patrick.net

Or rather than IQ, what about violence in the black community?

Try tweeting out facts regarding black on black crime. You'd get labeled a racist, doxxed until you are fired, etc... I forget the economist but I remember reading about a black economist who said that PC culture is the biggest enemy to economists helping the black community. He pointed out that most economic minds weren't allowed to ponder "racist" questions, such as "what can the black community do to improve it's own situation?" The only acceptable academic PC assumed racism is the problem, and therefore you cant research real world solutions (since suggesting blacks cause their own problems is racist).

^do you want PC culture. Or do you want the truth?

Aphroman says

What if a church is selling advertising on their new digital marquee, should they be forced to offer platform to gay porn site that wants to advertise there?

If it were the only marquee in the country and gay porn was routinely advertised there already, then yes. If they selectively choose to enforce the rules against political opponents that would be an infringement of rights.

It’s sad when corporations want to police political discourse. We have a congress to pass laws, and we have a judiciary to judge disputes. We don’t need vigilante corporations to suppress ideas they consider offensive or wrong.

The way left hates white, they are today’s Nazis. They vilified being white, like Hitler vilified Jews. They blame whites for all the problems.

Your party is Nazi, Marcus, you are just too bought into it to see it.

marcus says

CBOEtrader says

Unfortunately that makes him a Nazi in today's environment

Only to you.

CBOEtrader says

JP who feels this IQ discussion is at the core of societal importance? Sorry, I do agree w JP. If society wants to fixate on equality of results, it is imperative to discuss differences in IQ levels that drive those results rather than blaming white patriarchy.

You totally misunderstand what JP has said. HE never said anything close to that. He has talked about IQ differences, which are different on average but at the level of selected individuals it's irrelevant. Further more there are other factors I won't go in to that make it difficult to get representative scores for entire races, while controlling for educational differences.

Peterson is opposed to going for equality of outcome. But he never said: "it is imperative to discuss differences in IQ levels that drive those results rather than blaming white patriarchy." He's simply opposed to blaming white patriarchy as oppressive, and argues that meritocracy works and is what people are conflating with Patriarchy. He also sometimes talks about how if someone has an IQ of 80 or lower(perhaps the border he cites is lower), it's really going to be hard for them to make a living. If anything this is an argument for safety nets, which he is not opposed to.

There are alt right types that misunderstand Peterson and use him to defend their racism. Sadly you seem to fit that description.

CBOEtrader says

Censoring non-PC thought is tyrannical and wrong

There will always be censorship, that is people that aren't going to be allowed in the conversation. See the last few minutes of this.

Below JP with interesting political commentary starting at about 10:00

At 12:30 he seems to be advocating censoring you, or people like you, AT LEAST FROM SOME CONVERSATIONS.

www.youtube.com/embed/E1PeOfbT_q0

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6036481/Democratic-senator-sayys-Infowars-takedown-good-start.html

Democrats back Infowars takedown as one senator wants MORE accounts squelched and another says social media companies should be legally liable for everything their users post
Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube have banned broadcasts and podcasts from conspiracy theorist Alex Jones
Democratic senator from Connecticut calls it 'a good start' and hints that he wants a more heavy-handed approach to squelching fringe speech
Another Democrat, from Virginia, wrote a draft policy white paper that proposes making social media outlets legally liable for what their users post
Jones is known for conspiracy theories, including calling the Snady Hook shooting a hoax and the 9-11 terror attacks an 'inside job'
'See?' a Republican House aide said drily, 'it's not paranoia if they actually are out to get you'

Patrick says

Democrats back Infowars takedown as one senator wants MORE accounts squelched and another says social media companies should be legally liable for everything their users post

Yep. It's not going to end with Alex Jones. This was testing the waters. They're going to get more aggressive. New Media is an existential threat, a threat to their class status/pride, and how their enemies bypass their control of decreasingly influential Legacy Media.

It's funny it's all Sandy Hook, something that happened years ago; but the other 99% of what Jones said, particularly in the last year or so, which was mostly regular political commentary, was wiped away because of it.

Meanwhile, Social Media fulfills Alex Jones' prophecy that Social Media would Censor him.

FortWayne says

Your party is Nazi, Marcus, you are just too bought into it to see it.

So Fort Wayne joins CBOE in labeling the entire democratic party as nazis ? Isn't that close enough to to invoke Godwins law ? Not that it isn't idiotic enough anyway to speak for itself.

I don't agree that SJWs are anything like Nazis. I don't agree with them, on their emphasis on identity politics or on their tendencies to want their campuses to be safe spaces from free speech. But they are a small minority of the democratic party. The censorship meme association with the left is way overblown.

