I wonder if I can still listen to Erika and Wagner. Or watch Zeon AMVs But yeah, I could understand if company is taking a stance against politics in general (like Nintendo who banned trans levels in Smash online, since the game is not a soapbox for ANYONE). After all I use it as entertainment platform, but this is not what they're doing. It'll become the very thing it meant to counter: another shitty MSM platform with boring content. |
--ALEX-- said: What about MuH FrEe sPeEcH?!? Keep whining and crying Right Wingers....your tears are delicious. You have mental issues. |
 |
Aldnox said: Tapertrain said: I'd love for all queer people to have the freedom of expression to be who they are and be proud of it. However they wouldn't love for straight white people to have the same thing, which I take issue with since I'm for actual equality and inclusion.Is the freedom to be homophobic not enough for you. Do you Want to throw gay people in jail? Do you want to be able to advocate for the extermination of the LGBTQ community? Yes, as we all know being straight was illegal until some years ago and it still is illegal in many countries. |
Fate_Saber88 said: I don't support any of those ideas but it's getting out of hand. Remember the NZ mosque shootings? Youtube deleted some Euro beat songs from Initial D or blocked comments just because the shooter played gas gas gas while attempting to evade. Are you sure that's the reason? YT is deleting lots of eurobeat songs in general lately, the Super Eurobeat label became pretty strict when it comes to copyright violation. |
Ryuk9428 said: It's ultimately a dehumanization tactic. You don't have to engage with, challenge, critically think about or perhaps even concede to Nazis or white supremacists. It's akin to a Christian being told to hear out Satan's side of the story. It's blasphemy in this secular religion known as modern day liberalism.The left loves to conflate everyone who doesn't agree with them as nazis and white supremacists despite how rare those people really are. The fact is though, Youtube is using this "extremist views" thing the same way that old communist regimes used the term "re-education camps." Its a way to pretty up the language to disguise the fact that they will be removing anybody who has right-wing views. The left is so insecure about their ideology that they are desperately trying to stamp out anyone who disagrees with them because deep down, they know a lot of what they say is bullcrap and unrealistic and they don't want anybody to be able to say that because rational people will realize that most of what they say does not match up with reality so they won't support them. It's even more apparent when you look at how many of the replies on this thread skip all nuance and jump straight to the most autistic logical conclusions of the worst case scenario. "Hey, people should be allowed to express their views, even if you don't like what they say." "WHAT, so you're saying that non-whites should be ROUNDED UP and GASSED??? Are you saying LGBT people should all be shipped to BRUNEI and stoned to death?!?!! Is white supremacy and fascism all you think about?!?!1111" |
 |
| Americans being hypocritical retards? Who woulda thunk it! |
    |
WatchTillTandava said: NthDegree said: No offense, but in that case you'd have to be mad at almost any club or association... I'm pretty sure most of them have non-discriminatory clauses in their rules, yet nobody accuses them of limiting the freedom of speech of the members. Why should YT any different? Me thinks several people here are overreacting to what amounts to YT just stating the obvious. Well, YouTube is a social media platform for sharing user content, so naturally the type of people using it, the motives they have for participating, and the type of content is a lot more diverse than, say an exclusive tennis club, country club, or other other clubs or organizations centered around one or a more limited set of activities. The type of people who create videos will be almost as varied and diverse as the type of people who use computers in the first place. In any case though, I did say in a post further up the thread that there is no promise of, right to, or expectation of free speech with these mediums. Of course it's a given that any private entity has a large say in setting their own rules, policies, terms of use, and membership criteria. Just because they "can" do something though doesn't mean those who oppose it shouldn't criticize or push back against in some way. It's like if any random company raised the prices on their products. Just because they can doesn't mean they should or that it won't be met with criticism and opposition from those who have a stake in it. How does the content being more diverse make discrimination any more acceptable than in a tennis club? I'm not seeing your argument here. Just because they are entitled to their opinion doesn't mean I'm not allowed to call the said opinion a dumb overreaction that makes no sense. The freedom of speech goes both ways. |
