[Previous] Taleb Is Wrong: Killing Millions Actually Is Risky | Home | [Next] Potential Debate Topics

Deplatforming and Fraud

Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Patreon, PayPal and other companies have repeatedly advertised that they are politically-neutral open platforms. All are welcome. They’re for everybody. This fraud violates existing free-market-compatible laws, as I'll discuss below.

Then they ban, moderate, demonetize and censor people, and bias search algorithms, for a variety of biased reasons, including especially to persecute right wing political ideas. I’ll call this general issue “deplatforming”. It’s about not letting certain non-favored persons/ideas use the platforms in the standard, (allegedly) publicly-available way.

For those unfamiliar with or doubtful of the relevant facts, I’ve included an information section below.

The public debate over this issue has two main sides.

First, most of the left is cheering as their enemies are attacked.

Second, most of the right, along with some people on the left with greater integrity, say that free speech is important, tech companies are an important part of modern life, and we need government regulations to make things fair.

A third, smaller group are free market advocates say private companies should be able to do whatever they want, even if it’s politically biased, and the government should leave them alone. They often say this despite having right wing ideas themselves. They say it despite being part of the oppressed group.

What’s missing is a pro-free-market, anti-deplatforming group. That’s my position. It’s important that the free market is compatible with solving the deplatforming problem. This isn’t a failure of capitalism. Anyone who cares about freedom and classical liberalism should be interested in how it can address a problem like this; don't assume minimal government and capitalism are inadequate.

As a free market advocate, many people expect me to say that private companies can do whatever they want and the government should stay out of it. I think deplatforming is a horrible problem, but don’t my principles require me to accept it?

I find most free market people insufficiently regretful regarding their support of deplatforming. They don’t say how horrible it is, and they wish there was anything to be done about it, but their hands are tied. They don’t seem to mind much. I think many have some partial leftist sympathies.

There’s a better way to view the issue. There’s something bad going on. I dislike it. And most of the proposed solutions are statist. So then what? Give up? No! The first thing to do is consider free-market-compatible solutions. Classical liberalism is a sophisticated, nuanced political philosophy which should be able to deal with problems like this. Can it? No one seems to have checked.

In the free market, the initiation of force is prohibited. This includes threat of force and includes fraud. False advertising is fraud. Advertising being a neutral platform, while not being one, is fraud. These companies should be sued. We don’t need new regulations. We need the most basic legal protections that would also exist in a minarchist society (minimal government society, aka nightwatchman state).

These companies don’t follow the rules in their own Terms of Service. That’s fraud. They are telling the public the rules are one way, but acting a different way.

The ongoing fraud has been revealed by many sources including Project Veritas (e.g. Google Document Dump). More sources are below.

Why are companies flagrantly violating the law and no one seems to notice and they aren’t losing all their profits to lawsuits? Because they have special government privileges. They’re being protected from being accountable under the law. They aren’t fully private companies. They hire tons of political staffers and lobbyists. They have friends in high places. They have political pull and receive favors. They aren’t operating in a free market context. Rather than making new laws to control these companies, we need to abolish special privileges granted by the government to a favored elite.

People tell right wingers to make their own competing sites. If you don’t like these companies, beat them in the free market. There are a few problems with this. First, having a larger user base is a huge advantage in social media. People want to be on the sites their friends are on. And why do these companies have such a head start? Because they fraudulently lied about their political neutrality so people didn’t see the need to compete with them earlier on. Second, they are still lying today which reduces the interest in alternative sites. If they openly said they’re biased against Trump voters, more people would recognize the bias and switch to a new competitor. But they still lie to their users. And third, there’s the banking problem.

The worst problem related to deplatforming is not access to social media platforms for sharing ideas. It’s access to the financial system. You can make your own blog or other website to speak your mind (deplatforming by domain registrars, webhosts, etc., has begun but isn’t very bad yet). But what if you’re being prevented from selling your work online? What if your fans can’t donate money to support you? What if you can’t sell merch? How can you compete in the free market if you don’t have the ability to participate in the market online?

The banks and credit card companies are highly government regulated. And they have pressured sites like Patreon and PayPal to deplatform right wingers. And when Gab tried to build a Twitter competitor, they found it very difficult to get any banking partners. Patreon competitors have also had huge difficulties getting banking access to enable their users to send money online to fund content creators. For most types of business, getting banking is easy. Banks and payment processors compete for your business. They want to be widely used. But right wing people online are being treated differently by financial companies which are considerably more government-controlled or government-influenced than Facebook or Google is.

My position is that I wish we had a free market. A free market would solve this problem because there would be serious consequences for fraud. We aren’t even close to a free market. Free market advocates tend to recognize this fact in general. They recognize e.g. that the U.S. healthcare market (including before Obamacare) is not even close to free market, capitalist healthcare. They recognize how involved the government is in the universities. But with deplatforming, the government’s role seems to be widely overlooked.

The main takeaway here is simple but widely ignored. Given the facts about the situation (which most people don’t know much about), Google, YouTube, Twitter and so on are guilty of blatant, massive and ongoing fraud. We don’t need new laws or regulations, we need to enforce the most basic and capitalism-compatible laws.

Deplatforming Info

For those who haven’t been following the public information about deplatforming much, here are some examples:

"Twitter stands for freedom of expression," Dorsey declared. "Twitter stands for speaking truth to power." Dorsey is CEO and co-founder of Twitter. Just from accounts I was following, Twitter deplatformed Heartiste, Real Peer Review and American Renaissance.