Alex Jones got people riled up that Sandy Hook didn't actually happen. That type of conspiracy theory is completely different than whacky ones about the Bush family being reptilians or whatever. Because it's taking tragedy that happened to people and making a mockery of it. People have harassed some of those parents becasue of Jones. He also promoted pizzagate.

I'm fine with Jones being excluded from facebook. I can't believe it didn't happen about a week after he started the Sandy Hook BS.

It's fine and even necessary to have real journalists researching conspiracy theories. But when someone comes on TV yelling and screaming about them while they still are conspiracy theories ? (and likely false ?)

I would have a tough time coming up with a better example than some of Alex Jones' stories fitting the "yelling fire in a crowded movie theater" metaphor.

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says

It's funny it's all Sandy Hook, something that happened years ago; but the other 99% of what Jones said, particularly in the last year or so, which was mostly regular political commentary, was wiped away because of it.

That's the Liberals... always making a big deal about the "needles" and totally ignoring the "haystacks".

marcus says

You totally misunderstand what JP has said. HE never said anything close to that. He has talked about IQ differences, which are different on average but at the level of selected individuals it's irrelevant.

Lol, what is this theory? IQ doesnt matter? Before I laugh too much, please clarify

marcus says

But when someone comes on TV

You mean when he expresses his opinion on his social media channel or personally owned radio station?

Its is absolutely tyrannical to censor political speech, no matter what form his takes. Should we censor the daily show for using snippets of facts strung together in jokes that hit too fast to make sense yet are designed to push a narrative?

If the koch brothers censored left wing extremists like madonna for example, you'd have a huge problem w it.

I'd prefer anyone could say anything whatsoever. Of speech is to be policed, can we at least have some fair treatment rather than selective censorship?

Cause it sure likes the left just points and says, "that influential non believer needs to be silenced." You are insane if you think AJ is the last (or the first).

marcus says

So Fort Wayne joins CBOE in labeling the entire democratic party as nazis ? Isn't that close enough to to invoke Godwins law ?

I’d estimate that 75% of the Democrat politicians view extreme Leftists with skepticism at least, and don’t agree with their ideas. Of those, precious few have made any attempt to distance themselves from that hateful and extreme rhetoric.

If the extreme Leftists are Nazis, or at least Nazi-adjacent, what do we call the politicians who just go along with them without criticizing their radical agenda? Maybe they’re afraid of being on the wrong side of a movement or losing votes or whatever.
Let’s ask this a different way: what do we call Germans who joined the Nazi party in the 1930s just so they wouldn’t have to have a conflict with greater German society? Are they still Nazis, even though they may not have fully believed the hateful message of that party? History would argue that actions always trump feelings or words. When you gas a million Jews, you don’t get a free pass because you weren’t really that into it.

Same thing applies when you support repealing the Bill of Rights because it seems politically expedient.

CBOEtrader says

IQ doesnt matter?

Are you trying to be ironic ?

CBOEtrader says

Before I laugh too much, please clarify

I already did.

Left blame whites for everything
Nazis blames Jews for everything

Left promoting removal of whites from society
Nazis promotes removal of Jews from society

Left demand everything white be removed from culture and their property redistributed
Nazis demanded everything Jew be removed from culture and their property redistributed.

Nazis were socialists
Left is socialist

Plenty of same there. And when kamela Harris gets elected, you’ll see it even more vividly. Left isn’t far from burning people alive.

marcus says

FortWayne says

Your party is Nazi, Marcus, you are just too bought into it to see it.

So Fort Wayne joins CBOE in labeling the entire democratic party as nazis ? Isn't that close enough to to invoke Godwins law ? Not that it isn't idiotic enough anyway to speak for itself.

I don't agree that SJWs are anything like Nazis. I don't agree with them, on their emphasis on identity politics or on their tendencies to want their campuses to be safe spaces from free speech. But they are a small minority of the democratic party. The censorship meme association with the left is way overblown.

Alex Jones got people riled up that Sandy Hook didn't actually happen. That type of conspiracy theory is completely different than whacky ones about the Bush family being reptilians or whatever. Because it's taking tragedy that happened to people and making a mockery of it. People have harassed some o...

Those against free speech are really against free thought.

FortWayne says

Left blame whites for everything
Nazis blames Jews for everything

Republitards blame "liberals" for everything

FortWayne says

Left promoting removal of whites from society

Yeah there was that one whacko SJW on twitter with a comment that almost implied that.

FortWayne says

Left isn’t far from burning people alive.

Just a tad hyperbolic don't you think ?

marcus says

IQ differences, which are different on average but at the level of selected individuals it's irrelevant.

This is correct. There are average differences between groups but that fact does not determine the IQ of any individual.