Veronin said: Vox always makes anti-ccp videos[just check their any china related video],spouse america geo-politics imperialism view point when it benefits america and so on.Also supporting Antifa doesn't equal to far-left. Antifa is a coalition of various lefties[anarchist,communist,center-left],labour,republicans,liberals,centrist and so on.You can be conservative and still support antifa.The closest thing i can compare Antifa is anonymous. Antifa is not a political ideology/organization nor it is a party.ultravigo said: Funny thing they are capitalistic liberals at most and young turks which are filled with some social democrats. Vox made a video generally supportive of Antifa's activities. That is most definitely far-left. And wanting to restrict free speech, push affirmative action, punish white people for being white, and so on is not "liberal" by any means since liberalism is concerned with freedom. |
ultravigoJun 7, 2019 8:16 AM
Veronin said: ultravigo said: Funny thing they are capitalistic liberals at most and young turks which are filled with some social democrats. Vox made a video generally supportive of Antifa's activities. That is most definitely far-left. And wanting to restrict free speech, push affirmative action, punish white people for being white, and so on is not "liberal" by any means since liberalism is concerned with freedom. isnt that Antifa video of Vox about USA crime statistics made by Antifa solely in USA? the comment section was reacting as if its related to European Antifa >punish white people for being white did they make a video about that? |
NthDegree said: How does the content being more diverse make discrimination any more acceptable than in a tennis club? I'm not seeing your argument here. Just because they are entitled to their opinion doesn't mean I'm not allowed to call the said opinion a dumb overreaction that makes no sense. The freedom of speech goes both ways. My point is that a tennis club covers one activity. People are there to play tennis and anything which serves as a significant distraction, disruption, or impediment to that can be seen as a legitimate rule violation. With people uploading video content, the videos cover an incredibly broad and diverse range of topics and content. It's unreasonable to start to wade into the minutiae and begin policing the substance of the content like this. Again, this isn't new. People have been complaining about censorship as a whole on YouTube and other social media platforms, forums, and sites for a long time before the announcement of this latest politically-motivated policy change. In the past, it had more to do with overzealous kowtowing to copyright, but of course any move to police any type of language for any reason is always going to be met with resistance and opposition by concerned parties. Myself, I'm not affected as I only have a YouTube account to view videos and haven't uploaded a single thing since I was like 15 years-old many moons ago on an old account, nor do I participate in the social media aspect of it in any way (never even so much as comment below videos), but I'll always be sympathetic to those against more regulation and censorship of anything on the internet and against those in favor. As for them being entitled to their opinion and you being entitled to insult, attack, or criticize their opinion in any way, of course. I would think that goes without saying. |
| Right-Wingers 2015-2016: “The left are filled with SJW victim-complex children who play the “oppression Olympics” so we’re going to troll them mercilessly and make fun of ANYONE on the “left” non-stop! Right-Wingers 2019: “We’re being censored! All these LEFTIST companies are shutting us down...the same companies we HATE but secretly we NEED them...Why are they coming after us...we’re being oppressed! We’re the REAL victims!” Yeah...sorry, I don’t feel bad...not even a tiny bit...in fact I’m having a GREAT time laughing at Right-Wingers as they cry and bitch....in fact cry harder please, the schadenfreude is delicious! And just like you idiots told SJWs back then...I will tell you now...NO, you are NOT being oppressed, you are NOT victims, grow the fuck up and take personal responsibility for your ACTIONS! |
| JUST OUT DEBATE THEM 5HEAD LMAO LET'S JUST OUT DEBATE ISIS GIVE THEM PLATFORM PEPEGA |
| Is every thread on CE filled with this much garbage? @juandmarco Sorry, but bigot ≠ not agreeing with your politics. |
|
WatchTillTandava said: NthDegree said: How does the content being more diverse make discrimination any more acceptable than in a tennis club? I'm not seeing your argument here. Just because they are entitled to their opinion doesn't mean I'm not allowed to call the said opinion a dumb overreaction that makes no sense. The freedom of speech goes both ways. My point is that a tennis club covers one activity. People are there to play tennis and anything which serves as a significant distraction, disruption, or impediment to that can be seen as a legitimate rule violation. With people uploading video content, the videos cover an incredibly broad and diverse range of topics and content. It's unreasonable to start to wade into the minutiae and begin policing the substance of the content like this. Again, this isn't new. People have been complaining about censorship as a whole on YouTube and other social media platforms, forums, and sites for a long time before the