"I'm almost a free-speech absolutist." said Prince, the CEO of Cloudflare, an internet infrastructure company that deplatformed the Daily Stormer for political reasons.

Kudos to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg for defending free speech at a tough moment. There are many articles attacking Zuckerberg for being too favorable to free speech. Meanwhile Facebook deletes, censors and deprioritizes (lowering the traffic they get) right wing groups and ideas.

There is some non-political, largely-unexplained deplatforming too, contrary to publicly claimed policies. E.g. Facebook deleted without warning or explanation the Banting7DayMealPlan user group. The group has 1.65 million users who post testimonials and other information regarding the efficacy of a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet.

Sam Harris Drops Patreon, Citing 'Political Bias' Likely Inspired by SPLC's 'Hate Group' List

Google "Machine Learning Fairness" Whistleblower Goes Public, says: "burden lifted off of my soul”, from Project Veritas, which I found as the 15th search result on YouTube for project veritas google whistleblower. It’s so low due to search algorithm bias, which ironically is one of the topics of the video.

Twitter banned a psychiatry expert for sharing his professional research conclusions (for political reasons).

Jared Taylor was the first victim of a new YouTube deplatforming campaign.

I Was Fooled By The Promise Of The Internet:

Domain registrars promised that I could “own” my little corner of the web with a domain name, and now my domains can be seized by a faceless bureaucracy. Google told me to create the best content I could to be ranked highly in their search engine, but then they manipulated their algorithms to lift dull corporate propaganda above my own. Twitter promised that I could share any thought that came to mind, and after I spent years doing so, they changed their mind and will now ban me if I make fun of an obese feminist. YouTube said I could upload engaging videos that viewers love, and even make money doing so, but then they demonetized most of my videos, put others in “limited state,” and banned me from live streaming for three months because I asked if women who wear chokers want to be treated subserviently. Disqus offered me a service to allow the community at Return Of Kings to discuss what was on their mind, but they banned the site because they didn’t want us to discuss certain things. Amazon said I could publish books on their platform and even make a living as a writer, but then they banned the paperbook and ebook editions of nine of my books with no explanation why. Paypal said it would be easy to add payment processing to my site, and then later showed how easy it is to ban me for political reasons.

I’ve covered deplatforming in newsletters, e.g. after Charlottesville and re Twitter censoring Canary Mission and Gab and about the banking/financial forces behind deplatforming (sadly and ironically, the Nick Monroe Twitter thread in the newsletter is no longer readable because Twitter deplatformed him. And the Thread Reader App archive of it is hidden by Twitter in the replies behind a warning saying “Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content” and then the content is deleted from their site anyway. But it’s still on the wayback machine.).

Some more examples from the open politics discussion on Curiosity (this website):

  • Roosh’s private account banned from Instagram.
  • Heartiste deleted from WordPress.
  • Michelle Malkin post deleted on Facebook.
  • An Objectivist defended deplatforming.
  • David Horowitz restricted on Twitter.
  • Borderless video had delayed processing, then was taken down, on YouTube.
  • Facebook deleted a Paul Joseph Watson post consisting of the single word “honk” because it referenced a right wing political meme.
  • Koch Brothers Team Up With George Soros, Patreon and Airbnb to Fight Online Extremism (fighting online extremism is code for deplatforming).
  • Pinterest whistleblower told Project Veritas about their political bias. Then YouTube deleted the video after it had a million views. One consequence is that the link to the video in my email newsletter archives, which can’t be edited, is now broken.
  • Vdare article with non-classical-liberal tech censorship response.
  • I answer Alan Forrester’s question about what fraud Facebook has committed (part 2).
  • Apple threated to kick Parler (a Twitter competitor) off their app store unless Parler banned some people. Apple also blocks some channels on Telegram.
  • Reddit quarantined the The Donald subreddit and suspended Veritas’ account.
  • YouTube officially fraudulently lied that we apply our policies fairly and without political bias.
  • I commented on fraud and deplatforming on the House of Sunny podcast.
  • Wikipedia has biased editing, e.g. an example related to Jeffrey Epstein.
  • A gaming channel got banned at a million followers on YouTube and had to start over.
  • Links to collections of examples of Google and Facebook censorship.
  • Cloudflare deplatformed 8chan.
  • Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell got suspended from Twitter for sharing a video showing people making violent threats against him
  • Owen Benjamin has been deplatformed by YouTube and others.
  • Games Done Quick speedrun marathon deplatforms people for MAGA hats.

This is just a small sampling of deplatforming info. There’s far more. Post more in the comments below. I’ve posted, as the first comment, a list of deplatforming related links that Justin Mallone gathered earlier this year.

Elliot Temple on November 17, 2019

Messages (72)

Deplatforming Links

Justin Mallone on FI, 2019-03-23 at 5:46 PM on November 17, 2019 | #14355 | reply | quote

Reason.com thinks that only total censorship counts as censorship:

> PragerU, the prolifically popular creator of conservative video content run by radio host Dennis Prager, claims that it is being censored by big tech. The organization took to Twitter to announce that the platform had banned it from running ads.

> Except that's not actually censorship. Far from it: A quick glance at the company's Twitter feed shows that it uses the platform to great advantage, with hundreds of thousands of followers and a bevy of tweets that drive mega-engagement. If PragerU was actually "censored" by Twitter, they would not have a Twitter platform at all.

Anonymous at 6:17 PM on November 17, 2019 | #14356 | reply | quote

Anonymous at 6:18 PM on November 17, 2019 | #14357 | reply | quote

#14357 From the same link:


> But Twitter's advertising policies have nothing to do with the First Amendment, which protects PragerU from government action—not from the decisions of a private company.