James Damore was trying to make this very point with respect to female interest in engineering (very low, on average) but got fired from Google because of it. Everything he said was correct, but it did not fit the Inquisition's narrative of "bad white men" (not Asian men, somehow) stopping women from being engineers. Here is his graph from the memo that got him fired:



What we have now is a violently intolerant cabal which refuses to question its own orthodoxy, no matter how harmful or how provably false. They have control over almost all employment, public education, university policy, and the media both old and new.They will fire anyone who dares speak up for the truth, and will even set upon them with clubs if they try to speak at universities. And now they are attempting overt censorship online.

The fact that Google fired Damore for speaking sympathetically and correctly about these factual differences proves that Google is evil.

We are in desperate need of uncensorable distributed discussion and search systems. I think it could be done with browser-to-browser communication.

marcus says

Are you trying to be ironic ?

Are you just trolling now? You accuse me of misunderstanding JP, then you completely misrepresent what JP says about IQ and refuse to clarify your statement. sigh

TBC, JP specifically identifies the race IQ differentials and the subsequent differential in life success. He states that the tyrannical progressives who want to blame the patriarchy are flat wrong. As long as we arent allowed to discuss things like IQ differential without fear of being labelled racist, we dont have a chance to solve problems like this.

So, please let the forum know how you will misinterpret JP's truthful message into your flawed worldview.

marcus says

FortWayne says

Left isn’t far from burning people alive.

Just a tad hyperbolic don't you think ?

A little, but not much. Please see torture of a trump supporter. Low IQ Don Lemon refused to call this act evil:www.youtube.com/embed/99q0wO0ZjfE

Here's a shortlist of attacks on Trump supporters : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUVuzbfu3aQ

Here's a recent example of a mob hunting down Trump supporters in LA :http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-proud-boys-bar-20180717-story.html

And a shortlist of conservatives censored for having wrongthink opinions: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/05/26/10-times-facebook-censored-conservatives.html

Noone is pretending it is ALL LEFTISTS, just like most Germans in pre ww2 probably had no intention of physically assaulting Jews. However the establishment is absolutely left leaning and oppressing Trump supporters, with the silence and implied support of the masses. This is VERY MUCH like the 1930's Nazi's, wherein most Germans were happy that Jews were separated/censored/not allowed professorial jobs, etc...I'm sure those Germans who supported soft oppression never thought the Nazi's would kill every Jew they could. Pick up a history and learn how/why/when humanity devolves into its worst form. Today's left is showing all the signs of going full Nazi

Patrick says

What we have now is a violently intolerant cabal which refuses to question its own orthodoxy, no matter how harmful or how provably false. They have control over almost all employment, public education, university policy, and the media both old and new.They will fire anyone who dares speak up for the truth, and will even set upon them with clubs if they try to speak at universities. And now they are attempting overt censorship online.

who does this sound like?

Any voice that reminded America of her wickedness, she sought to destroy that voice. America wants to silence my voice. Jews want to silence my voice. But if you silence the Voice of Truth that shows you a mirror of yourself, how then can you change and save yourself?— MINISTER FARRAKHAN (@LouisFarrakhan) August 7, 2018

Jack Approved Tweet!

I reported it. I'm sure Twitter will suspend or ban Farrakhan's account.

Free Speech is more than the #1A. It's a societal value. And your turnabout still doesn't explain the Leftist hypocrisy in the original graphic.

And of course, a huge difference between one of a hundred bakeries in an area, and a literal handful of huge corporate social media tech giants.

Like I said, if Harry who personally runs his own bakery doesn't want to bake a cake, you can go to Tom, Dick, Larry, Laura, Linda, Mary's bakery. Or a few blocks over another 10 bakeries.

If Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T refuse to provide you cell service, you're fucked.

And yes, I DO believe in different standards between small businesses and multinational corporations. Have said so before.

Pretty weird that Farrakhan Speeches, #KillAllMales, and ISIS shit don't get taken down from Youtube.

TwoScoopsOfWompWomp says

Pretty weird that Farrakhan Speeches, #KillAllMales, and ISIS shit don't get taken down from Youtube

It's almost like gasp they are targeting one group w biased interpretations of their own rules.

"Seems totes fair" - moderate leftists.

Let's say we're at war with Nazi Germany, would the free speech libertarians here let nazi Americans run large scale propaganda operations in the US aimed sinking American morale, while American soldiers are fighting and dying in Europe?

I'm all for free speech in general, but not free propaganda.

There is a level of naivete in the arguments brought forth here.

Heraclitusstudent says

would the free speech libertarians here let nazi Americans run large scale propaganda operations in the US aimed sinking American morale

Depends what you mean. Are you talking about a foreign economic tyrant owning the NYT? Or a globalist, also richest man on earth who gets billion $ deals w the CIA own the WashPo. Or perhaps you are talking about UK spies leaking salacious rumors about a POTUS candidate to effect our elections? Or are you talking about Russian nationals releasing actual emails sent by a POTUS candidate to the public? Or are you talking about China buying Hollywood studios to push their agenda? Or are you talking about Russian nationals buying divisive advertising?

