate their citizens.
the Bible 20% Cannot completely ban the book, but some crowd it out with harmful substitutes and liberals distort its meaning with biased translations.
Atheism 20% Many do not quickly recognize its forms.
Tea Party Movement 30% Liberals haven't been able to censor it yet, but are trying very hard.
Military recruitment 30% Anti-war liberals often try to shut down recruitment centers with protests most notably on college campuses, with little success.
Opposition to the Homosexual agenda 30% By claiming that criticism of immoral and unhealthy lifestyles is "bigotry," pro-homosexual activists are able to censor critiques of their political agenda.
Chivalry 40% Feminists silence many expressions of chivalry, but human nature cannot be completely suppressed.
Christianity 50% Dimwitted censorship of Christian references often occurs.
Republican Party 60% Cannot be censored in national elections, but is ostracized and censored on college campuses and in many communities, and was demonized by Bush-haters in the national media
Conservative media 70% The truth can't be held back, an improving situation in the United States. Successful suppression is still commonplace.
Creationism 90% Absent from virtually every public school curriculum world-wide
Classroom prayer 99% Banned for over a hundred million by the actions of a handful

Over time, movements that are relatively difficult to censor -- i.e., have a low censorability -- can thrive. An example is the pro-life movement: it has virtually a perfect "0%" censorability.

Censor-Prone Environments

Different media, institutions and environments are more censor-prone than others. Colleges are extremely censor-prone environment, perhaps due to a small group of people acting with no accountability. The internet is at the opposite end of the spectrum, and is relatively immune to censorship, except in the case of an authoritarian country, where bugs are implanted into computers.

Most censored speech includes:

  • high school and college commencement addresses

(add to list)

Factors influencing Censorability

Ideas and movements' censorability is affected by various factors, including:

  • How easily the idea can be taken out of context
  • How easily the idea can be distorted and connected with negative ideas (ie. falsely claiming opposition to affirmative action is racism)
  • How complex the idea is, or how much background is required to understand it (complex ideas are easy to obfuscate, while simple ideas are hard to censor)

Ways to Reduce Censorability

Quantification of censorability may facilitate reducing the censorability of a movement or good idea. Just as exercise improves physical conditioning, there may be techniques for enhancing the resilient attributes of a message. From the above equation, there are two general obvious ways to reduce censorability: reduce c, or increase o. Specifically, some methods to reduce censorability:

  • Use rote learning to repeat a message, then when words are altered, the difference is obvious. In the Pledge of Allegiance, the line "One nation, under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all" will seem different when "under God" is removed. The rote repetition can reveal censorship.
  • Repeat a core message multiple times on a page, such as at the top, middle, and bottom. If one gets censored, the others might remain.
  • Reword a core message, after stating the rote form, using different words to avoid a global "search-and-replace" of all identical wording. The commandment, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against they neighbor" could be explained, later, as, "Do not tell lies about another member or person in your area". If the term "false witness" is removed, perhaps the other wording will remain.
  • Repeat a core message on multiple pages, or in multiple images, so that censorship of all instances will require an enormous amount of effort, or reveal suspicious gaps. On some obelisks of Ancient Egypt, the gaps in the hieroglyphic writing, carved in stone, reveal how names or words have been chiseled away and censored.
Personal tools