The YouTube purge

T.C.

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Stefan Molyneux giving a characteristically passionate analysis of the current wave of YouTube censorship:


https://youtu.be/WcTCNQEJju8

His points:

Does this situation herald the beginning of a new day or the end of internet free speech?

He lists a number of 'alternative' YouTubers who have been censored. People who don't stand for the left-wing, politically correct status quo, including JP, Mike Cernovich, Dave Rubin, Sargon of Akkad, Steven Crowder,

Talks about the revolution of the internet as the modern day printing press for the sharing of ideas, particularly in video form.

That historically, it was the Left who were more for free speech and the Right who were more for censorship. That has reversed, now, as existing power-structures are manipulating people, especially young people, into attacking free speech.

That free speech is important because the truth is something that has to be acquired collectively through exploration of ideas, of which all viewpoints should be able to be presented.

That it's difficult to know which ideas are going to bear the best fruit going forwards, and censorship is like saying that you already know what's for the best for all in any scenario. No one can and should have that power of prescience.

He plans to start a new platform where audio and video can be hosted, including pre-existing work.

Asks for donations towards the endeavour.


Tucker Carlson interviews Eric Schiffer and Dave Rubin:


https://youtu.be/VuNfCvYywMY

"Google is policing the content posted to YouTube and they're using a thoroughly discredited left-wing group to do that.

"Google is creating a group of 'trusted flaggers' who will help the company monitor alleged extremist content on the website.

"One of those trusted flaggers is not trusted at all - it's The Southern Poverty Law Centre. It's not an expert on the South, poverty or the law."

There then follows a report about the Southern Poverty Law Centre. It calls itself the "premier group monitoring hate groups". The centre have a map with dots all over the US showing groups it has identified - 917 of them.

Apple just donated $1m to the centre.

The centre list people like Ben Carson (Republican Politician), Laura Ingraham (political radio commentator and Fox News contributor) and Jeanie Pirro (Republican politician), but NOT ANTIFA.

In the words of the reporter, the centre is a "Left-wing, money-grabbing, slander-machine."

Carlson asks Schiffer how it could be that such an organisation could get end up policing content at the most powerful company in the world. Schiffer replies that it seems at one point, Google were getting criticised for not doing enough to censor actual extremist and terrorist sites, so they've turned to this type of company in order to appear more inclusive or moral, and it's just swung too far in the opposite direction.

He basically just expresses hope that Google will reverse its decision and get rid of Southern Poverty Law Centre and that Google should apologise.


Dave Rubin is kind of a 'former Leftist' who now considers himself more of a centrist. He hosts an interview show on YouTube called The Rubin Report where he interviews people of varying political persuasions.

Recently, YouTube have effectively 'Demonetised' him by not allowing ads on his videos.

Carson asks Rubin why he thinks this has happened to him.

Rubin begins by championing the platform first and foremost, that he wants YouTube to work for anyone and everyone, regardless of what kind of videos they're posting - political or otherwise.

Goes on to say:

"We do a talk-show based on big ideas in a sort of old-school, Larry King style. And I talk to people all over the political map. Many of them are conservative friends of yours (Carlson's), and then I have progressives and lefties. I talk about religion and science and all of this stuff. And just lately, almost our entire back-catalogue has been demonetised.

"And I'm talking about video's where we're talking about God and morality, or we're talking about stuff like the election, or even today's video I posted with a YouTuber by the name of Phil DeFranco who is one of the original YouTubers - the guy's got about six million subscribers. They demonetised that.

"This is one of their top creators who's been on there forever."

Carson then presents a statement from YouTube that contradicts what Rubin says:

YouTube: "Over 90% of the videos on The Rubin Report are fully monetised. The remaining 10% are not, because they contain discussions of adult topics, pornography, ISIS. These are topics which many advertisers find objectionable."

Carson: "What's your response?"

Rubin: "That's just simply not true. I'm telling you, right now, as we went to air, the video with Phil DeFranco, videos with many mainstream people who appear even on Fox, like Ben Schapiro and Larry Elder, Ayaan Hirsi Ali who I think is the greatest human rights hero that we have on Earth today. I could talk about Bishop Robert Barron from the Archdiocese of L.A. where we talked about religion. People I agree with. People I disagree with.

