The Public Space Shift

Although correlation is not causation, it's noteworthy that many developed countries banned smoking tobacco inside public buildings oftentimes anywhere between 2004-2013, with many smoking bans starting in the early to mid 2000s.

(France 2007, England 2007, Canada (largely) 2002-2004, Sweden 2005, Norway 2004, Germany 2008 (they still allow some smoking indoors), United States 1995 (in California) but largely between 2004-2007)

And around that same time, some of our major social media companies were founded. (Twitter in 2006, YouTube in 2005 and Facebook in 2004)

Essentially, the smoking bans shifted the public space from in person venues like coffee shops, bars, restaurants, movie theaters etc. to the private space of one's home and these social media entities created a new digital public space. This worked well because people who were already tobacco addicts substituted one addiction for another, as they soon became addicted to the dopaminergic effect of social media addiction.

This new digital public space is conveniently easier to control and monitor by federal governments and we know from Edward Snowden's (Former NSA contractor turned whistleblower) releases in 2013 that the US federal government worked behind closed doors with major telecommunications companies like AT&T and Verizon and they hacked companies like Google to monitor the public etc.

Think of it this way:

The government did not have full control of what people say or think in the private space of one's home and likewise had limited control over the public space, as each individual in these countries had their freedom of speech and right to gather protected by law (largely) and it was difficult to greatly influence the public directly in terms of political policy (etc.) with the exception being state funded media such as CBC in Canada and NPR in the United States. 

Now, in order to get control over the public and circumvent those freedoms of expression and right to gather in a real way, the government needed to eliminate the existing public space and create a new one that they could influence and monitor more intently and the smoking bans facilitated this.

Subsequently, the existing public space evaporated and new one appeared and at the same time not only did the government get control over this new public space and eliminate the old one, they also finally got control over the private space of one's home and that was never possible before social media and all of this was expedited because it was easy for them to introduce a new comparable addiction (social media addiction) for an old one (tobacco) as it is a known feature of addicts to substitute one addiction for another.

And although this doesn't prove social media companies were necessarily in cahoots with the federal government, it is remarkably convenient timing.

It is also remarkably convenient timing that new businesses popped up to take over for this destruction of the old public space. A simple example is the easy access of pornography on websites like PornHub. Essentially, major pornography websites got much of the business that used to be from both night clubs and strip clubs, as the allure of sex became immediately available to anyone, at any time from the comfort of home. (PornHub was founded in 2007, around the same time as these smoking bans) 

There are other examples too, such as the rise of internet gambling.

The point is, entire industries appeared out of nowhere almost immediately after these smoking bans that benefited immensely from this brand new market and it seems remarkable that all of these industries started at pretty much the exact same time as this decimation of the old public space.

In short it appears that the government and private business got two birds with one stone as they destroyed the old public space and a new one immediately appeared and at the same time this new public space allowed the government to get control over the private space in a meaningful way.

In one foul swoop the government got control over both the public and private space and the public helped them usher it in under the guise of protecting the public from the very real public health threats of smoking related illnesses.

If you're curious about how the government influences social media companies, there are a number of ways but one simple one is that the US Defense Department was whitelisted Twitter accounts to influence other countries, which was revealed by the Twitter Files and another example is that both Twitter and Facebook implemented blocks of sharing the Hunter Biden laptop story (specifically a New York Post article), also released by the Twitter Files.

The point is, there are a number of ways to manipulate the public with social media.

The subtlety of this transition seemed natural even to the most articulate and educated and that's the point, this is exactly how a true Trojan horse operates and if you pay attention you'll realise that Bill C-63 in Canada is a continuation of this effort and it is masked under the protection of children on the internet and because no one would disagree with that, no one puts two and two together to come to the understanding that the purpose of this Bill is to be the beginning of the end of freedom of expression in Canada.

To be charitable to this limb this author is out on, is this line of reasoning conspiratorial? 

Meaning, is it paranoid or schizophrenic to think that the government would hasten the elimination of the public space by smoking bans in public spaces in order to help facilitate a transition of that public space into a new digital space while at the same time also getting influence over the private space of the private citizen’s home? 

Yes, it would be paranoid or schizophrenic if Edward Snowden did not release the NSA files he did in 2013 to the Guardian and Washington Post revealing that the government in the US is in fact absolutely spying on average people.

Yes, it would be paranoid or schizophrenic if the Twitter Files didn’t reveal what they did.

Yes, it would be paranoid or schizophrenic if we were not in fact living in this new public space from which I am communicating to you right now.

Yes, it would be paranoid or schizophrenic if both the smoking bans and the emergence of a new public space and many new industries did not occur at nearly the exact same time and although correlation does not mean causation, the timing of all of these events are remarkably, convenient.

More on Bill C-63 another time.

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to be a hamster?