Author Topic: The unimportant news thread  (Read 357687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline North Star

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 17440
  • Location: Oulu, Finland
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3080 on: July 16, 2019, 01:21:01 PM »
But it's still undeniably clear that the leftist have been much more aggressive at censoring and shutting down, so far.
What kind of censoring and shutting down is the left doing? Genuinely asking because I don't know what kind of things you are thinking about here. I'm sure that Youtube, Facebook, etc are removing content that violates the US Civil Rights Act of 1968, for example, but I wouldn't call that leftist.
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3081 on: July 16, 2019, 04:12:34 PM »
I watched the video. I mean, I don't see anything I would disagree with that the guests said. And Tucker totally lost his cool.

Some of the clips I have seen him in, the stuff he's saying makes rational sense. Whether he's a "good guy" or not? No idea!


What kind of censoring and shutting down is the left doing? Genuinely asking because I don't know what kind of things you are thinking about here. I'm sure that Youtube, Facebook, etc are removing content that violates the US Civil Rights Act of 1968, for example, but I wouldn't call that leftist.
You asked the right question, my friend.

I bet I can't remember everything in one sitting, and there's just too much in general to include, but...
(these are mainly the people I follow off-and-on)

-Steven Crowder- demonetized from youtube because Carlos Maza finds a joke offensive, even though it's the same thing he calls himself (minus the "lispy" part)

-Any youtube video with MGTOW label is demonetized now (only because it is critical of feminism- it is also critical of traditional conservatism, but that's not significant)

-Jordan Peterson's book banned from New Zealand (he's not even conservative and the book is supposedly not even political... but somehow he's lumped into "alt-right" because of his mostly centrist views)

-Carl Benjamin getting banned from Patreon (he's not even conservative, but is critical of the far left)

-Paul Joseph Watson banned from Facebook- supposedly he didn't even have much on there, just pictures?

-Alex Jones banned from Facebook and youtube and Instagram (no, i don't take him seriously or follow him, but he shouldn't be banned)

-Milo Yiannopoulis banned from Facebook (actually I don't follow him, either)

-Gavin McInnes banned from Facebook and Twitter, I believe (don't remember much about it)


And then the cases where banks are involved, here's one from an Afro-Cuban Proud Boy member:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/chase-bank-conservative-customers/

Quote
Tarrio warns of the speech-squelching pattern emerging across Silicon Valley and on Wall Street: “First we get silenced on social media, then Paypal, then I get debanked. It’s a very dangerous trend.”


And then there's all of the instances where feminists try to shut down MRA events. And then there's Antifa trying to intimidate Jordan Peterson during his speeches to shut it down.

It's almost always the left trying to shut down all who disagree, rather than the right.

The key summary is this: both conservative voices and liberal voices deserve to be heard, right? Not just one side. You have the media being overwhelmingly liberal as it is. But then you have the internet, where everyone can post their political opinions to an audience. It shouldn't be such a toxic environment for people to voice their opinions if they disagree with liberal political correctness.

Also, to back up my point earlier, ALL of these people are up for debating and open discussions (think of Crowder's Change My Mind, for example). The president might be questionable about this since he is a nutjob, but just because he is, doesn't mean that conservatives in general are for "shutting down" their opponents.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2019, 04:14:47 PM by greg »
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3082 on: July 16, 2019, 04:42:37 PM »
Meanwhile, as for now, Shaun King, who is quite a popular liberal, is openly praising that guy that raided the detention facility and has said to stop it "by any means necessary" (implying violence is acceptable).


At the same time, Lindsay Shepherd (not familiar with her tbh) was banned for saying something mean to some transgender person and misgendering them. Sure, it's mean, but does it deserve a ban?
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/xwnbxd/free-speech-activist-lindsay-shepherd-was-banned-from-twitter-and-its-very-sad


I won't hold my breath for Shaun King to be banned from Twitter.

Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline SimonNZ

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 8317
  • Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3083 on: July 16, 2019, 07:31:36 PM »
William Buckley Jr must be turning in his grave now that idiots like Milo Yinnopoulis and Alex Jones are what's considered "conservative voices".

If so many of the people getting banned on Youtube and Facebook for offensive posting are on the right - then that's something the right need to ask themselves about keeping their own house in order and the face and values they want to present. It doesn't automatically make YT and FB "the left" - which they are not by any stretch.

And the NZ baiting was really lame. One specific chain temporarily removing a book does not equal censorship. If they had then stopped people from obtaining it elsewhere in all forms of media then that would be censorship.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2019, 07:42:45 PM by SimonNZ »

Offline North Star

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 17440
  • Location: Oulu, Finland
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3084 on: July 17, 2019, 01:43:30 AM »
-Steven Crowder- demonetized from youtube because Carlos Maza finds a joke offensive, even though it's the same thing he calls himself (minus the "lispy" part)
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/h_HOytoOfdg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/h_HOytoOfdg</a>


-Any youtube video with MGTOW label is demonetized now (only because it is critical of feminism- it is also critical of traditional conservatism, but that's not significant)
Based on what Wikipedia says about MGTOW, "MGTOWs advocate male separatism[3][15][19] and believe society has been corrupted by feminism,[3], a view shared with the alt-right.[15] MGTOWs posit that legal and romantic relationships with women fail a cost–benefit analysis,[11][22] that feminism has made women dangerous to men, and that male self-preservation requires dissociating completely from women.", it doesn't seem so much that it's critical of women, but that it's misogyny with a sprinkle of homophobia.

-Jordan Peterson's book banned from New Zealand (he's not even conservative and the book is supposedly not even political... but somehow he's lumped into "alt-right" because of his mostly centrist views)
The book was never banned from New Zealand, but a national bookstore chain stopped carrying it for 12 days or so, because the Christchurch mass murderer mentioned it in his manifesto. I'm sure anyone in New Zealand could order a copy from Book Depository, or perhaps get one from another local bookstore.

-Carl Benjamin getting banned from Patreon (he's not even conservative, but is critical of the far left)

So a direct violation of Patreon community guidelines by someone who isn't conservative, led to Patreon dropping them? Terrible!
https://patreonhq.com/hate-speech-on-patreon-a9026e52c2cf


-Paul Joseph Watson banned from Facebook- supposedly he didn't even have much on there, just pictures?

-Alex Jones banned from Facebook and youtube and Instagram (no, i don't take him seriously or follow him, but he shouldn't be banned)

-Milo Yiannopoulis banned from Facebook (actually I don't follow him, either)

It appears that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan's Facebook account was closed at the same time, because Facebook considered them "dangerous." "We've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology," a Facebook spokesperson said. "The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today."

From Wikipedia: "Watson's career emerged through his work for conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones. As editor-at-large of Jones' website InfoWars he helped promote fake news[11] and conspiracy theories such as the claim that 9/11 was an inside job, the chemtrail conspiracy theory, the New World Order and the Illuminati."
Isn't it terrible that Facebook has been forced to look more closely at InfoWars employees who spread fake news and influence US presidential elections?

You missed that Yiannopoulos was also banned from Twitter:
Quote
In July 2016, Yiannopoulos panned the Ghostbusters reboot as "a movie to help lonely middle-aged women feel better about being left on the shelf." After the film's release, Twitter trolls attacked African-American actress Leslie Jones with racist slurs and bigoted commentary. Yiannopoulos wrote three public tweets about Jones, saying "Ghostbusters is doing so badly they've deployed [Leslie Jones] to play the victim on Twitter," before describing her reply to him as "Barely literate" and then calling her a "black dude". Multiple media outlets have described Yiannopoulos' tweets as encouraging the abuse directed at Jones. Yiannopoulos was then permanently banned by Twitter for what the company cited as "inciting or engaging in the targeted abuse or harassment of others". He later stated that he was banned because of his conservative beliefs.
It's so difficult to be a pedophilia-supporting islamophobic Nazi spreading fake news these days.

