Stefan Molyneux Youtube Account and 2k Reddit Subs Terminated Today..

[eddie13]

libel, and of course it isn't.

The data is so white supremacist, it even places Asians and Jews above whites in average IQ...
Please..

"This proves whites are the best but the asians and jews are even better".. Sooo "white supremacist", lol..
I think not..
Think what you want..



BTW Stef has a Masters Degree in history from the uni of Toronto focusing on history of philosophy..


Check out wikipedia on Bitcointalk..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcointalk  "Traded accounts were reportedly used to scam people." <not biased at all
Man they are soo good they remove all the work done on it by our community members here.. Look at the edit history to see all the deletes..

BITCOIN VS. GOLD: THE FUTURE OF MONEY - PETER SCHIFF DEBATES STEFAN MOLYNEUX

[1714765081]

1714765081

[1714765081]

1714765081

[eddie13]

Nitpicking..
That shit is YEARS old anyway.. Old news..
It is nowhere near one of his main focuses.. Just something to cry about..

It's true though IMO

[Spendulus]

the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority

Right.. So anti-white racism is still just perfectly fine with reddit..
Perfect for the narrative..

And who defines what?

One might be racial type A and for a radius of a hundred miles, find the population was 90% B, C, or D. And in another location, B, C or D have that issue. I can think of having lived in three such areas myself, each with a different far-majority race. Never even considered it a problem. Never.

Reddit, google, Youtube and the like would apply a ruleset concocted in San Francisco and Los Angeles to the entire US, and the entire world. Might be a problem there?

[Spendulus]

...Nobody should be forced to give him a platform if they don't want to.

Actually, yes they should, if they are operating as a non-editorial public data utility.

Bit of the "have your cake and eat it too" problem here.

[suchmoon]

You say that, but then they get denied services like DDoS protection, hosting, email, banking, etc. I guess they should just reinvent the internet if they want to speak huh?

LOL. I've always wondered what kind of person would be the reason for a "no shirt no shoes no service" sign. Now I know.

I mean you can always sue the providers of these services for discrimination if you really have your shoes and your shirt on and they're just being mean to you. Or use Tor. Or start an AM radio station.

Actually, yes they should, if they are operating as a non-editorial public data utility.

TECSHARE doesn't know the answer to this but maybe you do:

[...] it still wouldn't work if users and/or advertisers leave the platform as you can see now happening with Facebook. So then what - are you gonna force Nike and Starbucks to pay for the content you like?

[eddie13]

I'm not sure what to think about these companies using selective censorship like they are.. I can kinda see both sides of the coin legally.. But I still hate them.. 
Too much government involved either way imo.. If it was an actual free market I wouldn't give a shit..

No question the big tech companies are teaming up to influence the election, influence politics, and influence public opinion in general..

[TECSHARE]

I'm not sure what to think about these companies using selective censorship like they are.. I can kinda see both sides of the coin legally.. But I still hate them..  
Too much government involved either way imo.. If it was an actual free market I wouldn't give a shit..

No question the big tech companies are teaming up to influence the election, influence politics, and influence public opinion in general..

No, you got it wrong, corporate oligarchical totalitarianism is the free market, an ideological monoculture is diversity, and book burning is providing a public platform! Totalitarianism is great, as long at it is our totalitarianism. We are too dumb to realize we are also on the same ramp to the slaughter house once this is accepted, but that's ok because we are progressive therefore we want to destroy everything anyway because we hate ourselves, the world, and you should too. Collective suicide is great. Its fer yer health.

[Spendulus]

Here's the problem: he's not a scientist and taking his words as "scientific stuff" is an intellectual failure on the part of those who do. He's a social media personality and professional speaker. Nobody thinks science is "white supremacy." Actual scientists have debunked the majority of his claims and the rest of us can see them for what they actually are: inflammatory nonsense designed to give white supremacists (his primary audience) a boner.

Here's what the professor Molyneux based much of his "research" on has to say about him:[/b]

"These people are just coattail-hangers. They don't have anything new to contribute to the debate - they just try and make the debate spectacular. I've invested a huge amount of time on this issue, read all the best thinkers, and wouldn't think it would be worth my time."
..
"I've never seen him in the literature as having made any supplementary points to the points Jensen made, and his reputation is such that one suspects he oversimplifies the debate. You have a limited amount of time in your life, and if you look at what every nut says about every issue, you'll never have time to do anything else."
....

But the very same professor that Flynn got the data from, in the very same article you quote from, has a bit more to say.

"...if there's free speech, some people will be naïve enough to endorse views I think are [not rational]… If you were to tell me over the phone today the theory of evolution was wrong and every little fish was created by God, I would think, 'How pathetic.' But I certainly wouldn't try and shut you up. I might think to myself, 'I hope he doesn't get hold of some naïve young person who'll believe him, but I wouldn't stop you.'"

HE SPECIFICALLY DISAGREES WITH YOU AND REDDIT that Molyneux should be suppressed.