announcement of this latest politically-motivated policy change. In the past, it had more to do with overzealous kowtowing to copyright, but of course any move to police any type of language for any reason is always going to be met with resistance and opposition by concerned parties. Myself, I'm not affected as I only have a YouTube account to view videos and haven't uploaded a single thing since I was like 15 years-old many moons ago on an old account, nor do I participate in the social media aspect of it in any way (never even so much as comment below videos), but I'll always be sympathetic to those against more regulation and censorship of anything on the internet and against those in favor. As for them being entitled to their opinion and you being entitled to insult, attack, or criticize their opinion in any way, of course. I would think that goes without saying. So what about having multiple activities exactly makes discrimination okay? Isn't the number irrelevant? Besides you could even argue that although they may be on different topics, they're still videos all the same. Just like an art club focuses on one activity, art, even though the subjects of the paintings or art styles may differ. I'm not seeing how that's significantly different from YT. Or are you saying art clubs should be criticized for limiting freedom of speech if they don't allow discrimination? It doesn't matter whether people have criticized it before or not. All that means is that idiots exist in all time periods. |
| YouTube is slowly dying.~ |
 サディスティックな考え "JUST KILL ME." サディスティックマインド |
| People have labeled me as a racist right winger, but what they don't understand is that I'm black below the waist. |
--ALEX-- said: Right-Wingers 2015-2016: “The left are filled with SJW victim-complex children who play the “oppression Olympics” so we’re going to troll them mercilessly and make fun of ANYONE on the “left” non-stop! Right-Wingers 2019: “We’re being censored! All these LEFTIST companies are shutting us down...the same companies we HATE but secretly we NEED them...Why are they coming after us...we’re being oppressed! We’re the REAL victims!” Yeah...sorry, I don’t feel bad...not even a tiny bit...in fact I’m having a GREAT time laughing at Right-Wingers as they cry and bitch....in fact cry harder please, the schadenfreude is delicious! And just like you idiots told SJWs back then...I will tell you now...NO, you are NOT being oppressed, you are NOT victims, grow the fuck up and take personal responsibility for your ACTIONS! Nothing has changed, the left is still filled with SJW victim complexes who are trying to censor everybody who doesn't agree with them because they are insanely insecure in their ideology and can't bear to be around anybody who might point out facts to them. The fact is that there is literally institutional discrimination against white and asian people, especially if you're male. Its not coming from the right though, its coming from leftist policies. And in the social realm, leftists are constantly demonizing white conservative men as evil. They fan the flames of racial tensions by brainwashing the African American community into thinking that there is widespread discrimination against them and pit men and women against each other by convincing women that most men are evil potential rapists out to subjugate them. The left is no better than the British in the 19th century, divide and rule and then use the excuse of "hate speech" to squash free speech and all the civil liberties that we hold dear in this country. In this case, they're just trying to turn every "minority group" out there against the people they hate and then say that the threat white men pose to them is so great that they need government to protect them from those evil white men. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
--ALEX-- said: Just reposting my response since I'll admit my hyperbole gets over the top.Right-Wingers 2015-2016: “The left are filled with SJW victim-complex children who play the “oppression Olympics” so we’re going to troll them mercilessly and make fun of ANYONE on the “left” non-stop! Right-Wingers 2019: “We’re being censored! All these LEFTIST companies are shutting us down...the same companies we HATE but secretly we NEED them...Why are they coming after us...we’re being oppressed! We’re the REAL victims!” Yeah...sorry, I don’t feel bad...not even a tiny bit...in fact I’m having a GREAT time laughing at Right-Wingers as they cry and bitch....in fact cry harder please, the schadenfreude is delicious! And just like you idiots told SJWs back then...I will tell you now...NO, you are NOT being oppressed, you are NOT victims, grow the fuck up and take personal responsibility for your ACTIONS! You seem to have no problem with an oligarchical ruling class wielding power to whatever end they see fit so long as it doesn't negatively impact you. This is shortsighted as if it were right-wingers in charge and they were censoring your ideas and the voices you listen to, you'd be outraged (and rightfully so). In effect, you're not actually upholding any real principles or standards that prevent this cycle from repeating every time the pendulum swings the other way. You are simply feeding into a vindictive will to power which, taken to its logical conclusion, very much produces societies such as 1930's Germany. But in that sense, the reality is that politics is power. It is ultimately about the conquest, dominion and subjugation of dissidents. Never once in history has politics been anything other than a means to the end of having one's way. |