-Gavin McInnes banned from Facebook and Twitter, I believe (don't remember much about it)
Again, such a shame that inciting violence, racism, defending Holocaust deniers, accusing the Jews of being responsible for the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles, Islamophobia, "Nazis are not a thing. Islam is a thing", general misogynia, white supremacy, starting a far-right neo-fascist group of political violence can lead to such an extreme leftist reaction.

And then the cases where banks are involved, here's one from an Afro-Cuban Proud Boy member:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/chase-bank-conservative-customers/


And then there's all of the instances where feminists try to shut down MRA events. And then there's Antifa trying to intimidate Jordan Peterson during his speeches to shut it down.

It's almost always the left trying to shut down all who disagree, rather than the right.

The key summary is this: both conservative voices and liberal voices deserve to be heard, right? Not just one side. You have the media being overwhelmingly liberal as it is. But then you have the internet, where everyone can post their political opinions to an audience. It shouldn't be such a toxic environment for people to voice their opinions if they disagree with liberal political correctness.

Also, to back up my point earlier, ALL of these people are up for debating and open discussions (think of Crowder's Change My Mind, for example). The president might be questionable about this since he is a nutjob, but just because he is, doesn't mean that conservatives in general are for "shutting down" their opponents.

Nobody is claiming all 'conservatives are for "shutting down" their opponents'. But even if you can make an excuse for calling support for universal health care 'far-leftist' in the US because in the current political climate, the Republicans are against it, and even some Democrat voters, too, it doesn't mean that there's somehow a very large and dangerous far left comparable to the far right.
Otherwise there would obviously be leftist terrorism on the same level that there is right wing terrorism in the US.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/homegrown-terrorists-2018-were-almost-all-right-wing/581284/

Most of these things seem to be about Republicans/Conservatives/right-wing extremists trying to violate the rights of others, and whining about the response. Or about election fraud.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2019, 01:45:53 AM by North Star »
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

Offline Florestan

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 20008
  • Location: Bucharest, Romania
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3085 on: July 17, 2019, 03:38:49 AM »
male self-preservation requires dissociating completely from women

In other words, in order to preserve males, they should be cut off completely from any chance of reproducing themselves. Brilliant, just brilliant.  ;D

“I compose music because I must give expression to my feelings, just as I talk because I must give utterance to my thoughts.” --- Rachmaninoff

Offline drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 8575
  • Gypsy, 1970
  • Location: Watertown, MA
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3086 on: July 17, 2019, 05:43:40 AM »

     It's Darwinism at work, as males who are unsuited to reproduce take themselves out of the game. Of course they have reasons, there are always reasons in retrospect.

     Take the Middle East, please. In many countries the economy doesn't generate enough jobs to make marriage a real prospect. Ideologies fill the void. Bog wants the infidels dead dead dead. Americans are experimenting with a No Bog version and not killing the scapegoats, just hating them a little.

     No one could accuse me of liking people but I don't hate them. They are funny and really into believing stuff.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:56.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/56.0 Waterfox/56.2.13
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:64.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/64.0

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3087 on: July 17, 2019, 05:53:54 AM »
If so many of the people getting banned on Youtube and Facebook for offensive posting are on the right - then that's something the right need to ask themselves about keeping their own house in order and the face and values they want to present. It doesn't automatically make YT and FB "the left" - which they are not by any stretch.
I see you like victim blaming, comrade.
Do you still not see that "offensive" is a subjective term? They are being banned based on others' subjective feelings. What if you were banned for no good reason because someone didn't like what you said? Maybe you should take a good hard look at yourself and make sure to conform next time.
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3088 on: July 17, 2019, 06:01:58 AM »
As for the Mgtow comments, none of you even know a thing about it. Very telling that you immediately resort to ridicule after simply reading a wikipedia page about it.
"And a sprinkle of homophobia." That's what I'm talking about, do you not see what you are doing? Immediately resorting to shame tactics to shut down anyone calling out truth. That's the sole tactic of the far left. Tech companies and mobs are just the extension of that.

