Trump Blasts Social Media ‘Censorship': ‘Discriminating Against Republican/Conservative Voices’

The Jewish supremacists and their controlled media are working tirelessly to silence the strong white male conservative voices. We are a threat to them, as many of us have figured out their schtick.

 

Yes, there is a good argument to be made for that.

 

I see this needs to be repeated -- AGAIN...

 

Race is a protected class. Lying, self-fellating conservative demagogue isn't. You are welcome for that minor clarification.

 

Trump Blasts Social Media ‘Censorship': ‘Discriminating Against Republican/Conservative Voices’

... and then there is out-right "Fake News". My oh my civilization has come a long, long way! What I would like to know is ..... how does Main Stream Media classify "The National Inquirer" these days? Really. I haven't heard any dirty comments about it for decades. Just wondering.

 

I will break from tradition and seriously engage a Brewskier thread. Just this one time.

First, as someone who is familiar with antitrust law in the United States, I can safely say you are not so familiar. I don't know what a "natural" monopoly is (because that isn't a thing), but the government doesn't break up monopolies just because they're monopolies. The government only breaks up monopolies that became monopolies by engaging in anti-competitive conduct. There are a lot of companies that become 'legal' monopolies, meaning they corner their markets without ever engaging in anti-competitive conduct. The government cannot touch them.

Second, while I think the Silicon Valley turds were wrong to ban Alex Jones, they nonetheless had every right to do so, as they should. Although Facebook has a lot of traffic, it is not a public forum. It is a private website. They should have final say with regard to who and who does not have access to their property. If they want to get into the censorship business, the price they pay is that they have now alienated Alex Jones and his many sympathizers.

This is a very bad analogy. That's like saying taxpayer dollars pay for the roads, so every possible destination from the roads, public or private, is public property. Taxpayers don't pay for the servers that run Facebook, nor do they pay the rent to my apartment.

 

And yet thier actions in backing legislation was a far stronger threat to fr Edomite of speech than some private company banning misbehaving members

 

You did.

You have been posting throughout making a vague and convoluded argument to suggest that Facebook, Google, Twitter and the rest do owe anyone open access to use their platforms.

 

Nothing like a outright statement of openly anti Semetic bigotry, accompanied by a Yiddish expression!

 

Actually, I think the sites you metion do a lot more business than Democracy Now, the Young Turks, and the rest of the left wing blogs.

Left wing blogs don't attract liberals the same way that right wing ones draw the talk radio crowd. That's because most of the left wing and moderate audence don't need someone to provide them with pat answer, bloody shirts, slogans, etc. Those on the far left are as subject to confirmation bias as every Trumpster here is deeply invested in it.

The rest of us read. We don't need an ex disc jockey to "explain" the big, scary world to us. And we don't appreciate being lied to the way the right wing audience clearly does.

 

No, I don't. They can refuse left or right wingers. I don't care.

Almost got there. Conservatives should migrate to platforms that perform the same function and are less fussed about promoting the views they like.

Sorry, but my grip on reality is pretty firm and I believe every word I have written.

I'm not the one advocating that a social media company be somehow compelled to host content they don't want to host. The fact you have point blank refused to deal with the implications of that position is a bit of a giveaway as to who has the reality problem here.

I'm not the one making up some BS distinction that because these platforms are 'interactive' that they should be beholden to a completely separate set of rules to other online providers such as media organisations or other businesses.

I'm not the one throwing around terms like 'monopoly' to describe platforms that are not only not monopolies, but are 100% the product of a choice that requires mere minutes to undo.

If I am guilty of anything it is giving conservatives & potential conservatives too much credit. I continually assume they are capable of using alternative platforms and finding information the way we all do - with a few keystrokes. I assume that like hundreds of millions of internet users, they are capable of moving to platforms that better suit their needs. You clearly think they are not. I guess you know your own people.

The problem is that you are hung up on the idea that your views have some right to a large audience courtesy of private companies that don't want your views associated with their product.

The 'reality' problems here are firmly on your side of the equation.

 

Spot on.

I don't get my information from Facebook or twitter or Youtube. I have had an adult reading level since my early teens and that is how I get my information. Not a sub-140 character rant. Not a soothing voice, nice graphics and dot points telling me exactly what I want to hear. That is straight out propaganda, not information.

I don't need particular commentators to tell me what to think or reassure me that I'm right. I can find my own information. You could take every 'left wing' commentator & publication off Facebook, Youtube & twitter tomorrow and I wouldn't notice.

It is telling that conservatives seem so addicted to such products.

 

I know of one: "It's Going Down", which is basically an Antifa-terrorist group, had their crowd-funding account removed by Patreon.

https://itsgoingdown.org/patreon-caves-to-tim-pool-alt-right-bans-igd/

 

False.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...rosoft-gab-hate-speech-hosting-ban-deplatform

And those new providers will most likely do the same thing, as we saw with Daily Stormer.

 

What tradition? You try and engage my threads all the time.

Embarrassing. Obviously you have no knowledge of economics, or the ability to use Google, which could have saved you from making such an obviously wrong claim.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly

And Facebook doesn’t do that? Ever see “The Social Network”?

Are those businesses also getting subsidized from the Government to the tune of billions? Do those businesses not have any rea competition to speak of, as in the case of Facebook? Can those businesses have their permits to do business taken from them because of two antisemetic comments made by customers in those businesses? Probably not. Talk about bad analogies.

 

.

 

It’s pretty funny to watch actual communists, who do not believe in private property rights at all, take the “muh private property rights” side of companies like Facebook, who they know censor their opponents on the right. They support this censorship. What I’m proposing would effectively kill their coordinated ability to censor us, which is why you are seeing them break with their own ideology to oppose this.

 

.

 

That has to do with exactly what other than your need to think you are cute?

 

Funny that you and your fellow left wing friends are free to bandy about the term "white supremacy" day in and day out, yet when you call out Jewish supremacy it supposedly makes one a bigot, a hater and an anti-Semite. What a pathetic fail.

 

I don't follow any of those sites, so what does it matter to me, or most others? And what do you mean by "run off pretty much everyone"? Is that like "disagreeing" with liberal opinions?

The issue at hand here is the outright censorship of conservative speech at large scale liberal media outlets; not negative reviews of liberal opinions on small-scale conservative sites. Surely you know the difference between the two; but then again, you probably don't.

 

I've got news for you left wingers and others who cry about "muh anti-Semitism" when I call out Jewish supremacists and their filthy controlled media. Each time a thread is made about some imaginary white supremacists, I am going to call out the Jewish supremacists and their filthy media. Get used to it.

 

there is nothing wrong with censoring Holocaust-denial and racist propoganda

 

Just noting you were making an asinine apples and eggplant comparison.

 

Not different at all. According to the clueless this is a free speech issue ( a theory advanced by those who have no understanding of the concept).