|
juandmarco said: Ryuk9428 said: Nothing has changed, the left is still filled with SJW victim complexes who are trying to censor everybody who doesn't agree with them because they are insanely insecure in their ideology and can't bear to be around anybody who might point out facts to them. The fact is that there is literally institutional discrimination against white and asian people, especially if you're male. Its not coming from the right though, its coming from leftist policies. And in the social realm, leftists are constantly demonizing white conservative men as evil. They fan the flames of racial tensions by brainwashing the African American community into thinking that there is widespread discrimination against them and pit men and women against each other by convincing women that most men are evil potential rapists out to subjugate them. The left is no better than the British in the 19th century, divide and rule and then use the excuse of "hate speech" to squash free speech and all the civil liberties that we hold dear in this country. In this case, they're just trying to turn every "minority group" out there against the people they hate and then say that the threat white men pose to them is so great that they need government to protect them from those evil white men. So what you're saying is black people, women and homosexuals were never persecuted and that's SJW propaganda? Are you seriously this dumb? Also, I love how you guys say disagreeing with the left doesn't make you a bigot (which I never said anyway) but disagreeing with the right automatically makes you an evil SJW. I know some people say white people (especially white men) are to blame for everything bad that happens in the world, but saying you're being actively persecuted is the true victim complex. Fuck every single one of you. You're doing another classic leftist tactic of just saying "you said X, which means you really meant X." Blacks, gays and women are not being persecuted at this current moment in time. The only reason why Buttigieg is able to run as a presidential candidate on the Democrat ticket is because he is gay. Even Bernie Sanders noted that the Democrat party only cares about who you are when it comes to who they will allow to run for president rather than your ideology. They really don't want Joe Biden to be their frontrunner because he is a white male. They really wanted Hillary to be president because she is a woman, and they didn't want an old white guy "taking her ticket." No I've met reasonable liberals, I've mentioned before that I'm actually quite open to the people I "dislike" but the difference is that the right isn't threatening free speech in the country and isn't trying to tell me that I'm evil for my race and gender. The left creates lynch mobs on the news networks, and on social media to permanently destroy the lives of people they don't like. Because accusations of racism and sexism are taken so strongly now, anybody who is accused of such, whether innocent or guilty, runs a risk of getting fired from their jobs and being unable to find employment after that. Even the worst harassment from gamergate doesn't threaten your employment and future career because people are sympathetic when the alt-right harasses somebody but nobody has sympathy when the far-left comes after somebody. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| It's pretty obvious that youtube wants to turns its platform to another TV outlet. They seem to love giving attention to what the corporatist overlords deems "appropriate", which is basically company vids that are under their wing and nothing else. Everything else is censored, no matter how tame a viewpoint is, and they're trying to hide it by making a boogeyman out of it and saying "bigot!" Vids outside the corporate reach are slowly pushed out of the algorithm, before they're erased out of the website entirely. I can't believe so many bootlickers are out here defending this... |
 |
Peaceful_Critic said: HungryForQuality said: All of them. They all tie into each other anyway. You didn't write an essay. But you can choose the one you're most confident in if you'd like and maybe start from there. Okay, I'll start with this then: "Banning them sends an implied message that they are a threat and makes them more powerful since you ran away(banned) from them convincing them and similar minded people they are right." A lot of these examples are going to be about YT. In this case, Steven Crowder would be a prime example when Vox tried to ban him. You wanna know one of the most liked comments were? This: "If you can’t win the debate, get them banned. Right Vox?"