[eddie13]

Here's the problem: he's not a scientist and taking his words as "scientific stuff" is an intellectual failure on the part of those who do. He's a social media personality and professional speaker. Nobody thinks science is "white supremacy." Actual scientists have debunked the majority of his claims and the rest of us can see them for what they actually are: inflammatory nonsense designed to give white supremacists (his primary audience) a boner.

Here's what the professor Molyneux based much of his "research" on has to say about him:[/b]

"These people are just coattail-hangers. They don't have anything new to contribute to the debate - they just try and make the debate spectacular. I've invested a huge amount of time on this issue, read all the best thinkers, and wouldn't think it would be worth my time."
..
"I've never seen him in the literature as having made any supplementary points to the points Jensen made, and his reputation is such that one suspects he oversimplifies the debate. You have a limited amount of time in your life, and if you look at what every nut says about every issue, you'll never have time to do anything else."
....

But the very same professor that Flynn got the data from, in the very same article you quote from, has a bit more to say.

"...if there's free speech, some people will be naïve enough to endorse views I think are [not rational]… If you were to tell me over the phone today the theory of evolution was wrong and every little fish was created by God, I would think, 'How pathetic.' But I certainly wouldn't try and shut you up. I might think to myself, 'I hope he doesn't get hold of some naïve young person who'll believe him, but I wouldn't stop you.'"

HE SPECIFICALLY DISAGREES WITH YOU AND REDDIT that Molyneux should be suppressed.

The article from nutildah also says such things as...
"no one should listen to anything Stefan Molyneux has to say on the topic. But not necessarily because he's wrong."
And..
"I'm a socialist"




Stef's discussion of the topic stemmed in the first place from this thing that happened...

"The father of DNA says he still believes in a link between race, intelligence. His lab just stripped him of his titles."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/01/14/father-dna-says-he-still-believes-link-between-race-intelligence-his-lab-just-stripped-him-his-titles/

Father of DNA stripped of honorary titles after saying he still believes in link between race and intelligence
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/father-of-dna-stripped-of-honorary-titles-after-says-he-still-believes-in-link-between-race-and-intelligence

A New York laboratory has cut its ties with James Watson, the Nobel prize-winning scientist who helped discover the structure of DNA, over “reprehensible” comments in which he said race and intelligence are connected.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/13/james-watson-scientist-honors-stripped-reprehensible-race-comments


I think he might be a real scientist... nutildah?

We were talking about censorship right?
Stripped of his titles over inconvenient truth.. A fine example of censorship..

Wrongthink..

[suchmoon]

I'm not sure what to think about these companies using selective censorship like they are.. I can kinda see both sides of the coin legally.. But I still hate them.. 
Too much government involved either way imo.. If it was an actual free market I wouldn't give a shit..

No question the big tech companies are teaming up to influence the election, influence politics, and influence public opinion in general..

What's the end game? Why would big companies go against the big-business-friendly tax-cutting anti-regulation president?

They've been happy to allow all sorts of nutjobbery until recently... seems like a shift in public opinion is happening and forcing the tech giants to rethink their business model and not the other way around. If they could make more money by allowing those pseudo scientists and other bullshit to continue - I don't doubt they would.

[TECSHARE]

I'm not sure what to think about these companies using selective censorship like they are.. I can kinda see both sides of the coin legally.. But I still hate them..  
Too much government involved either way imo.. If it was an actual free market I wouldn't give a shit..

No question the big tech companies are teaming up to influence the election, influence politics, and influence public opinion in general..

What's the end game? Why would big companies go against the big-business-friendly tax-cutting anti-regulation president?

They've been happy to allow all sorts of nutjobbery until recently... seems like a shift in public opinion is happening and forcing the tech giants to rethink their business model and not the other way around. If they could make more money by allowing those pseudo scientists and other bullshit to continue - I don't doubt they would.

Public opinion isn't just shifting, these companies are the ones shifting it. You think this is just about right vs left. This is about the establishment vs everyone. It is one big club, and you ain't in it regardless of your delusions otherwise. You are just a tool being used until they build the system up enough to the point that they can dispose of you like a used jizz rag, then you will join the 2nd class citizens in being silenced.

Of course then it will be too late to do anything about it by the time you realize how fucking retarded you were. Then there will be no one to resist it with you because you helped silence the ones who would have, because you were fooled into thinking they were your enemy. You are allowing your personal dislike of ideas you disagree with blind you to the fact that you are building your own cage.

[suchmoon]

Public opinion isn't just shifting, these companies are the ones shifting it. You think this is just about right vs left. This is about the establishment vs everyone. It is one big club, and you ain't in it regardless of your delusions otherwise. You are just a tool being used until they build the system up enough to the point that they can dispose of you like a used jizz rag, then you will join the 2nd class citizens in being silenced.

Of course then it will be too late to do anything about it by the time you realize how fucking retarded you were. Then there will be no one to resist it with you because you helped silence the ones who would have, because you were fooled into thinking they were your enemy. You are allowing your personal dislike of ideas you disagree with blind you to the fact that you are building your own cage.