Perhaps you could actually listen to what they have to say first? No? Yeah, i thought so.

I might comment on the other stuff later but that's it for now.
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3089 on: July 17, 2019, 06:16:41 AM »
One more thing real quick: Facebook and Youtube have CEOs that are leftists. While it doesn't influence everything, you can control a company much more directly than a country. Their influence over their companies are going to be stronger than Trumps influence over the US.
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 8575
  • Gypsy, 1970
  • Location: Watertown, MA
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3090 on: July 17, 2019, 06:49:26 AM »

Do you still not see that "offensive" is a subjective term? They are being banned based on others' subjective feelings.

     Laws are passed for subjective feelings. I note also that businesses of all kinds have standards about abusive speech that can get you fired. Curiously, they resemble each other in a way that suggests subjective commonalities are not strictly tied to ideological preference. Trump gleefully uses abusive language that would get him fired almost anywhere else. The fact that he offends people his base doesn't like is immaterial. Further, I don't see abuse as being proof of conservatism. If conservatives choose to apply Trumpist standards to their own conduct is it "conservative conduct"? If that's how they want it to be we all should take note of what it means to be conservative in the new era. Far from being a judgment that is imposed on them they are clearly making a choice about how they want to be judged.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:56.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/56.0 Waterfox/56.2.13
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:64.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/64.0

Offline SimonNZ

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 8317
  • Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3091 on: July 17, 2019, 07:55:30 AM »
In what alternate reality is Mark Zuckerberg a "leftist"?

Don't know who runs YT.

Offline amw

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4474
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3092 on: July 17, 2019, 08:06:23 AM »
Sergey Brin & Larry Page.

Offline North Star

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 17440
  • Location: Oulu, Finland
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3093 on: July 17, 2019, 08:14:10 AM »
As for the Mgtow comments, none of you even know a thing about it. Very telling that you immediately resort to ridicule after simply reading a wikipedia page about it.
"And a sprinkle of homophobia." That's what I'm talking about, do you not see what you are doing? Immediately resorting to shame tactics to shut down anyone calling out truth. That's the sole tactic of the far left. Tech companies and mobs are just the extension of that.

Perhaps you could actually listen to what they have to say first? No? Yeah, i thought so.

I might comment on the other stuff later but that's it for now.

From https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/reddit-mgtow-men-sex-sleep-women-manosphere-meninist-a7330276.html:

Quote
“I want sex and company, but I don’t want/can’t put in the effort to get it,” wrote another user on the MGTOW.com forum.

The MGTOW community has a pretty clear set of expectations for themselves and the wider world that are based in meninism: a counteraction to feminism which sees women’s rights directly disadvantage men.

While feminists might argue that their movement aims to help both men and women break free of harmful gender stereotypes, meninists disagree.

To them, men are the victims of heterosexual relationships, comparable to a horse with a cart strapped it its back. MGTOWs borrow heavily from pop-culture to explain their beliefs, particularly the film the Matrix where the Chosen One chooses to reject his blinkered "blue pill" life in favour of the awareness offered by the "red pill".

The ultimate goal for MGTOWs is total freedom from societal constraints - known as Level 4.

“Level 0” involves “taking the red pill” and recognising gender equality is a sham. Level one sees a man rejecting long-term relationships but engaging in sexual encounters, which he will reject in level two.

As the MGTOW movement is entangled with alt-right and libertarian politics, the third step sees the man focusing on earning money in order to sustain himself.

In this quest, obstacles include feminists; white knights (men who are “chivalrous” towards women); social justice warriors; those who are pro-LGBT rights and support safe spaces, amongst other things.

Their heroes? The so-called herbivore men of Japan who have no interest in finding long-term female partners, a label with which half of men in their 20s and 30s identify.
sh
The origins of MGTOW are unclear. The MGTOW website loftily suggests their ideals hark back to “Schopenhauer, Tesla, Beethoven, Galileo, or even Jesus Christ”, and equates it to "fire".