It's a good example of what i'm trying to oppose. The examples are readily available. I think most ppl don't wanna click a bunch of links, don't know the facts, and doubt half of what i'm arguing based on factual misconceptions ... without considering like *if* curi has the facts right, would he have a point?

Many libertarians and Objectivists who are siding with deplatforming are my biggest motivation for writing about this. They are on the side of massive fraud (which violates capitalism...), in addition to being on the side of the culture wars trying to destroy civilization (I've seen that second issue, that they're on the wrong side, pointed out plenty, but not the capitalism and fraud issue).

curi at 6:21 PM on November 17, 2019 | #14358 | reply | quote

WSJ: How Google Interferes With Its Search Algorithms and Changes Your Results

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/11/google-search-results-have-more-human-help-than-you-think-report-finds/ :

> Google's increasingly hands-on approach to search results, which has taken a sharp upturn since 2016, "marks a shift from its founding philosophy of 'organizing the world's information' to one that is far more active in deciding how that information should appear"

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-google-interferes-with-its-search-algorithms-and-changes-your-results-11573823753 :

> The company states in a Google blog, “We do not use human curation to collect or arrange the results on a page.” ... But that message often clashes with what happens behind the scenes.

> Over time, Google has increasingly re-engineered and interfered with search results to a far greater degree than the company and its executives have acknowledged, a WSJ investigation has found.

> Despite publicly denying doing so, Google keeps blacklists to remove certain sites or prevent others from surfacing in certain types of results.

> These moves are separate from those that block sites as required by U.S. or foreign law, such as those featuring child abuse or with copyright infringement, and from changes designed to demote spam sites, which attempt to game the system to appear higher in results.

> The [WSJ's] findings undercut one of Google’s core defenses against global regulators worried about how it wields its immense power—that the company doesn’t exert editorial control over what it shows users.

> One of the first hot-button issues surfaced in 2015, according to people familiar with the matter, when some employees complained that a search for “how do vaccines cause autism” delivered misinformation through sites that oppose vaccinations.

> At least one employee defended the result, writing that Google should “let the algorithms decide” what shows up, according to one person familiar with the matter.

> Instead, the people said, Google made a change so that the first result is a site called http://howdovaccinescauseautism.com — which states on its home page in large black letters, “They f—ing don’t.”

> Mr. Brin argued against human intervention, contending that Google should deliver the most accurate results as delivered by the algorithms, and that the algorithms should be tweaked only in the most extreme cases.

> Mr. Page countered that the user experience was getting damaged when users encountered spam rather than useful results, according to people familiar with the matter.

> Mr. Brin still opposed making large-scale efforts to fight spam, because it involved more human intervention. Mr. Brin, whose parents were Jewish émigrés from the former USSR, even personally decided to allow anti-Semitic sites that were in the results for the query “Jew,”...

> Google posted a disclaimer with results for that query saying, “Our search results are generated completely objectively and are independent of the beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google.”

> “Google used to say, ‘We don’t approve of the content, but that’s what it is,’ ” Mr. Wenley Palacios said. “That has changed dramatically.”

Anonymous at 11:03 AM on November 19, 2019 | #14385 | reply | quote

A video on Soph (aka LtCorbis) being banned from YouTube:


Guy seems center-left or moderate or something (hard to tell), not a Soph fan, but a free speech fan who has criticism of our tech dystopia.

Anonymous at 3:48 PM on November 19, 2019 | #14388 | reply | quote

Facebook censors PragerU post about top Dems voting for a border fence in 2016

Facebook censored a Nov 18, 2019 post by PragerU about top Dems voting for a wall in 2016 by obscuring it with a "Partly False Information" label and making the reader click a small "See Photo" link in the corner in order to read the post. The post says:

> “Did you know?

> In 2006, Hillary Clinton voted for a fence on the Mexican border.

> So did Barack Obama and Chuck Schumer and 23 other Senate Democrats.

> Now, a border wall is considered racist. 🤔

> Why has the Left shifted so far on the issue of immigration?”

Alisa at 6:16 AM on November 21, 2019 | #14473 | reply | quote

#14473 You say 2016 twice then change to 2006 in the post. I'm guessing the 2016s are both errors?

Anonymous at 12:18 PM on November 21, 2019 | #14480 | reply | quote

#14480 Yes, those are both errors. Thanks.

I don't know how I messed that up.

Alisa at 12:58 PM on November 21, 2019 | #14489 | reply | quote

OGE banned from twitch


> A whomegalul streamer accused him of being transphobic because he said ”okay dude.”


> Nah Flocculency deleted her VOD before proceeding to fabricate willful lies about what OGE said. She knew exactly what she was doing. The reluctant "apology" came after being called out as a proven liar.

> Make no mistake, this isn't an issue of a misunderstanding caused by a language barrier. It's an issue of a malicious, petty, self-loathing human being and her legion of twitch/twitter followers deliberately trying to ruin someone's livelihood over a minor in-game argument.

> She incited her followers to spam tweet at Twitch/Gladiators/other sponsors to cancel OGE based on lies, then tried to play it off as a misunderstanding after numerous people called bullshit. It's like a false sexual harassment claim followed by "haha maybe it was just a misunderstanding XD" after evidence disproves it.


> He said "okay, man". Which doesn't change a lot but it's a little detail that you could read differently in a transcript I guess. Don't get me wrong though I'm 100% on OGE's side and am baffled by Twitch's decision.

