By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
As part of a series of articles regarding censorship by the crowd-funding service Patreon, I now pose the question of whether Patreon, as based upon its current actions and policy, would censor and ban great historical figures such as Aristotle, Jacob Riis, and numerous other contributors to the betterment of the human condition. The men and women of those times certainly did not subscribe to the ideas of 21st century political correctness and were the products of their own times, but since Patreon through its actions seems to conflate the idea of these people as a brand, where an arbitrary set of ideas about the author dictates the value of the content of their ideas or speech. It seems most likely these figures would not have been granted a voice had Patreon been the gatekeeper to their ideas.
What contributions to history might have been lost had the mindset such as that engendered today by Patreon prevailed?
For those unfamiliar with Patreon the company describes itself as a funding source where, “Membership allows [content creators] like you to have a direct relationship with your biggest fans, get recurring revenue for your work, and create on your own terms.”–content creators being those such as artist, videographers, writers et al. Or, as Jack Conte states, “is a membership platform that provides business tools for creators to run a subscription content service as well as ways for artists to build relationships and provide exclusive experiences to their subscribers, or patrons.”
The in my view unjustified banning of numerous users, most notoriously recently Carl Benjamin, a.k.a. Sargon of Akkad, for uttering two prohibited words off-site from Patreon leads me to ponder the type of existential threat to Liberty a Patreon controlled system of censorship provides. (His words were taken completely out of context, and lead to a loss of over $12,000.00 in monthly income from his patrons after Patreon yanked his account.)
We as a society need only look into historical figures and what the loss of their voice and contribution means to our futures. But given the idea that Patreon is by default creating an Untouchable Class of thinkers and idea creators how would these minds be treated today?
Most are familiar with Aristotle and his contribution to Western Culture, philosophy, and logic. But what perhaps is fatal to learning of his ideas would be his inability to engage in discussion within a Patreon controlled world. One of his sins certainly would be his discussion of slavery.
In many respects Aristotle considered slavery to be natural and slaves to be the rightful possession of their masters. He went so far as to proffer that slavery was a necessary institution in Greek Society but did question the practice for prisoners-of-war and others. Any reasonable mind could certainly derive that again he was the product of his environment and take other remarkable areas of thought to heart. But since Aristotle had this small segment of his “Brand” as Patreon would probably label him, the rest should go to the dustbin
19th Century Social Commentator Jacob Riis likely also would be the subject of a Patreon style censorship campaign had the same standard been applied with 21st Century microaggression violations in mind.
Among Mr. Riis’ many literary and photo journal works may not have seen the audience he garnered at the turn of the twentieth-century if he was depersoned and branded as untouchable. His most famous and lasting work was How the Other Half Lives, (1890) which brought the deplorable and socially unjust plight of slum-dwellers in New York City to the minds and hearts of the middle-class of America and elsewhere in the Anglosphere. Most people then had at best an abstract idea of the squalor and poverty faced in poor areas of the city and certainly by extension elsewhere. The average person had truly no understanding otherwise.
It was through the publication of How the Other Half Lives that sparked the inertia for the public at large to demand reforms and the awakening of consciousness and empathy toward the poor. It was journalism that brought this to light. Mr. Riis as a content creator exercised his right to speech and participate in the free press and millions of individuals then, and certainly since continue to receive social benefits and consideration directly as a result of his advocacy and ideas.
Unfortunately, Mr. Riis also stated in his preeminent work what would clearly be numerous violations of the group-think that is endemic in some circles today, being a product again of his environment notwithstanding. Had Patreon’s Trust and Safety Team received a complaint regarding the below excerpt, would How The Other Half Lives come to the public forum and actual change to the poor have been afforded?