“MGTOW is not as old as fire, but it's as old as a man's first discovery of it. If MTGOW is fire, then perhaps feminism is gasoline,” reads the MGTOW.com history page. A more concrete theory is that MGTOW was created by online aliases Solaris and Ragnar in the 2000s, when they penned a manifesto calling for men and women to adhere to traditional gender roles and to fight for pared back govermment.

And while their communities may be virtual, their determination seems very real indeed.


And here's the kind of discussion MGTOW's forum has on the LGBT community:
https://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/the-lgbt-community/
"My take is they’re full of s~~~ and dangerous and shouldn’t be allowed to roam the streets amongst our elders and children.
"I don’t hate them, I just pretend they don’t exist."
"And I also hate the fact that when you don’t want to hear that s~~~ from gay people, “you’re automatically a bigot.”
"I also agree that they’re worse than feminists some cases"
"However, I can’t stand the LGBT community that are activists. They’re full of s~~~. As far as I can tell, they’re the same as feminists."
"All females do is complain. Gays are feminine in nature."
"Every time I talk with gay people, they’re also feminists and have the same level of “victimhood” as feminists do."

This from a community of men who have fallen victim to women and minorities having some rights as well.
"Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it." - Confucius

My photographs on Flickr

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3094 on: July 17, 2019, 09:06:30 AM »
Don't know who runs YT.
Susan Wojcicki.
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3095 on: July 17, 2019, 09:15:13 AM »
From https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/reddit-mgtow-men-sex-sleep-women-manosphere-meninist-a7330276.html:


And here's the kind of discussion MGTOW's forum has on the LGBT community:
https://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/the-lgbt-community/
"My take is they’re full of s~~~ and dangerous and shouldn’t be allowed to roam the streets amongst our elders and children.
"I don’t hate them, I just pretend they don’t exist."
"And I also hate the fact that when you don’t want to hear that s~~~ from gay people, “you’re automatically a bigot.”
"I also agree that they’re worse than feminists some cases"
"However, I can’t stand the LGBT community that are activists. They’re full of s~~~. As far as I can tell, they’re the same as feminists."
"All females do is complain. Gays are feminine in nature."
"Every time I talk with gay people, they’re also feminists and have the same level of “victimhood” as feminists do."

This from a community of men who have fallen victim to women and minorities having some rights as well.
Not going to read while at work, but the Independent article is probably just a smear piece.

As for the random comments, there is no unified anti-LGBT sentiment, Mgtow is not really even an organized movement. So you will have people with various opinions, same as the general public. But instead they are labeled as homophobic and racist just as a shaming tactic.

To make it simple, there are really two main categories: those that just engage in hookups/dating but not marriage, and the "monks" who completely disengage. The main common theme is just to avoid marriage because of the very extreme risk that it brings to men.
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline k a rl h e nn i ng

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 56497
  • Et quid amabo nisi quod ænigma est?
    • Henningmusick
  • Location: Boston, Mass.
  • Currently Listening to:
    Shostakovich, D. Scarlattii, Stravinsky, JS Bach, Liszt, Martinů, Haydn, Henning
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3096 on: July 17, 2019, 09:19:58 AM »
So a direct violation of Patreon community guidelines by someone who isn't conservative, led to Patreon dropping them? Terrible!

Not fair ! 8)
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3097 on: July 17, 2019, 10:00:08 AM »
     Laws are passed for subjective feelings. I note also that businesses of all kinds have standards about abusive speech that can get you fired. Curiously, they resemble each other in a way that suggests subjective commonalities are not strictly tied to ideological preference. Trump gleefully uses abusive language that would get him fired almost anywhere else. The fact that he offends people his base doesn't like is immaterial. Further, I don't see abuse as being proof of conservatism. If conservatives choose to apply Trumpist standards to their own conduct is it "conservative conduct"? If that's how they want it to be we all should take note of what it means to be conservative in the new era. Far from being a judgment that is imposed on them they are clearly making a choice about how they want to be judged.
As for the second half of your post, I'm not sure what to say because I don't think I'm even conservative, and I don't like Trump, so not going to defend that.