> Flocculency falsely accused OGE (Pro player for Overwatch League's Gladiators) of being transphobic and trying to raid her stream.

> Logic debunked the entire thing in this thread

> She has since deleted all the evidence from discord, twitter, and Twitch.

> She tried to do the same thing to xQc this year as well

curi at 3:04 PM on November 21, 2019 | #14499 | reply | quote

All advertising is false advertising.

Anonymous at 4:14 PM on November 21, 2019 | #14504 | reply | quote

Democrat presidential candidates Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard are being massively deplatformed by the media, and i'm sure some by tech companies (not following closely).


The tweet is wrong to blame this on anti-asian racism but i liked that chart. The cause is their politics. They're challenging the status quo and established powers in some ways. Bernie got treated unfairly in 2016 vs. Hillary btw. Similar thing. The mainstream media helps more mainstream candidates who they like better.

Anonymous at 11:53 AM on November 22, 2019 | #14520 | reply | quote

Andy Ngo (journalist known for negatively covering antifa and hate hoaxes) deplatformed from Twitter:

Anonymous at 3:41 PM on November 25, 2019 | #14578 | reply | quote

Anonymous at 4:16 PM on November 25, 2019 | #14579 | reply | quote

#14579 That article has a super biased paragraph:

> While PayPal has previously severed ties with extremist groups and individuals including the Ku Klux Klan, the Proud Boys and Alex Jones, Jammi theorized that Molyneux managed to evade investigation by calling himself a "philosopher" rather than a white nationalist. "Suspending Stefan Molyneux should have been an open-and-shut case," Jammi told Right Wing Watch.

It's smearing the Proud Boys by mentioning that right after the KKK in a list with the KKK. It's trying to trick readers into thinking the KKK and Proud Boys are similar.

This is extra dishonest because the KKK is part of the left and there have been ongoing attempts by the left to trick ignorant people into associating the KKK with the right.

It's also nasty how they say being a thinker or intellectual is no excuse and they want people like that deplatformed too.

Anonymous at 4:29 PM on November 25, 2019 | #14580 | reply | quote

> This is extra dishonest because the KKK is part of the left

You must be joking, can I get a hit of what you're smoking?

Why are you advocating for coercively making these platforms host racists anyway? If they don't want to that's their right. #liberty

Anonymous at 5:54 PM on November 25, 2019 | #14581 | reply | quote

TikTok Deplatforming


> TikTok censorship: there was a kerfuffle this week after someone posted a make-up video to Tiktok in which they talked about China's oppression of Uyghurs while doing eye-lashes - the idea was to see if it got past the content moderation, and it did, until it disappeared and the account was disabled. First Tiktok claimed the person had previously posted Jihadi content and been permanently banned (they had posted a photo of Bin Laden but as an obvious joke), but now it's backtracked and said it's just a failure of automated moderation at scale ('if computer sees 'Bin Laden' then block'). Given the screw-up theory of large organisations, this explanation is probably even true, but it doesn't matter - it just brings that much more American attention to the fact that lots of American teenagers are using an app from a Chinese company, and the Chinese government has ultimate control of any Chinese company and can enforce its ideas of what should be allowed. (Of course, this is also the problem that everyone else on earth has faced with American companies' social networks for the last decade or two.) Link

curi at 2:01 AM on December 2, 2019 | #14648 | reply | quote

> TikTok censorship: there was a kerfuffle this week after someone posted a make-up video to Tiktok in which they talked about China's oppression of Uyghurs while doing eye-lashes - the idea was to see if it got past the content moderation, and it did, until it disappeared and the account was disabled.

reminds me of this Lauren Southern vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCMpIA4QEVo&app=desktop

Anonymous at 3:47 PM on December 2, 2019 | #14657 | reply | quote

Anonymous at 6:55 PM on February 10, 2020 | #15442 | reply | quote

#15442 Article says:

> Mr. Delzer, the proprietor of a secondhand store in Nashville called Defunct Books, has a different view. “If Amazon executives are so proud of their moral high ground, they should issue memos about which books they are banning instead of keeping sellers and readers in the dark,” he said.


Anonymous at 7:00 PM on February 10, 2020 | #15443 | reply | quote

#15443 How does that wreck them? My first guess was that some evil entity once banned books and issued memos about its bans, and Delzer's comment was meant to link Amazon to that entity. But I did a web search for "moral high ground, they should issue memos" and didn't see anything about that.

I also searched Twitter and found that the quote has been quoted twice there, but with no discussion on either tweet.

Alisa at 9:55 PM on February 10, 2020 | #15444 | reply | quote

#15444 It's a self-contained argument. If they are doing something good, which they are rightly proud of, they should be happy to provide details of what they're doing instead of hiding it. Hiding it indicates they think people disapprove and that they're hiding from that debate/judgment because they lack arguments.

Anonymous at 10:50 PM on February 10, 2020 | #15445 | reply | quote

YouTube removes video of Rand Paul speaking on the Senate floor


> YouTube removed a video clip of Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul reading the question Chief Justice John Roberts suppressed during the Senate impeachment trial naming Eric Ciaramella, a man identified as the whistleblower by Real Clear Investigations.

> “It is a chilling and disturbing day in America when giant web companies such as YouTube decide to censure speech,” Paul told Politico, which first reported the story. “Now, even protected speech, such as that of a senator on the Senate floor, can be blocked from getting to the American people. This is dangerous and politically biased. Nowhere in my speech did I accuse anyone of being a whistleblower, nor do I know the whistleblower’s identity.”