Carson: "And those videos have been demonetised?"

Rubin: "Yes, absolutely. So I don't know why they issued that strange statement.

"I'm glad that there has been some communication though, because unfortunately, the lack of transparency there... It took me about two years to get on the phone with them and didn't really get any answers."


Paul Joseph Watson interviews Sargon of Akkad, a centrist philosopher, political/social critic and commentator, and full-time YouTuber who had his Google account suspended recently. After regaining access to the account, Sargon (real name, Carl Benjamin) posted a new video which has been promptly censored in the UK by YouTube:


https://youtu.be/-uC2PxB5qHE

Sargon has been given no indication by YouTube for reason of his account suspension.

Watson highlights the fact that the purge has been stepped up since the Parkland School Shooting.

Watson points out that the purge isn't/hasn't affected the actual far-right or alt-right and that the majority of the targets appear to be centrist conservatives and ask what should we deduce from that.

Sargon: "Well, that's a very, very good question.

"There have been so many different accounts that have been struck, it's been difficult to keep up with the sheer volume. Honestly, there's a part of me that thinks that's not coincidental, but it's really hard to say. Because, as you say, the far-right accounts are being generally left alone.

"And even then, why go after the centrists? I just can't understand it. And I think the thing that we have to bear in mind is the culture at Google. Everyone knows that Silicon Valley is left-leaning, but I don't think they know just HOW left-leaning they are."

They then discuss the case of James Damore.

Discussion of Google's exclusion of and growing institutional animosity towards white people.

Watson theorises that the centrists are being attacked and the far-right are being left alone because the centrists are an actual threat, whereas the far-left and far-right need each other as bogey-men to shore up their own stances.

Sargon expands on that idea from a view that for him there's a very low probability that the far-right have any chance of becoming a serious political threat to the establishment, whereas the centrists have much more chance of appealing to the average person. He then points out how the principles of classical liberalism can act as an antidote the radical left-wind ideology when it comes to collectivism vs individualism, categorising people based on their race etc. vs treating all people fairly as human beings.

More detailed discussion and critique of current radical left wing viewpoints.

Exploring the idea that online social and political critique of the radical left is seen by seen as discriminatory cyber-bullying. Critics and thinkers being attacked and shut down by the radical left because their criticism is interpreted and labelled as hatred.

Examples of left-wing snowflakes with double standards.

They then move onto discussing the possibility of having their channels shut down for good and losing all of their work. That Sargon and many other people rely on their channels to make a living.

Sargon highlights the Wall Street Journal attack on YouTuber 'PewDiePie' for what were described as anti-semitic jokes. That this ties into what Schiffer talked about above, in that the WSJ continued to complain about content creators getting paid for views which a minority of people find offensive, and that's what really ramped up the demonetisation of videos (or ad-pocalypse) that has happened.

Sargon: "They were attacking YouTube as a platform, saying, "Look, you have an advert on a video that we disapprove of, therefore, YouTube as a whole is at fault.

"And that means that hundreds of thousands of independent content creators who had nothing to do with the very tiny slice of offensive content are now being financially punished by the advertisers for responding to an attack on the Wall Street Journal.

"And then, on the 11th of November, you have the Wall Street Journal connecting YouTube to pedophilia. It's like, oh my God, that's an even smaller slice of what's happening on YouTube, but yet again, the advertisers were called in, YouTube was called in front of British parliament on charges of hate speech, and they ended up hiring these 10,000 moderators (the 'trusted flaggers' mentioned in the Tucker Carlson video).

"And when you look at the culture that Google and YouTube are swimming in - the far-left, incredibly regressive culture - what kind of moderators are they hiring?

"And then we have the 'YouTube Purge' as a direct result of that, where these 10,000 people say, "Well, right wing; gun; all of this conspiracy theory stuff; that's just all verboten."