(Proof) Which is a type of sentiment Steven often shares when he's kicked off of colleges as well as his followers. Steven also gained subs from this: "I subscribed after reading of Vox's attack on you, keep up the good work. Never heard of you before that. Thankyou Vox" "Thanks Vox I’m a new subscriber to Steven Crowder!" Vox trying to ban him, no doubt made him more powerful. Same goes for IHE when his channel got deleted. I followed him before and after, and there was a huge difference in the number of people new subscribed to him. Except the complaint about Crowder wasn't the ideas he was stating, it was more of a person saying "stop referencing me in your videos". Which if he continued to do so would pretty much justify the harassment claim (but based on the claim it sounds like it was an ongoing issue especially with the doxxing allegation). If he was banned for harassing other people on the platform but gained support because people thought he was banned for his ideas, then those people are simply ignorant. So they're literally the epitome of blind followers at that point because they've chosen not to take into context the full situation in order to support someone of a similar ideology who they know almost nothing about. |
juandmarco said: Ryuk9428 said: Nothing has changed, the left is still filled with SJW victim complexes who are trying to censor everybody who doesn't agree with them because they are insanely insecure in their ideology and can't bear to be around anybody who might point out facts to them. The fact is that there is literally institutional discrimination against white and asian people, especially if you're male. Its not coming from the right though, its coming from leftist policies. And in the social realm, leftists are constantly demonizing white conservative men as evil. They fan the flames of racial tensions by brainwashing the African American community into thinking that there is widespread discrimination against them and pit men and women against each other by convincing women that most men are evil potential rapists out to subjugate them. The left is no better than the British in the 19th century, divide and rule and then use the excuse of "hate speech" to squash free speech and all the civil liberties that we hold dear in this country. In this case, they're just trying to turn every "minority group" out there against the people they hate and then say that the threat white men pose to them is so great that they need government to protect them from those evil white men. So what you're saying is black people, women and homosexuals were never persecuted and that's SJW propaganda? Are you seriously this dumb? Also, I love how you guys say disagreeing with the left doesn't make you a bigot (which I never said anyway) but disagreeing with the right automatically makes you an evil SJW. I know some people say white people (especially white men) are to blame for everything bad that happens in the world, but saying whites are being actively persecuted is the true victim complex. Fuck every single one of you, whether you think white people are evil incarnate or you're a white who thinks white people are oppressed. You're not an SJW for disagreeing with right-wing politics. You're an SJW because you think silencing those with opposing view points is a good thing. |
|
Peaceful_Critic said: GamerDLM said: The point of the post was to prove how he got more powerful through the threatened ban. I didn't state my opinion aside from that, as I don't follow either Vox or Crowder. Except the complaint about Crowder wasn't the ideas he was stating, it was more of a person saying "stop referencing me in your videos". Which if he continued to do so would pretty much justify the harassment claim (but based on the claim it sounds like it was an ongoing issue especially with the doxxing allegation). If he was banned for harassing other people on the platform but gained support because people thought he was banned for his ideas, then those people are simply ignorant. So they're literally the epitome of blind followers at that point because they've chosen not to take into context the full situation in order to support someone of a similar ideology who they know almost nothing about. But it still points out a fundamental flaw with your initial post/argument because it essentially ignores cases where a ban is justified. Such as a person potentially violating a sites Terms of Service. It also doesn't really matter if you have a specific opinion on that situation. You chose to use Crowder as an example with limited context discrediting your initial points by validating a counter argument to one point specifically "Most people aren't blind followers to everything they hear". The comment you specifically referenced, and pointing out that it is the most popular comment on the page, highly reinforces the idea of blind followers supporting people simply based on ideology. |
| gonna add this again "In order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance and also im sure Crowder and other far right channels want to stay in youtube because its the biggest video platform that can attract them more subscribers and profit so just like any capitalists this youtubers (aside from youtube itself) want market monopoly rather than free market because if they believe in the free market then they will just leave youtube and start their own video platform |