Alisa at 9:30 PM on February 14, 2020 | #15458 | reply | quote

YouTube bans Nick Fuentes, funds Young Turks

https://twitter.com/jamestulp/status/1228427730091466752 (first two inline links added by me):

> In the same week, Google owned YouTube has announced they are funding the left wing Young Turks and deplatforming the right wing @NickJFuentes.

Alisa at 9:36 PM on February 14, 2020 | #15459 | reply | quote

#15458 #15459 Good info. Sad.

curi at 11:30 PM on February 14, 2020 | #15461 | reply | quote

curi at 11:32 PM on February 14, 2020 | #15462 | reply | quote

#15462 Do you disagree with Shapiro because he is falsely insinuating that Fuentes threatened him, or for some other reason?

oh my god it's turpentine at 3:00 AM on February 15, 2020 | #15463 | reply | quote

I disagree that Fuentes is *an absolute disgusting shitshow*, and I particularly disagree with attacking Feuntes like that in the context of him being deplatformed. An evil disaster happened! All civilized people should be worried! But Shapiro enthusiastically social-signals how much he hates the victim while offering only a conditional, no-profanity-or-hate polite disagreement with YouTube.

I have no idea what's going on with the stuff about threats. Have not been following. I didn't read it as having anything to do with Fuentes threatening Shapiro. I assumed threats is YT's baseless excuse and Shapiro is saying if that is indeed baseless then YT is wrong, which is quite mild next to 1) how bad political deplatforming is 2) what he said about Fuentes for, afaik, thought crimes along the lines of being anti-immigration.

I've vaguely heard that Fuentes is anti-semitic. I have no idea if that's true. Even if it is, it doesn't explain Shapiro's treatment of him or the condemnation of his viewpoints in general rather than a particular error.

curi at 2:47 PM on February 15, 2020 | #15466 | reply | quote

Wikipedia and some article say Fuentes was banned from YT for violating their hate speech policies, not for threats, so idk what Shapiro is talking about re threats.

Maybe it's just cuz the YT form letter, besides mentioning hate speech, also mentions inciting or glorifying violence. But it doesn't accuse Fuentes of that, it just lists it as one of the things he might have done. They don't like to be specific about why they ban people. https://twitter.com/NickJFuentes/status/1228390570986483713 Maybe Shapiro misunderstood that or wanted to smear Fuentes.

The same sorts of accusations are made against Michelle Malkin and many others who are anti-immigration Trump supporters.

Apparently Ben Shapiro was a significant force in getting Fuentes deplatformed in the first place:


Dunno details. I don't really follow Shapiro or Fuentes. I already knew Shapiro was a bastard though.

curi at 2:55 PM on February 15, 2020 | #15467 | reply | quote


Apparently Shapiro has been fucking with Fuentes for a while – and being evasive about the actual issues – to the point that Fuentes confronted him IRL.

curi at 2:58 PM on February 15, 2020 | #15468 | reply | quote


I've liked some stuff Paul Joseph Watson said in the past.

curi at 2:59 PM on February 15, 2020 | #15469 | reply | quote

#15466 I agree that Shapiro shouldn't be qualifying his condemnation of Fuentes' ban. Also, if Fuentes was actually threatening Shapiro then why wouldn't Shapiro go to the police?

I think Fuentes is actually anti-Semitic cuz of this clip:


oh my god it's turpentine at 12:05 AM on February 16, 2020 | #15471 | reply | quote

#15471 Ugh, awful vid.

The guy who made that tweet thread of Fuentes saying awful stuff is unreasonable but that doesn't matter to evaluating the vids where Fuentes speaks for himself (it didn't look edited and was long enough I don't think it was clipped out of context).


> Fuentes is a Racist:

> Fuentes was at the Charlottesville white supremacy and Nazi march

Going to Charlottesville at all proves you're racist?

This vid is awful too (has a jump cut in the middle but doesn't seem misleading):


Says e.g. blacks being forced to drink out of separate water fountains was no big deal.


There's more in that thread, and it sucks, but none of it compares to the Green New Deal, which is far worse. Democrats are more despicable, quite openly, about many things, and don't get marginalized for it, let alone deplatformed. Lots of them are openly racist and anti-semitic too. BDS and other lefty anti-semitism is currently a larger threat to Jews and Israel than the less-popular and less-political-policy-affecting Fuentes-style anti-semitism.

Fuentes is doing this stuff partly to get attention, partly for in-group social signaling, partly to break taboos and stand up to political correctness, partly perhaps because he doesn't know about a better package deal of ideas to select for himself (with requirements like not racist against whites, pro-American, not letting in millions of third worlders to change America, etc.). Fuentes might change a bit if he got more mainstream. Or not. I don't know. With people like AOC, Hillary or Bernie, we can't even give them that maybe.

Just this morning I saw on Twitter that Richard Dawkins basically agrees with "race realist" views on IQ and eugenics. When lefty scientists don't know how to deny it, how is Fuentes supposed to know better?



> It’s one thing to deplore eugenics on ideological, political, moral grounds. It’s quite another to conclude that it wouldn’t work in practice. Of course it would. It works for cows, horses, pigs, dogs & roses. Why on earth wouldn’t it work for humans? Facts ignore ideology.

Wrong and he has no Paths Forward, but the mainstream "scientific" part of our culture doesn't know better. The main opposition to this is the religious view that humans are special, not the BoI view about universal knowledge creators.

If Dawkins is right, of course race and various intellectual traits correlate today.