Mention of the hegemony of YouTube as a content provider, difficulty of creating alternative platforms. As a result, you have to try to take YouTube on and get them to change, so to speak.

Mention of a proposed 'YouTube Union' for content creators, which Sargon thinks might work.

The idea that YouTube is the main platform for alternative media and that traditional media companies can't compete any more and are laying people off, so why is YouTube cowtowing to them?

Watson expresses surprise that if this is indeed the start of a continuous purge, that it hasn't happened sooner.

Mention of groups with influence at Google like the Southern Poverty Law Centre who list Ayaan Hirsi Ali (ex muslim reformist) and Maajid Nawaz (Muslim reformist) as "anti-Muslim extremists", painting a target on their backs for actual Islamic radicals to target them. These are the types of groups advising Google and policing YouTube. The Southern Poverty Law Centre's business model relies on fanning the flames of hate speech, so we shouldn't be surprised at what is happening to YouTube, because they're going to characterise 'edgy opinions' or even conservative opinions as hate speech.

Examples of left-wing hypocrisy over private companies. On the one hand, criticising capitalism and small businesses rights to choose who they will provide services to, yet, a private company which pushes their agendas is just fine.

More examples of left-wing lobbyist influence over companies.

Watson: "What message do you have for those who applaud monolithic corporations like Google censoring free speech?"

Sargon: "I think they're remarkably short sighted. If you can't argue for the rights of your opponents, then ultimately, when it comes to you having your rights threatened, there'll be no one to argue for you.

"I mean, this isn't anything new of revolutionary. This is the basis of a liberal democracy and universal rights. Everyone should be protected.

"I mean, I don't like having to defend, like, the alt-right when they're being censored - I really don't - but I've had to do it consistently because that is the principle I believe in. I think that everyone should have the right to free speech, regardless of how awful what you're saying is.

"And, in fact, I actually believe that sunlight IS the best disinfectant. I think it is better to have these unpopular and often vile opinions to be present so that people can use them as an example of why we don't do these things. These are a good spring-board from which to argue against.

"But the regressive left just won't have that. And I think it comes down to a totalitarian mindset [...] because as soon as you have the power to censor, then you have to worry about maintaining control of that power, and then that becomes the focus of your life, because otherwise that's going to be used against YOU. And anyone who manages to usurp it from you, however they manage it, they're just going to turn that on you. And you have absolutely no grounds on which to say, "Well that's wrong for them to censor me," because it was right when you were dong it.

"It's so short-sighted."
 

Beorn

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
Thanks for the summary TC. I think the reason the far right isn't being censored as much as centrists is that the far right have a pathological world view, just like the far left. The only thing that isn't allowed in a pathocracy is normal thinking and common sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lys

T.C.

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Ryan Dawson's YouTube account has been suspended.

Ryan is an investigative journalist and author. Great researcher. Great thinker. Spent years exposing Israel and did a huge amount of work linking Israel to 9/11.

Ryan's channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1vTH0ByVIcIOB83FbvHP7Q

Link to a video tweet from Ryan about his suspension:

https://twitter.com/RyLiberty/status/971310115872804868
 

Mark7

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
Thanks, T. C. for this well-done and detailed summary.

Talks about the revolution of the internet as the modern day printing press for the sharing of ideas, particularly in video form.

That historically, it was the Left who were more for free speech and the Right who were more for censorship. That has reversed, now, as existing power-structures are manipulating people, especially young people, into attacking free speech.

That free speech is important because the truth is something that has to be acquired collectively through exploration of ideas, of which all viewpoints should be able to be presented.

That it's difficult to know which ideas are going to bear the best fruit going forwards, and censorship is like saying that you already know what's for the best for all in any scenario. No one can and should have that power of prescience.

He plans to start a new platform where audio and video can be hosted, including pre-existing work.

When you let the cat out of the bag - you create a whole feline nation - to closely paraphrase the Cs.

Beorn said:
Thanks for the summary TC. I think the reason the far right isn't being censored as much as centrists is that the far right have a pathological world view, just like the far left. The only thing that isn't allowed in a pathocracy is normal thinking and common sense.