GamerDLM said: Peaceful_Critic said: The point of the post was to prove how he got more powerful through the threatened ban. I didn't state my opinion aside from that, as I don't follow either Vox or Crowder. But it still points out a fundamental flaw with your initial post/argument because it essentially ignores cases where a ban is justified. Such as a person potentially violating a sites Terms of Service. It also doesn't really matter if you have a specific opinion on that situation. You chose to use Crowder as an example with limited context discrediting your initial points by validating a counter argument to one point specifically "Most people aren't blind followers to everything they hear". The comment you specifically referenced, and pointing out that it is the most popular comment on the page, highly reinforces the idea of blind followers supporting people simply based on ideology. Crowder's ban wasn't justified though. |
|
| either way i only hear news that far right youtubers are just demonetize and not banned on youtube so far, so they are still on youtube and they can make their current followers advertise their youtube channels by just naming those channels on comments section of far left videos they see to recruit more so meh to me nothing big has changed besides this far right youtubers gonna sell more merchandises like "socialism is for fags" |
Peaceful_Critic said: GamerDLM said: They are cases where the opinion isn't the problem, but my post was about ideas and opinions. Nowhere did I claim they weren't cases where banning was justified.But it still points out a fundamental flaw with your initial post/argument because it essentially ignores cases where a ban is justified. Such as a person potentially violating a sites Terms of Service. It also doesn't really matter if you have a specific opinion on that situation, you chose to use Crowder as an example with limited context discrediting your initial points by validating a counter argument to one point specifically "Most people aren't blind followers to everything they hear". The comment you specifically referenced, and pointing out that it is the most popular comment on the page, highly reinforces the idea of blind followers supporting people simply based on ideology. It doesn't discredit anything the comments are there(aka my proof). I have watched multiple of his videos even though I'm not following him, so I do know some things on him. Btw, I went back to watch the video, and people aren't blindly following him. You clearly haven't watched the video either. What you brought up about them being unaware of the channel being claimed for harassment, not the idea was disproven seconds into the video. Except he didn't disprove the idea, he shifted the focus. Even if he doesn't feel like he caused any form of harassment because of the idea that "it's just the way he acts" then it means he's already playing loosely with the advertising guidelines. For example even if he feels he's justifying himself calling the guy say "a lispy queer" he's essentially ignoring the very first best practice Youtube recommends for advertiser friendly content. Which is be respectful to people or groups featured in videos. So he should have no issues with those videos being demonetized because it's not a huge stretch to interpret that as disrespectful thus not advertiser-friendly content. Instead his video mostly focused on the idea that "corporations are trying to keep the little man down". Essentially he's taking the stance that he can directly call out journalists at Vox but as soon as they take any form of counteraction it's suddenly a huge conspiracy to shut down right wing voices. Which plays into the overarching and ongoing belief, that particularly right wing groups have had, that major media sites (google, twitter, etc.) have been actively silencing right wing voices. Many of those claims have also been notably debunked or generally impossible to prove. So if you want to continue to use this video as a reference it's blind followers who feel vindicated that they have a big bad media corporation to point at, and a figurehead who they can use as a victim despite the actions against him being easily justified. |
Ryuk9428 said: juandmarco said: So what you're saying is black people, women and homosexuals were never persecuted and that's SJW propaganda? Are you seriously this dumb? Also, I love how you guys say disagreeing with the left doesn't make you a bigot (which I never said anyway) but disagreeing with the right automatically makes you an evil SJW. I know some people say white people (especially white men) are to blame for everything bad that happens in the world, but saying you're being actively persecuted is the true victim complex. Fuck every single one of you. You're doing another classic leftist tactic of just saying "you said X, which means you really meant X." Blacks, gays and women are not being persecuted at this current moment in time. You heard it folks. Homophobia and racism are dead. right isn't threatening free speech in the country and isn't trying to tell me that I'm evil for my race and gender. Oh man, that's hilarious. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48521788 https://www.out.com/television/2019/6/03/alabama-church-show-arthur-gay-marriage-episode-after-censorship https://twitter.com/mnrrntt/status/1137082269942919169 Right wings constantly spend their time demonizing black people and LGBT people online and not online, it's literally in your lifestyle. These forums used to be dominated by people like you implying black people were genetically dumber and LGBT were pedophiles. And no, the "left" doesn't hate white people or straight men. I know it's a bitter pill to swallow because the only way you can survive is if you make yourself a victim. Not doing this would mean acknowledging your failures and the people you actively try to discriminate against every day. You are literally implying you are discriminated while being part of the 99%. That's how insane you sound. (Also protip: Just repeating THE LEFT doesn't win an argument outside of voat and /pol/, which I assume is from where you hail from) Aldnox said: Bernrika said: This is what I mean. If you're not oppressed enough you're excluded, so much for inclusion.Yes, as we all know being straight was illegal until some years ago and it still is illegal in many countries. I'm confused, do you want people to beat you for being straight? Do you want religion to hate you for being straight? Do you want your parents to kick you out of the house for being straight? Do you want having to hide your sexuality because you are from a conservative environment? Do you want to spend your time enduring vitriol from right wingers because you are straight or white (Muh IQ tests, muh crime stats) Who is "excluding" you for being straight (Or white, in the western world)? Are you being intentionally obtuse? What the fuck do you want actually? Instead of being happy you are not discriminated, you cry for discrimination? |
BernrikaJun 7, 2019 4:08 PM
TsukuyomiREKT said: GamerDLM said: But it still points out a fundamental flaw with your initial post/argument because it essentially ignores cases where a ban is justified. Such as a person potentially violating a sites Terms of Service. It also doesn't really matter if you have a specific opinion on that situation. You chose to use Crowder as an example with limited context discrediting your initial points by validating a counter argument to one point specifically "Most people aren't blind followers to everything they hear". The comment you specifically referenced, and pointing out that it is the most popular comment on the page, highly reinforces the idea of blind followers supporting people simply based on ideology. Crowder's ban wasn't justified though. The ban that didn't happen could easily be justified. |
| Sweet babby omnissiah!!! As long as they don't remove my Black Templar tunes I will be okay. |
 |
Bernrika said: Aldnox said: This is what I mean. If you're not oppressed enough you're excluded, so much for inclusion. I'm confused, do you want people to beat you for being straight? Do you want religion to hate you for being straight? Do you want your parents to kick you out of the house for being straight? Do you want having to hide your sexuality because you are from a conservative environment? Do you want to spend your time enduring vitriol from right wingers because you are straight or white (Muh IQ tests, muh crime stats) Who is "excluding" you for being straight (Or white, in the western world)? Are you being intentionally obtuse? What the fuck do you want actually? Instead of being happy you are not discriminated, you cry for discrimination? What @Aldnox likely wanted to say here, but failed to formulate correctly, are probably things like "quotas" and "affirmative action". Basically attempts to "equalize social differences by overcompensating the perceived disadvantaged collective" which then falls on the shoulders of the "privileged ones", but in individual form. Though personally I don't think it's anything like a "ideological conspiracy" or such, but rather just left-leaning (and also centric and even some right-leaning) companies and institutions throwing everything under the bus as long as they have "good statistics to show". It seems concepts like inclusion were very popular at some point (and might or might not still be so right now) so some organisations took that a bit far and it snowballed into things like that being normalized now with most people being unable to see how absurd it is. To be fair, the right often overstates the quantity of such cases, but the ones who control most of the media are not on the right... |
 |