“IX Chinatown: BETWEEN the tabernacles of Jewry and the shrines of the Bend, Joss has cheekily planted his pagan worship of idols, chief among which are the celestial worshipper’s own gain and lusts. Whatever may be said about the Chinaman being a thousand years behind the age on his own shores, here he is distinctly abreast of it in his successful scheming to “make it pay.” It is doubtful if there is anything he does not turn to a paying account, from his religion down, or up, as one prefers. At the risk of distressing some well-meaning, but, I fear, too trustful people, I state it in advance as my opinion, based on the steady observation of years, that all attempts to make an effective Christian of John Chinaman will remain abortive in this generation…”
Pioneering birth-control advocate Margaret Sanger brought to the Western World, especially in the United States, the normalcy of choice for the individual their own family planning. Regarded especially on the left for her movement, in many ways she ushered in the eventual liberation of many women from traditional gender roles and provided them with achievable alternatives to homemaking. The movement among others was instrumental at the time at formulating this idea and that of what later would be Planned Parenthood.
Ms. Sanger certainly realized during her own time the kind of specter her highly controversial writings might bring against her livelihood. In fact, she had to flee to Britain for a time to escape prosecution under the Comstock Act. Her effort did not come in vain as she was a catalyst in what would become the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Griswold v. Connecticut which held that statutory prohibitions on access to birth control violated the Constitution in that the state law was illegally construed,”…to deny disadvantaged citizens … access to medical assistance and up-to-date information in respect to proper methods of birth control.” and went beyond the right to contraception by introducing in the court the precedent of penumbras of the right to privacy, in this case the right to privacy in intimate personal affairs.
Yet, Margaret Sanger committed a grave sin in the eyes of the current microaggression enforcing state–she associated once with the wrong people.
As she mentioned in her 1938 autobiography, Ms. Sanger among her numerous public appearances, lectured on birth-control to the Women’s Auxiliary of the Ku Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey. The horror!
Surely the list of those potentially brandable as being undesirable according to the often changing terms of service and decisions of Patreon’s Trust and Safety Team could exceed the imagination. I could continue with examples such as Franklin Roosevelt for his internment of Japanese Americans during the Second World War, Chris Rock for using the N-Word in his comedy routine, or Joe Average who lives in Bethesda, MD because he insulted a coworker but you surely get the point. Simply put, when does the need for censorship and the variety of microaggressions end?
The failure that is Patreon in the market place of thought and ideas is that it forces individuals to constrain their thinking under the threat of economic loss and untouchability. Creativity suffers. Evolution of human thought tends under these conditions tends to remain stagnated. Look at the possibility of structural fracturing of the creative chain:
Lets look at the example of science fiction. One less recognized aspect of this genre or other fashion of expression is that it provides a basis for exercising ideas and thought outside the realm of the limitation for which we are constrained by presently available and understood science. We do not have to wait to attain interstellar travel or technical advances to then begin our discussion of what it might be like to encounter life elsewhere or travel beyond the speed of sound. In the Star Trek example, we found a basis in inspiration to pursue the sciences among the young and a frame of thinking to think along the scientific method. In the fiction we resurrected history and how explorers of centuries past encountered “new civilizations”. The show also brought some social progress with one of the first kisses between two races on public television, a taboo in the mind of many at the time.
Then we have the example of the creation of science fiction prompting scientific discovery:s
Even the notion of allegory seeds further thinking, it short we need the diversity of minds, even those some might take exception to, if we are to enjoy what may become of our own realms.
Yet if we were all so unfortunate to have self-appointed authoritarians such as Patreon contolling what we choose. Our ideas and strength is only as strong as their form of censorship will allow. We in the Star Trek example have to wait until permissible conditions allow us to expand our thinking and unfortunately without the right conditions or permissions, that time might not ever come.
By Darren Smith
Pateon: A Threat to Free Speech
Patreon: A Threat to Free Speech Pt. 2: Your Person Is A Brand That Can Be Censored
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
17 thoughts on “Patreon: A Threat to Free Speech Part 3: Would Patreon Censor & Ban Aristotle?”
Good post Darren one could go on and on in that vein
More like Patreon will have numbered days than Aristotle’s work
Indirectly related, I hadn’t realized just how horrible Cassander was, despite being one of Aristole’s pupils along with Alexander III, later called the Great.
A grave concern of mine is the alignment of censorship across so many channels, all coordinated against conservatives. It starts in the education system, where the vast majority of teachers and professors are Left, and they bring that bias firmly into the classroom. Conservative students are persecuted, harassed, and punished, even including threats of violence from Liberal professors. Then, the media has gone far left. It is biased in its coverage, excludes facts and stories benefitting conservatives, and promotes stories that denigrates them. There is very little straight news. One could argue that the extreme efforts the mainstream media went to in order to protect Hillary Clinton from getting called out on selling 1/5 of our uranium to Russia, paying Russian spies for fraudulent information on her political opponent, using that false information to get the FBI to investigate her opponent and eavesdrop on his private conversations while a private citizen, breaking her Blackberries and laptops with hammers while under Congressional subpoena, bringing 9 lawyers into her FBI interview, and keeping and lying about her own private server in order to prevent the collection of her correspondence as required by law – it could be considered an illegal campaign contribution estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars.
The mainstream media crafts Liberal propaganda for the public to consume. Then social media carries that torch. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram all censor conservatives, and they all promote Liberal propaganda. PayPal punishes conservatives. GOOGLE censors conservatives, and its executives were caught discussing how they could change the outcome of the next election by purposely controlling information users can access. The GOOGLE algorhym is used by just about every platform, including Internet Explorer, Safari, and Firefox. When you choose an alternate search engine, you’re still using the same engine. Now Patreon has joined forces with the Liberal Propaganda Machine.
Then, of course, you have the weaponization of various political agencies against conservatives. It doesn’t matter who sits behind the Resolute Desk. The Liberal minions still run the country, from government, news, social media, and even to payment processing. It’s a machine. If I had heard such statements a few years ago, I would have relegated it to tinfoil hat conspiracy theories. It is now established fact, supported by damning evidence.
This is just how every Socialist or Fascist dictatorship operates. The people get controlled at the most mundane levels, and dissent is quashed.
This is not what individual freedom looks like.
There’s a simple test. Any Pattern user can lightly translate Aristotle, Plato, Mill, … anyone into modern usage forms. See what happens. Its almost worth getting an account just to see.
Sorry, Patreon. Blasted spell-
checker got me.
Since Sargon did no wrong, we have no idea how Patreon would treat any of these people in this thought exercise. Let’s talk about real people who have done wrong using Patreon who are not being barred like Antifa. Why are they still there?
What the frig is Patreon? Some website?
I had never heard of Patreon prior to the columns here, and I don’t know if they have any kind of established or consistent policy on who they allow and who they ban from their site.
A review of who they may have “censored” might give a better idea of how “open” they are, are aren’t, to all points of view.
I spent a bit of tine looking at Patreon’s censorship “policy” and history.
The answer to the question ” Would Patreon ban and censor Aristotle” would seem to hinge on Patreon’s view of whether Aristotle was politically correct enough to be worthy of participation on their site.
SANGER THOUGHT KKK..
COULD USE BIRTH CONTROL
Sanger actually addressed an audience of KKK wives. And she was hopeful they would ‘use’ birth control. Sanger sought to take that message to poor, common women all over the country.
Of course some Republican might tell me ‘Sanger supported Eugenics’. However PBS’ “American Experience” covered Eugenics in a recent broadcast. According to that film, Eugenics was actually mainstream science in the 1920’s. What’s more, Eugenics was LESS controversial than birth control. Therefore Margaret Sanger exploited Eugenics to promote birth control.
I have no problem with that in any direction.
Including the demographic competition & eugenics sides of it
The erudition will exceed the grasp of those who need it most.
What quality or qualities do you have that make you more “human” than a zygote? A zygote comprises the 46 chromosomes common only to human beings. A zygote requires only the exact same things as any human being to thrive to old age: shelter and nourishment.
One difference between a zygote and readers is that a zygote requires a host (normally the mother) for shelter and nourishment for about 40 weeks. Currently federal law gives the birth mother the right to an abortion at any time prior to the unborn exiting the birth canal. This is a legal definition of humanity related to the unborn’s location in space, which seems transparently wrong.
Black American mothers abort at the rate of 45%. How do you qualify that?
How has the earlier belief in a “population bomb” worked out for China, Europe, Japan, and now the USA?
The so-called population bomb is only going off in Africa.
What does this possibly have to do with this post?
To you, apparently, an acorn is an oak tree.
Reminds me of Brave New World but also of the People’s Republic of China.
Comments are closed.