I saw the Dawkins tweet because it was retweeted by the anti-racist, not-at-all-Nazi or "alt right", smart and broadly reasonable @stucchio

curi at 11:39 AM on February 16, 2020 | #15473 | reply | quote


In this one, in last 20 seconds, Fuentes says ethnicity and race are what matter, not ideology and ideas.


This one is pro-Mussolini.

curi at 11:55 AM on February 16, 2020 | #15474 | reply | quote

Facebook/Instagram Deplatforms McInnes, Soph, Milo and more


> Censored.tv, formerly FreeSpeech.tv, founded by Vice co-founder and Proud Boy founder Gavin McInnes, has been banned across all Facebook-owned platforms, namely Facebook and Instagram.

> The platform, which has roughly 15,000 monthly subscribers, is popular for its hosts, who have mostly been banned from popular platforms like Twitter and YouTube—including Gavin McInnes, Milo Yiannopolous, Joe Biggs, Laura Loomer, and Soph.

(Soph was formerly LtCorbis.)

FB/IG censors links to the site in addition to kicking those people (and their associates like a show engineer) off FB/IG. You can't even PM a link to your friend.

curi at 12:00 PM on February 16, 2020 | #15475 | reply | quote

People getting deplatformed from government healthcare in the UK:


> NHS staff can refuse to treat racist or sexist patients under new rules

> The NHS will soon bar discriminatory patients from non-critical care - powers that currently only cover aggression or violence.

It's not currently about what you said on Twitter. It's if you say something "racist" to the NHS staff while trying to get care, then they can just tell you to leave if you don't have a medical emergency.

This shouldn't affect reasonable people much because you're already polite to your doctor right? But some people are gonna get kicked out over ~nothing or over the doctor being egregiously unreasoanble. There will be bad cases. And some people will be kicked out over acting a little dumb. It's going to disproportionately harm lower/working class people who are less polite in general. And sometimes people will be chatting in a friendly, social way instead of only politely saying relevant info – tons of people do social chit chat with tons of people they meet – and that chatting is sometimes going to involve some politics or something (especially with the massive overreach to politicize most of life) and SJWs are triggered so fucking easily in ways that are hard to predict for non-experts (and sometimes unpredictable to anyone). So bad things will happen.

And this is a slippery slope to much, much worse rules – if "racist" remarks are associated with denial of healthcare, if that becomes standard and legitimate, then it's going to spread to what you say on social media not just what you say IRL (initially maybe just tweets about your doctor, then maybe tweets about the NHS in general, then more).

The government promises to take care of people, it's a nanny/paternalistic state that controls healthcare, but then it's imposing conditions about thoughtcrime. Very nasty, worrying stuff.

curi at 12:18 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15491 | reply | quote


> How NYC performer Martina Markota was blacklisted for being a Trump voter

> She worked for some of the city’s biggest nightlife names, but once she was outed as a Trump supporter, they started a campaign against her to ruin her life and career.

> They wrote countless articles about her online, accusing her of being a Nazi and white supremacist.

>Her agent even said no venue would work with her again due to the pressure.

Anonymous at 12:37 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15496 | reply | quote


> Third World Quarterly publishes “The Case for Colonialism” leading to censorship demands

> Demands for retraction, to fire the journal editors, even to fire author and to revoke his PhD.

> Members of the editorial board have threatened to resign. Some have threatened to boycott the journal entirely (even not to cite it). Cries of racism and ‘white supremacy’ dominating academia have naturally followed.

Anonymous at 12:40 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15497 | reply | quote


> On Sunday night, when Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince announced in a blog post that the company was terminating service for 8chan, the response was nearly universal: Finally.

> It was hard to disagree: it was on 8chan — which was created after complaints that the extremely lightly-moderated anonymous-based forum 4chan was too heavy-handed — that a suspected terrorist gunman posted a rant explaining his actions before killing 20 people in El Paso. This was the third such incident this year: the terrorist gunmen in Christchurch, New Zealand and Poway, California did the same; 8chan celebrated all of them.

> To state the obvious, it is hard to think of a more reprehensible community than 8chan. And, as many were quick to point out, it was hardly the sort of site that Cloudflare wanted to be associated with as they prepared for a reported IPO. Which again raises the question: what took Cloudflare so long?

pro deplatforming article.

Anonymous at 1:46 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15510 | reply | quote


> David Horowitz Slams Twitter Suspension

3min vid

Anonymous at 2:26 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15517 | reply | quote

#15496 Geez. That was in June, 2017. I did a search for her name and found that Chase Bank shut down Martina Markota’s bank account in early 2019.

Alisa at 6:59 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15520 | reply | quote

#15520 :(((((((((((

curi at 7:02 PM on February 18, 2020 | #15521 | reply | quote

The Radical Youtube Algorithm MYTH The lies about how YT's algorithm spreads white supremacism are part of the excuses for deplatforming.

The DOWNFALL of Youtube talks about YT manipulating what videos are trending. Correlates a lot with being made by corporate media, not views/likes/etc. And they suppress people they don't like such as PewDiePie who is largely prevented from being promoted as trending in the US. (Twitter btw has a similar trending promotional feature which they bias and manipulate.)

Cancel Culture - A Social Plague covers 3 examples of deplatforming

Youtube is Deleting Iconic Videos - Idiotic New Policies discusses YT's censorship policies re so-called harassment and hate speech. YT also says they can ban or censor you even when no specific video or statement violates the rules. Reminds me of people criticizing my tone/style while having zero quotes they object to.

curi at 2:11 PM on February 20, 2020 | #15562 | reply | quote

I knew Reddit had quarantined r/TheRedPill a while ago (maybe a couple years). Just saw that r/MGTOW is quarantined now.

curi at 4:17 PM on February 23, 2020 | #15598 | reply | quote

#15598 The_Donald has ~790k subs and is quarantined

Anonymous at 4:42 PM on February 23, 2020 | #15600 | reply | quote

#15600 Sounds like you may not realize TRP has 1,724,546 subscribers. It's big!

Anonymous at 4:47 PM on February 23, 2020 | #15601 | reply | quote

> #15600 Sounds like you may not realize TRP has 1,724,546 subscribers. It's big!

Indeed I did not realize that

Anonymous at 4:50 PM on February 23, 2020 | #15602 | reply | quote


VDare got some physical space to hold IRL meetings. They mention deplatforming as a reason:

> Having a space where we can meet and share ideas without fear of deplatforming will make a difference so material it is hard to overstate. And for that we will be forever grateful.

Hurrah for private property

Anonymous at 7:18 PM on February 26, 2020 | #15649 | reply | quote

The_donald subreddit had a bunch of their mods removed (for supposedly approving stuff violating the Reddit content policy) and reddit is soliciting new people to sign up as mods for the_donald subreddit.

The_donald subreddit has already been quarantined for some time but apparently Reddit decided that wasn't enough and is escalating. Members of the subreddit see this as an attack by Reddit and some are fleeing to https://thedonald.win/

Anonymous at 6:43 AM on February 27, 2020 | #15654 | reply | quote


House of Sunny Podcast


Anonymous at 11:38 AM on February 28, 2020 | #15669 | reply | quote

#15669 I posted a comment on that video:

We can take action against deplatforming using only currently existing laws that would exist in a minimal nightwatchman state too. They commit blatant fraud and false advertising. That's already illegal and should be illegal. They lie constantly to customers about their policies. As Objectivists, we don't have to either put up with it or advocate more regulation and government control; that's a false choice. I wrote about this at https://curi.us/2243-deplatforming-and-fraud

curi at 11:53 AM on February 28, 2020 | #15670 | reply | quote

CPAC 2020: James O'Keefe full speech 16min. Good summary info about Veritas insiders.

curi at 5:15 PM on February 29, 2020 | #15691 | reply | quote


> Why Portland Police Stand By Passively When Leftists Riot

This deplatforms people from IRL spaces, among other downsides.

Anonymous at 7:20 PM on February 29, 2020 | #15692 | reply | quote


> For those who still think "threats to free speech" is a right wing fantasy: Prof Selina Todd is noted Oxford historian of women & the working class, due to speak today at a celebration of 50 Years of Women's Lib. At 6pm last night she was no-platformed .

Anonymous at 7:21 PM on February 29, 2020 | #15693 | reply | quote


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/09/technology/amazon-bookstore-nazis.html :

> Mr. Delzer, the proprietor of a secondhand store in Nashville called Defunct Books, has a different view. “If Amazon executives are so proud of their moral high ground, they should issue memos about which books they are banning instead of keeping sellers and readers in the dark,” he said.

Regarding the above quote, anonymous wrote (in #15445):

> It's a self-contained argument. If they are doing something good, which they are rightly proud of, they should be happy to provide details of what they're doing instead of hiding it. Hiding it indicates they think people disapprove and that they're hiding from that debate/judgment because they lack arguments.

I think Amazon is wrong to ban books, but I disagree that the fact that Amazon isn't more transparent about which books they ban constitutes a *self-contained* argument that they're not "proud of their moral high ground".

I expect that Amazon believes, correctly, that publishing a list of the books they ban would draw more attention to those books -- something they don't want to happen.

Consider how a social media site that removes child abuse imagery doesn't describe the individual images that were removed. The reason they don't give details is not because the site owners think people will disapprove of what they did.

Or consider how a blog owner takes down a post that doxes someone. Just because they don't provide much detail about the contents of the removed post doesn't mean they're not proud of the removal.

For the argument about Amazon to be self-contained, it would need to explain how the situation with Amazon is different from the two examples I gave.

Alisa at 7:49 PM on March 8, 2020 | #15812 | reply | quote

> For the argument about Amazon to be self-contained, it would need to explain how the situation with Amazon is different from the two examples I gave.

It'd need that to be self-contained and (more) complete. There is an (incomplete) argument presented there in a self-contained way.

Anonymous at 7:53 PM on March 8, 2020 | #15813 | reply | quote


> New York Post journalist Jon Levine was locked out of his Twitter account earlier today and forced to delete several tweets in connection to his article exposing the ultra-wealthy background of socialist YouTuber Carlos Maza.

> Twitter first locked Levine out of his account this morning, but after inquiries from the journalist and his followers, the platform restored access to his account, claiming that the lockout had been an “error” and that his tweets about Maza did not violate the platform’s policies.

Anonymous at 3:56 PM on March 9, 2020 | #15821 | reply | quote

Around 7:30 this guy, who has 414k subscribers, says he's been demonetized for a month straight (all his new vids get demonetized fast):


I think he's an American who lived in China for over 10 years, was kinda naive but eventually figured out China is awful.

The Chinese government harassed him about making videos ... and now YouTube does too.

Anonymous at 11:31 PM on March 11, 2020 | #15867 | reply | quote


6000 follower account tweets tons of stats, data, news and criticism re 1) Elon Musk 2) coronavirus

I started following them a week ago. Even little guys are often prevented from growing quite early on if they start getting some attention.

curi at 12:08 PM on March 17, 2020 | #16010 | reply | quote

Right Wingers Banned From Food Delivery During Pandemic


> Uber eats is offering a zero dollar delivery fee during corona virus to people so they don’t have to leave their homes.