Thank you for explaining what I do and how I think but your useless rant doesn't answer anything in my post, which wasn't even addressed to you to begin with. I think at this point it's safe to say that you're wasting your time trying to scare me with your doomsday shit but I'll happily pretend to be impressed by it if that scratches your itch.

[TECSHARE]

Thank you for explaining what I do and how I think but your useless rant doesn't answer anything in my post, which wasn't even addressed to you to begin with. I think at this point it's safe to say that you're wasting your time trying to scare me with your doomsday shit but I'll happily pretend to be impressed by it if that scratches your itch.

It was in fact an answer, just not one you want to hear. I am not trying to scare you, I am well aware your head is lodged far too firmly up your own ass to have sensible fear over the results of what you are promoting. I was warning about how these kinds of activities would result in civil war in the US for years, and you mocked the idea, and now that this reality is manifesting you turn around and say I WANT and was PROMOTING civil war.

You can lie to everyone else, you can lie to yourself, but none of that is going to protect you from the results of your lies. Maybe you will have the nuts to remember that idiot you thought I was actually turned out to be you when it does come to pass, but I doubt it.

[suchmoon]

now that this reality is manifesting

What is manifesting? Civil war?

[Spendulus]

...
I think he might be a real scientist... nutildah?

We were talking about censorship right?
Stripped of his titles over inconvenient truth.. A fine example of censorship..

Wrongthink..

Hello, world of Lysenko!

Science subjugated to politics. Truth is lies, freedom is chains.

History tells us this does not end well.

[eddie13]

What's the end game?

Ultimate power over the peasant classes..

They've been happy to allow all sorts of nutjobbery until recently... seems like a shift in public opinion is happening and forcing the tech giants to rethink their business model and not the other way around.

Nah... They are just always upping their propaganda and censorship game more and more..
Google search results have been biased forever..
Youtube changed their search algorithm a long time ago to promote only "mainstream" news..
Facebook bans anything they can get away with that isn't progressive..

It's been going on for a very long time..

[suchmoon]

What's the end game?

Ultimate power over the peasant classes..

Seems very nebulous. ~10-15 years ago the social media as we know it didn't really exist. Was it created specifically to control the peasants or did it somehow get subverted? As far as I can tell people voluntarily join it and even give up their privacy for whatever it is they get from it. I would understand advocating against that loss of privacy and against the use of social media in general, but instead we have this bizarre desire even by conservatives to get in on the whole scheme. Something doesn't compute here.

[TECSHARE]

Seems very nebulous. ~10-15 years ago the social media as we know it didn't really exist. Was it created specifically to control the peasants or did it somehow get subverted? As far as I can tell people voluntarily join it and even give up their privacy for whatever it is they get from it. I would understand advocating against that loss of privacy and against the use of social media in general, but instead we have this bizarre desire even by conservatives to get in on the whole scheme. Something doesn't compute here.

Traps work best with bait.

[eddie13]

What's the end game?

Ultimate power over the peasant classes..

Seems very nebulous. ~10-15 years ago the social media as we know it didn't really exist. Was it created specifically to control the peasants or did it somehow get subverted? As far as I can tell people voluntarily join it and even give up their privacy for whatever it is they get from it. I would understand advocating against that loss of privacy and against the use of social media in general, but instead we have this bizarre desire even by conservatives to get in on the whole scheme. Something doesn't compute here.

People are brainless NPC attention whores addicted to likes.. Most people are completely oblivious sheep..
Look at what tiktok is doing to our young generation.. Sexualizing them, indoctrinating them, getting them addicted to the likes..

The NSA/CIA have big interest in social media and big tech companies.. Something like they "never imagined people would voluntarily carry tracking devices in their pocket everywhere they go and update the internet about everything they do including current pictures"... Can't find the quote..
Like the Chinese social credit score system.. They spy on everything..
Those seeking ultimate power love the big data.. Those in charge of big data know what they have..
Always seeking more ways to get more data.. It's part of their arsenal..

Social media is also a very valuable tool for everyone to use to disseminate information and advertise..
With things like elections it is also very valuable to conservatives to advertise and get their messages out.. Get seen..
It is even valuable to anarchist philosophers to spread their message.. To have an audience..
If you are going to commit your life to speaking about libertarianism, or whatever, you need the views for ads and/or donations so you can make a living doing it.. Life isn't free..

It's the best way of reaching out to the masses, no matter your message, and the big tech companies are onboard with pushing narratives because they want in on the power side and they make government deals to get tax breaks and such..

Facebook isn't going to get a tax hike from leftists if they cooperate with them..
These big companies probably don't pay much of shit in taxes..

[suchmoon]

~

Seems very fucked up to (1) recognize that social media is evil but (2) use it to indoctrinate the "sheep" as long as it's the "correct" doctrine. Would it be ok to run ponzi schemes or sell meth to finance conservative campaigns?