The first part: this is really specific and basic, actually. It alludes to the problem of whether these companies should abide by public or private rules. That's a debate entirely itself that is currently ongoing. I can accept censorship if they are honest with the bias.

For the public space, the limits of free speech end at calls of violence. Not hurting someone else's feelings. And should stay that way.
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie

Offline drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 8575
  • Gypsy, 1970
  • Location: Watertown, MA
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3098 on: July 17, 2019, 10:50:32 AM »
     


The first part: this is really specific and basic, actually. It alludes to the problem of whether these companies should abide by public or private rules.

     I would say yes, abide by public rules have have their own. The private rules will be quite similar to the rules that govern public employees, and should be the absolute minimum standard for political leaders who should obey an even higher standard.

     Once again, and as many times as necessary, rules against behavior hit those who violate them, and if it should happen that a conservative violates the rule, it does not make the rule anti-conservative, unless it is a necessary condition of being a conservative that one violates the rule.

     
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:56.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/56.0 Waterfox/56.2.13
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:64.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/64.0

Offline greg

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3099 on: July 17, 2019, 03:42:59 PM »
And the NZ baiting was really lame. One specific chain temporarily removing a book does not equal censorship. If they had then stopped people from obtaining it elsewhere in all forms of media then that would be censorship.
Ok. Maybe not the best example since it was somewhat small scale and not really impactful.




<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/h_HOytoOfdg" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/h_HOytoOfdg</a>
Wow, you have some massive balls to send me a video with 6.4k likes to 18k dislikes as a reply.

The Young Turks are extremely biased. After watching them literally laugh about that one publicized case  about a man being raped, I stopped watching their videos. So won't give them 10 more minutes.

(the problem with this is not the joking, but the fact that if a woman were tied up and raped, they would definitely would not be laughing).


It appears that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan's Facebook account was closed at the same time, because Facebook considered them "dangerous." "We've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology," a Facebook spokesperson said. "The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today."
They are not 100% liberal. Doesn't mean there isn't a strong bias. They've banned people literally over "misgendering" someone. What type of conservative, or even moderate, company would do that?

Louis Farrakhan was blatantly anti-Semitic. I don't remember what Alex Jones was banned for specifically.




Quote
Again, such a shame that inciting violence, racism, defending Holocaust deniers, accusing the Jews of being responsible for the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles, Islamophobia, "Nazis are not a thing. Islam is a thing", general misogynia, white supremacy, starting a far-right neo-fascist group of political violence can lead to such an extreme leftist reaction.
Any non-leftist sources that confirm all of this? I'm not an expert on him. Direct sources?




Nobody is claiming all 'conservatives are for "shutting down" their opponents'. But even if you can make an excuse for calling support for universal health care 'far-leftist' in the US because in the current political climate, the Republicans are against it, and even some Democrat voters, too, it doesn't mean that there's somehow a very large and dangerous far left comparable to the far right.
Otherwise there would obviously be leftist terrorism on the same level that there is right wing terrorism in the US.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/homegrown-terrorists-2018-were-almost-all-right-wing/581284/

Most of these things seem to be about Republicans/Conservatives/right-wing extremists trying to violate the rights of others, and whining about the response. Or about election fraud.
No idea why you brought up health care. Also not sure how they are determining those numbers, or how they are determining they are liberal or conservative.

Leftist terrorism nowadays is Antifa. I'm not sure what the equivalent of is of right-wing terrorism that is openly forming mobs in black clothes and masks, attacking people, and refusing to converse with anyone. Surely the KKK is still around, but they are hidden in secrecy.




It's hard for people to see when they are in an echo chamber. It's like trying to look at one's self without a mirror.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2019, 03:47:03 PM by greg »
Wagie wagie get back in the cagie