... I second that!

Some people will never give up their attachment to authority it seems, but... The iceberg of frozen and spellbound people that the PTB/STS rely on for their support and 'food' is getting smaller, people are hungry for truth, the life raft is getting unstable, fear has set in. Dangerous predatory and parasitical animals should be considered with caution and forethought, let them have their diminishing zone, an other realm is coming.
 

Rhythmik

Jedi Master
Great post T.C.
A few banned users' new channels:

Anti-School (Isaac Green) currently under Elliott Marxx: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqoeWG9DyBDtQpWp6PRawQQ
Destroying The Illusion (Jordan Sather) now 2.0 https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0v4ZBPYfq-sPmXOd67cDww
Dustin Nemos now Nemo V: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQ7VgW7XgJQjDEPnOR-Q0Qw

Even Bombard's Body Language channel was taken down: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXG8i4PE6-mxh52nFKwMkcg However after a lot of uproar Youtube removed her 3 strikes and reinstated her channel, but she just again received a 2nd strike and cannot post videos for a couple weeks. Censoring her was most likely a result of her videos regarding the Parkland shooting witness testimonies.

Many people now are now migrating to platforms running on blockchain tech: Bitchute https://www.bitchute.com/ and DTube which is linked to Steemit.
 

Rhythmik

Jedi Master
Couldn't find a separate thread on this, but Scottish comedian Count Dankula (Mark Meechan) "was found guilty of a hate crime earlier this week for posting a video of himself training his girlfriend's pug, Buddha, to mimic a Nazi and respond to commands the court ruled anti-Semitic."

Sargon of Akkad: 'Count Dankula Did Nothing Wrong (#FreeDankula #GrosslyOffensive #Liberalist)'
https://youtu.be/vqf1pr36OCg

Jonathan Pie: 'It's a JOKE!' (NSFW language)
https://youtu.be/ti2bVS40cz0

The original video that got him in trouble:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu47muw--A4&bpctr=1521987160
 

Palinurus

The Living Force
SOTT carried an article about it recently:

https://www.sott.net/article/380656-Scottish-comedian-who-made-hilarious-video-of-pet-pug-giving-Nazi-salutes-convicted-of-hate-crime-UPDATE
 

c.a.

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Google Beats Lawsuit Accusing YouTube of Censoring Conservatives
March 26, 2018 7:49pm PT by Eriq Gardner
-https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/google-beats-lawsuit-accusing-youtube-censoring-conservatives-1097631
A judge holds that YouTube isn't a "public forum" run by a "state actor.

Google has prevailed in a lawsuit that alleged YouTube has been violating the First Amendment by censoring conservative viewpoints. On Monday, a California federal judge agreed to dismiss a complaint from Prager University, run by radio-talk-show host Dennis Prager

The plaintiff produces videos with titles like "Why Don't Feminists Fight for Muslim Women?" and "The Most Important Question About Abortion." In the lawsuit, Prager's company asserted that YouTube professes viewpoint neutrality, but indeed censors conservatives by putting age restrictions on certain videos. The decision making is far from even-handed, Prager contends, pointing among others to a restricted video titled "Are 1 in 5 women in college raped?" compared to better treatment for a Real Time With Bill Maher video about The Hunting Ground.

Prager sought an injunction.

Since the First Amendment free speech guarantee guards against abridgment by a government, the big question for U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh is whether YouTube has become the functional equivalent of a "public forum" run by a "state actor" requiring legal intervention over a constitutional violation.

Koh agrees with Google that it hasn't been sufficiently alleged that YouTube is a state actor as opposed to a private party.