> I’m banned on Uber Eats.

> Here is yet another example of big tech deciding who is and isn’t worthy of receiving food during a global pandemic.

> In other words, if you can’t leave your home and you need food delivery, big tech thinks you deserve to starve if they don’t like your political opinions.

> This type of discrimination by big tech companies needs to end. It’s actually criminal to silence and deny people resources and information at this point in time when we are in the middle of a global pandemic and people are being federally ordered to social distance.

curi at 1:47 PM on March 17, 2020 | #16015 | reply | quote

YouTube demonetizes videos on big channels, like thunderf00t and Upper Echelon Gamers, if they mention coronavirus. Sometimes even if they don't mention it. laowhy86 (an American who lived in China for over a decade and does journalism and China-related videos) has had everything demonetized for over two months.

Twitter has a new policy of censoring information that contradicts what the authorities say. So if some retarded CDC spokesman says we don't need to wear masks, you could get suspended or something for saying masks help.

curi at 6:05 PM on March 21, 2020 | #16088 | reply | quote




> During the 1970s and early 1980s, the majority of NPR funding came from the federal government.

Apparently it doesn't receive much government funding today, but the legacy of government funding still made a big impact on how it's perceived and helped it get big.

curi at 11:46 AM on March 25, 2020 | #16136 | reply | quote


> The news media have begun to impose blackouts on President Donald Trump’s coronavirus briefings to the American public. On Monday evening, multiple news outlets cut away from the president’s briefing before he finished.

> Far-left outlets like the Washington Post, NBC News, the Atlantic, CNN, the Boston Globe, etc., want to put an end to broadcasting Trump’s briefings; the idea being to block Americans from hearing directly from their president so these massive media corporations can censor whatever the president says that they do not approve of.

> Just writing the above sounds preposterous, like something outlandish, like something out of a dystopian novel where mega-corporations rule over everything.

> For those of you who doubt this, here is the Washington Post:

> > Radical change is necessary. The cable networks and other news organizations that are taking the president’s briefings as live feeds should stop doing so.

> > Should they cover the news that’s produced in them? Of course. Thoroughly and relentlessly — with context and fact-checking built in to every step and every stage.

> Here is far-left CNN staffer Jake Tapper:

> > If the president is not capable of leading stably and effectually, he should, at least, for his own reputation, for the good of the country, stop making things worse and consider leaving the podium to others.

> And now the blackouts have begun.

curi at 4:16 PM on March 25, 2020 | #16140 | reply | quote

This is the kind of material the Cultural Elites don't want you to see and deplatform:


curi at 5:31 PM on March 26, 2020 | #16157 | reply | quote

Anonymous at 7:07 PM on March 27, 2020 | #16167 | reply | quote

#16167 Horrifying. Thanks for sharing.

curi at 8:02 PM on March 27, 2020 | #16170 | reply | quote

VDare, which has had tons of deplatforming issues, bought a castle ⚔️🏰🏹so they could have their conferences in peace.

This article talks about some SPLC guy demonizing VDare.


SPLC guy says:

> The castle is also securely embedded on a hill and surrounded by iron gates, making it hard for antiracist demonstrators to access it should VDARE decide to host a conference there. Well-attended counterdemonstrations have had a deleterious impact on the racist right’s ability to organize in public in recent years, making secure locations appealing to white nationalists like those linked to VDARE.

The SPLC's tweet about his article got a bunch of threatening replies. Read the article for details. Just taking one example, somebody tweeted:

> Aluminum powder mixed with iron oxide.

> Or Gallium if you're trying to be sneaky.

VDare says:

> That’s what we must call a really serious threat. The first part (aluminum powder and iron oxide) is the recipe for thermite, as used in arson and sabotage. And gallium reacts with aluminum in peculiar ways.

> I don’t know all the details, but I’m not trained in metallurgy, as “Dedwrekka” is. His Twitter profile reads “Questioning White Bio-male. He/Him/Yall. Veteran. Animation, Woodworking, Metalworking, Sculpting, Makeing".

> It doesn’t take much in the way of internet sleuthing to establish that this guy threatening us with thermite is a college student in North Texas named Aaron, who is studying metalcrafts.

> I don’t want to “doxx” him in the usual sense. But if the FBI or other law enforcement agencies are interested, I’ll forward them the details.

> *And they should be*. This is a “terroristic threat” *across state lines*.

> This is just one more instance of the danger of the SPLC, which as Hayden notes in his article, has been targeting us specifically for almost twenty years.

Some disturbing things going on here:

1. VDare has had to deal with enough problems hosting their peaceful events that they felt they needed to buy a literal castle and rely on medieval physical security technology to protect them from mobs.

2. The mob is being whipped up by activists and issuing very specific threats about what criminal acts they might engage in.

3. The police will probably do nothing to stop this.

The situation is bad :-(

Anonymous at 4:18 AM on March 29, 2020 | #16181 | reply | quote

Twitter seems to have deleted tweets from the President of Brazil related to coronavirus


Anonymous at 7:13 PM on March 29, 2020 | #16191 | reply | quote


> [email protected] Tweeted about this story of a man who had Coronavirus that said Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin saved his life.

> Twitter locked her account for it and made her delete it.

> Man who had Coronavirus and says Experimental Drugs saved his life says it’s “Truly Un-American” for people to not want the drugs to work because President Trump mentioned them.

curi at 8:16 PM on March 30, 2020 | #16207 | reply | quote

(This is an unmoderated discussion forum. Discussion info.)