^^ the only fair effective way to fight back against a world of lies and deception is to allow a 1st amendment wherein people can freely speak truth to power.

It seems like you would prefer a biased (everyone is biased) beaurocrat pick and choose what is propaganda vs what is is truth. You really think a Ministry of Truth is a good idea? Yeah... how about we just have a bullet proof 1st amendment and call it a day.

Heraclitusstudent says

There is a level of naivete in the arguments brought forth here.

You want a Ministry of Truth, and assume those who dont are naive? Lol, please read about the history of censorship and its murderous results. Censorship will lead to terrible things.

"Wherever they burn books, in the end will also burn human beings." - Heinrich Heine

CBOEtrader says

^^ the only fair effective way to fight back against a world of lies and deception is to allow a 1st amendment wherein people can freely speak truth to power.

You're not fighting back. You just creates clans of people living in echo chambers, and the country is collapsing every day a bit more under the false beliefs, ultra-polarized society, strident accusations, and increasingly, violent reactions.

CBOEtrader says

Depends what you mean. Are you talking about a foreign economic tyrant owning the NYT? Or a globalist, also richest man on earth who gets billion $ deals w the CIA own the WashPo. Or perhaps you are talking about UK spies leaking salacious rumors about a POTUS candidate to effect our elections? Or are you talking about Russian nationals releasing actual emails sent by a POTUS candidate to the public? Or are you talking about China buying Hollywood studios to push their agenda? Or are you talking about Russian nationals buying divisive advertising?

I asked a simple question: would you let nazi Americans run large scale propaganda, for example showing captured or killed Americans, while American troops are fighting against the same nazis in Europe?

Yes or no?

CBOEtrader says

You want a Ministry of Truth, and assume those who dont are naive? Lol, please read about the history of censorship and its murderous results. Censorship will lead to terrible things.

You certainly don't need to censure reasonable exchange of ideas. Debates are not propaganda. There is a clear difference.

Heraclitusstudent says

Let's say we're at war with Nazi Germany, would the free speech libertarians here let nazi Americans run large scale propaganda operations in the US aimed sinking American morale, while American soldiers are fighting and dying in Europe?

Sure, if you mean there's a "war war" on that includes a draft call, an actual declaration of war, and a national war footing. Or at least 2 of those 3.

Not a mere cooling of relations.

Also, bitching about Russian Influence with a few bucks spent on Facebook while Saudis, Qataris, Norwegians, Mexicans, Japanese, Chinese, Germans, and god knows how many Oligarchs from Soros to Slim pump money into politics, think tanks, lobbyists, etc. is kind of misfocused, IMHO. Everything from University Chairs to Think Tanks to Conferences to Paid Lobbyists, involving millions upon millions of dollars direct from national governments, plus countless bucks via NGOs and Companies and Individuals of these nations.

Hillary's 13 fundraisers in foreign countries.
https://sunlightfoundation.com/2016/03/17/hillary-clinton-campaign-totals-13-fundraisers-in-foreign-countries/

The Clinton's Moroccan Money Mess
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/clinton-foundation-morocco-marrakech-230717

Morocco, that pinnacle of Democracy.

Heraclitusstudent says

You're not fighting back. You just creates clans of people living in echo chambers, and the country is collapsing every day a bit more under the false beliefs, ultra-polarized society, strident accusations, and increasingly, violent reactions.

Somehow these millions upon millions haven't gotten the same level of scrutiny from WaPo and the NYT. Oligarchs don't want the sums given to Hillary by Foreign Countries, many of which are Authoritarian Non-Democracies (and connected to terrorists) compared to the sums allegedly spent by Russia on promoting BLM issues on Facebook.

Heraclitusstudent says

You're not fighting back.

I am not the first amendment. Perhaps you missed my point.

Lets be clear. Answer this question: would you rather have a 1st amendment, or a ministry of truth? There is no 3rd option.

I choose a 1st amendment. You?

Heraclitusstudent says

I asked a simple question: would you let nazi Americans run large scale propaganda, for example showing captured or killed Americans, while American troops are fighting against the same nazis in Europe?

This is a bizarre hypothetical which you are using to dodge the conversation. No, I do not think we should block those ISP's for Americans to search out and view, if that's what you mean.

How about you answer my real world question now? Which of the dozens of identified propaganda campaigns would you shut down? Better yet, to whom do you grant this judgement?

My argument is that noone deserves this power, and the only functional effective way to combat propaganda is the 1st amendment.

The only alternative to 1st amendment is a ministry of truth. So choose: do you want a ministry of truth or a 1st amendment?