"Plaintiff does not point to any persuasive authority to support the notion that Defendants, by creating a 'video-sharing website' and subsequently restricting access to certain videos that are uploaded on that website have somehow engaged in one of the 'very few' functions that were traditionally 'exclusively reserved to the State,'"
she writes.
"Instead, Plaintiff emphasizes that Defendants hold YouTube out 'as a public forum dedicated to freedom of expression to all' and argues that 'a private property owner who operates its property as a public forum for speech is subject to judicial scrutiny under the First Amendment.'”
The judge turns to precedent, particularly a 1945 Supreme Court case — Marsh v. Alabama — which involved a Jehovah's Witness who distributed religious literature in a town that was entirely owned by a private corporation. In that decision, the high court held that the corporation acting as a state actor was required to run the town in compliance with the U.S. Constitution. But Koh then emphasizes later Supreme Court decisions that limited the reach of this holding including one — Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner — where a privately owned shopping center could prohibit anti-Vietnam War protesters from distributing literature.

Koh writes she
"is not convinced that Marsh can be extended to support Plaintiff’s contention that Defendants should be treated as state actors subject to First Amendment scrutiny merely because they hold out and operate their private property as a forum for expression of diverse points of view."

There's also a nod to another recent opinion from the Supreme Court — Packingham v. North Carolina — which generated a great deal of speculation about implications when the high court justices invalidated a North Carolina state law that made it a felony for a registered sex offender to access a social media website.

According to the judge, "Although Packingham spoke of 'cyberspace' and 'social media in particular' as 'the most important places . . . for the exchange of views' in modern society, Packingham did not, and had no occasion to, address whether private social media corporations like YouTube are state actors that must regulate the content of their websites according to the strictures of the First Amendment."

Ultimately, the judge
doesn't think that YouTube is very much like that private corporation governing all municipal functions of a town.

"Instead, Defendants are private entities who created their own video-sharing social media website and make decisions about whether and how to regulate content that has been uploaded on that website," the opinion states. "Numerous other courts have declined to treat similar private social media corporations, as well as online service providers, as state actors."

The complaint is dismissed, but plaintiff is granted permission to file an amended version if they so wish to try.

Here's the full opinion, which also goes into analysis why a claim of false advertising under the Lanham Act and various state law causes of action fail too.

Lucy Haeran Koh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_H._Koh
Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Assumed office June 9, 2010
Appointed by Barack Obama
Judge of the Santa Clara County Superior Court
In office 2008–2010
Appointed by Arnold Schwarzenegger

Professional career
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_H._Koh#Professional_career
From 1993 until 1994, Koh worked for the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary as a Women's Law and Public Policy Fellow. From 1994 until 1997, Koh worked for the United States Department of Justice, first as a Special Counsel in the Office of Legislative Affairs (1994–1996) and then as a Special Assistant to the United States Deputy Attorney General (1996–1997).[7] From 1997 until 2000, Koh served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Office of the United States Attorney for the Central District of California. From 2000 until 2002, she worked as a Senior Associate at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, a Palo Alto, California law firm. From 2002 until 2008, Koh worked as a litigation partner at the Silicon Valley office of the law firm McDermott Will & Emery representing technology companies in patent, trade secret and commercial civil matters.[8] In January 2008, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed Koh a judge on the Superior Court of California for Santa Clara County, a position she held until becoming a U.S. district judge in 2010.[7][6]

Federal judicial service
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_H._Koh#Federal_judicial_service
On January 20, 2010, President Barack Obama nominated Koh on the recommendation of California Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein to a seat on the United States District Court for the Northern District of California vacated by judge Ronald M. Whyte, who assumed senior status in 2009.[5] On March 4, 2010, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to move her nomination to the full Senate.[9] The Senate confirmed Koh in a 90–0 vote on June 7, 2010.[10] She received her commission on June 9, 2010.[6]

On February 25, 2016, President Obama nominated Koh to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, to the seat vacated by Judge Harry Pregerson, who took senior status on December 11, 2015.[11][12] On July 13, 2016 a hearing on her nomination was held before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary.[13] On September 15, 2016 her nomination was reported out of committee by a vote of 13-7. Her nomination expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress.[6]

Judge Lucy Koh :: Disguise of Objectivity / 2:01
Feb 24, 2017

https://youtu.be/pwnxaHQ_TCs?rel=0
 

Ant22

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Ryan Dawson's YouTube account has been suspended.

Ryan is an investigative journalist and author. Great researcher. Great thinker. Spent years exposing Israel and did a huge amount of work linking Israel to 9/11.

(...)


Another voice critical of Israel has been silenced on YouTube. Abby Martin's video was blocked from viewing in 28 countries.

Voltaire's words come to mind: "To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

Abby Martin interview critical of Israel is blocked by YouTube in 28 countries

An episode of Abby Martin’s Empire Files, featuring journalist Max Blumenthal and spotlighting rising militarism in Israel, has been blocked by YouTube in 28 countries, including Israel and the UK, for violating “local laws.”

“Just notified by YouTube that Abby Martin’s interview with Max Blumenthal has been blocked from being viewed in 28 countries (including Israel) to ‘comply with local laws.’ Actions disabled & warnings for viewers elsewhere,” the program’s official Twitter account related on Thursday.

Entitled “Jewish-American on Israel's Fascism: ‘No Hope For Change From Within',” the episode featured a discussion between Martin and journalist Max Blumenthal about the increasingly militaristic, racist attitude of Israel towards Palestinians.

YouTube has claimed that it removed my interview on Israel-Palestine with Abby Martin to comply with laws in 28 countries. However, nothing I did or said in the discussion was even remotely illegal, even in countries with the strictest hate crime laws, Blumenthal told RT in an email.My comments were based entirely on my extensive journalistic experience in the region and my analysis was clinical in nature. At no point did I denigrate anyone based on their faith or ethnicity.”

Blumenthal said that his comments were “motivated by a strong opposition to Israel's systemic discrimination against Palestinians,” and his “dedication to equal rights for all.” He called the YouTube's decision “a political one and likely made under pressure from powerful pro-Israel interests.”

A screenshot from YouTube which accompanied the tweet identified the 28 countries and territories where the 2015 video, was blocked and this list includes most European countries.

Viewers from around the world responded to Empire Files’ tweet, reporting that the video includes a warning that is has been “identified by the YouTube community as inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.” The video’s description, view counter, comments section, as well as ‘like’ and ‘dislike’ options have apparently also been disabled by YouTube.

According to Blumenthal, this isn’t the first time YouTube has censored his commentary and journalism on Israel-Palestine. In 2010, he made a viral video exposing “racist extremism” in Israel, which received widespread media coverage and was subsequently removed from the platform without explanation.

“The trend of censoring material that presents Israel in a less than favorable light has only intensified as establishment attacks on critical voices expands. This latest episode confirms my view that the pro-Israel lobby and its willing accomplices in Silicon Valley present one of the greatest threats to free speech in the West,” Blumenthal told RT.

Last year, YouTube invited the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to join its "Trusted Flagger" system. The ADL defines opposition to Israel's system of apartheid as a form of anti-Semitism. Blumenthal told RT that he believes the ADL is likely behind the suppression of his interview with Martin.

Empire Files, the documentary and interview program airing on teleSUR, is known for addressing hot-button issues that are often overlooked or ignored by traditional media.


 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
The purge continues. Now Sargon of Akkad was kicked from Patreon:


Seems like SJWs have completely taken over Silicon Valley. I found the Apple CEO's speech at the end of the above video absolutely chilling. Reminds me of the book "Darkness over Tibet" where there's a "spiritual school" that on the surface looks like the real deal, but underneath is a horrible demonic enterprise.

Apparently there are many people migrating from Patreon to other platforms because of this; and with the latest facebook scandal etc., perhaps more and more people will ditch at least some of the services of the Silicon Valley tech giants.

Perhaps that is part of what the Cs meant by this comment?

A: Yes. California is no longer "paradise" and will shortly look more like hell.
 

Keit

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I found the Apple CEO's speech at the end of the above video absolutely chilling. Reminds me of the book "Darkness over Tibet" where there's a "spiritual school" that on the surface looks like the real deal, but underneath is a horrible demonic enterprise.

Yeah! Talking about deep delusions of grandeur. This is indeed VERY creepy. Especially when you remember how exactly Apple phones are being made and how many people are suffering. It's like they demand a sacrifice, while making speeches like this of being morally superior.
 
Top Bottom