« First « Previous Comments 44 - 83 of 87 Next » Last » Search these comments
A story about Pinterest censoring conservatives by James O'Keefe and Project Veritas on Tim Pool's YouTube channel was removed without explaination.
Quigley saysI’m starting to understand the mindset of the willingly brainwashed. They want above all, to make sure that people around them understand the world in the same way they do. They want to share the same illusion, delusion, or fantasy as everyone else. And they know that the best way to achieve this is to hold hard to whatever ideology that Authority is preaching, then shame and denigrate anyone with a different viewpoint.
It’s not that they disagree with you, it’s that they really want everyone to think the same way, and find it offensive when other narratives are put forward.
You see, other competing narratives break their shared fantasy about the world into tiny pieces! Rather than relaxing with a comfortable fantasy, they’re suddenly thrust into a world of unknowns, of multiple interpretations, and many possible definitions.
This is why it’s so impossible to convince one of t...
Don't be delusional. Nobody got banned ever who didn't break the law. People left on their own volition mostly because Patrick didn't give them global mod rights or because a few of their personal posts were flagged.
Don't be delusional. Nobody got banned ever who didn't break the law. People left on their own volition mostly because Patrick didn't give them global mod rights or because a few of their personal posts were flagged.
If Twitter can block users for their perspectives, then bakers can refuse to bake cakes based on perspectives, no?
Nope, a TV channel that isn't a user-based social media can't censor users by definition: One-way communication
Yep, the Supreme Court ruled on that one I'm pretty sure.
Yes, an apple isn't an orange. So what? A TV channel can only allow certain viewpoints to make it on their airwaves, thereby censoring content. Same as youtube.
Don't be delusional. Nobody got banned ever who didn't break the law. People left on their own volition mostly because Patrick didn't give them global mod rights or because a few of their personal posts were flagged.
How is it not 100% hypocritical for Patrick to complain???
Not at all. The TV produces it's own content, doesn't allow people to start accounts and upload videos about makeup, twerking, old Gary Numan music videos, or SJWs to their 8PM timeslot.
@mell is exactly right.
No one got banned for their views, ever.
The only bans have been for deliberately personally insulting other users over and over. And spammers, but they are robots as a rule.
Easy, it's because Twitter and other corporate sites ban people explicitly because of their points of view.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Your moderators absolutely banned people by disabling their ability to post because of their political views.
They ban people because they violate their terms of service
by banned I mean has to have their comments checked by a moderator.
demonetized does not equal banned.
Shared illusions can be a powerful social device to make people feel connected to each other.
Jonathan Haidt has the same conclusion as you, but he calls it righteousness. He suggests the more irrational the righteous virtue signal, the higher the group loyalty.
Since group cohesion is more important to daily life than rational thought, he suggests the human instinct to be righteous is partially designed to shut down rational thought... and we get an awesome shot of dopemine if our righteous behavior is cheered on by our tribe.
Wow, this does a lot to explain pervasive and unremitting Islamic violence as well.
RafiMaas saysdemonetized does not equal banned.
True. However, it is like sanctions. Sanctions are not a hot war, but they are a form of warfare and can lead to a hot war, as they did in WWII with Japan. In the same way, demonitization is a form of harssment which like sanctions, hurts both parties involved, YouTube and the user, but play at, 'This is going to hurt you more.'
which means Google won't allow AdSense ads on the video
It's also a company not a government agency. Perfect opportunity for someone to launch a competing company which can set up rules that are selectively enforced.
WookieMan saysBut we have monopoly protections in place for this very reason
Lol we are agreeing on 2 different threads.
« First « Previous Comments 44 - 83 of 87 Next » Last » Search these comments
1. to have been banned or demonetized from Wordpress/Twitter/Facebook/YouTube/Google or other anti-free-speech sites
2. to have a website which is not on one of the intolerant corporate/liberal sites and has content
Alex Jones https://alexjonespodcast.com/
Anne Marie Waters https://www.forbritain.uk/
Ben Shapiro https://www.dailywire.com/authors/ben-shapiro
Brigitte Gabriel https://www.actforamerica.org/
Candace Owens https://candaceowens.com/
Dylan Louis Monroe https://www.dylanlouismonroe.com/q-web.html
Heartiste, aka Roissy https://gab.com/heartiste and https://archive.is/zvx8C
Jesse Kelly https://thefederalist.com/author/jessekelly/
Laura Loomer https://lauraloomer.us/
Live Action https://www.liveaction.org/
Milo Yiannopolous https://www.dangerous.com/
Natural News https://www.naturalnews.com/
Paul Joseph Watson https://www.bitchute.com/channel/9WF6N0ecQ55u/
PJ Media https://pjmedia.com/
James O'Keefe of Project Veritas https://www.projectveritas.com/ and https://search.bitchute.com/renderer?use=bitchute-json&name=Search&login=bcadmin&key=7ea2d72b62aa4f762cc5a348ef6642b8&query=project+Veritas
Sargon of Akkad (Carl Benjamin) https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hPBWLRZXgklG/
Scott Adams https://blog.dilbert.com/
Soph https://www.bitchute.com/video/68KM8MPvTA75/
Stephen Crowder https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/
Tim Pool https://www.timcast.com/
Zero Hedge https://www.zerohedge.com/
Please add more in the comments. I'm watching this post and will add them up here.