Bernrika said: Ryuk9428 said: You're doing another classic leftist tactic of just saying "you said X, which means you really meant X." Blacks, gays and women are not being persecuted at this current moment in time. You heard it folks. Homophobia and racism are dead. right isn't threatening free speech in the country and isn't trying to tell me that I'm evil for my race and gender. Oh man, that's hilarious. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48521788 https://www.out.com/television/2019/6/03/alabama-church-show-arthur-gay-marriage-episode-after-censorship https://twitter.com/mnrrntt/status/1137082269942919169 Right wings constantly spend their time demonizing black people and LGBT people online and not online, it's literally in your lifestyle. These forums used to be dominated by people like you implying black people were genetically dumber and LGBT were pedophiles. And no, the "left" doesn't hate white people or straight men. I know it's a bitter pill to swallow because the only way you can survive is if you make yourself a victim. Not doing this would mean acknowledging your failures and the people you actively try to discriminate against every day. You are literally implying you are discriminated while being part of the 99%. That's how insane you sound. (Also protip: Just repeating THE LEFT doesn't win an argument outside of voat and /pol/, which I assume is from where you hail from) Aldnox said: This is what I mean. If you're not oppressed enough you're excluded, so much for inclusion. I'm confused, do you want people to beat you for being straight? Do you want religion to hate you for being straight? Do you want your parents to kick you out of the house for being straight? Do you want having to hide your sexuality because you are from a conservative environment? Do you want to spend your time enduring vitriol from right wingers because you are straight or white (Muh IQ tests, muh crime stats) Who is "excluding" you for being straight (Or white, in the western world)? Are you being intentionally obtuse? What the fuck do you want actually? Instead of being happy you are not discriminated, you cry for discrimination? So to find evidence of your persecution, you went to the most deeply conservative state in the entire US and showed an example of a mayor who is being told he has to resign from office because he thought what he was saying was private and it turned out it wasn't, which means that he knew he'd get in huge trouble if what he was saying became public, and a church in Alabama airing an episode of a same sex wedding. A few assholes isn't persecution. Turns out even in your hated state of Alabama though, you can still have gay pride parades... https://closetprofessor.com/2012/06/04/central-alabama-pride/ https://www.proudout.com/po-event/central-alabama-pride-pride-week/ Several Gay bars... https://birmingham.gaycities.com/bars Can get legally married, and have access to the entire internet where your views will mostly be protected. Meanwhile, you continue to prove my point that leftists are constantly using the whole "you're racist, sexist, homophobic, or xenophobic," as their trump card because they think it will intimidate people to back down. But they're looking like the boy who cried wolf more and more with each passing year as they continue to rely on it as their trump card. The far right is basically a reaction to the world that liberals created. Liberals have been obsessing over making identity politics the central issue of their ideology, and have been obsessing over identity politics when the right was prepared to just let it all go. But because they were so determined to prove that widespread discrimination still exists, they ended up fanning the flames of racial tension, producing more racist black people and white people as a result. In the 1980s, everybody believed that we were past all this crap and that the racism of the past was gone. People felt more comfortable making racially insensitive jokes because they felt like racism was dead and not a problem anymore so its fine to joke about it. And it was pretty much true, but liberals literally resurrected racial tensions both on and offline out of desperation for their narrative to be true. |
Ryuk9428Jun 7, 2019 5:23 PM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Thinking only "true extremists" will be affected is naive at best. Youtube is clearly in dissonance with their community, mainly because their algorithm is one of the worst out there (kinda excusable, given the amount of content going through every second). They keep on pushing corporate entities and punishing independent creators despite the community's ongoing rejection. Besides, they are reaping what they sew for years and years. Since their biggest purpose is keeping people watching for as long as humanly possible so they can display more ads, these kinds of inflamatory and conspirational videos thrived in the "watch next" section. Inciting an emotional response in the audience ("white people are going to die out"/"the jews did it"/"but the lizard people") is the easiest way to make people passionate about a subject, because they feel personally threatened, therefore they must band together and feed that echo-chamber so they can feel safer, feel they are taking action. Don't get me wrong, this is the same tatic SJWs use in their space as well, but, you know, there are far fewer mass shootings happening around because of SJW rhetoric. Anyhow, yt were complicit for years, now they wanna do something? Yeah, it won't work out. And it's better this way. As some say: it's better to have a murder not be imprisoned than an innocent man arrested, because one cannot repair the damage done to that person's life and reputation. It's far better to have some "true extremists" around than taking away the right of people just because they were the easiest targets. |
KosmonautJun 7, 2019 5:34 PM
 |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |