I previously wrote a column about the rising calls by Democratic leaders and activists for different forms of public and private censorship. Indeed, the recent extreme demands and controversy at the New York Times shows how speech controls have been a virtual article of faith for many. Twitter’s actions against Trump tweets are another example of the inconsistent use of such controls. Now GoFundMe has taken it upon itself to censor causes that it views as offensive in closing down a fundraiser by conservative political commentator Candace Owens in support of an Alabama cafe whose co-owner criticized the George Floyd protests. The question again is not whether we agree with such sentiments but the free speech implications of these forms of private censorship. Rather than respond to such controversial statements, critics today focus on silencing the speakers or barring their views or causes to be heard by others. What is interesting is that, by abandoning neutrality, GoFundMe is now affirming that it does regulate content and will face demands for more such action. That could undermine the position of these companies against the loss of immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Birmingham’s Parkside Cafe, whose co-owner Michael Dykes said Floyd was a “thug” and protesters were “idiots” in a text message to a co-worker that was posted online. The comments in my view were offensive and inflammatory but they are not my views. Dykes was expressing his personal view and the result is that he was given death threats and the cafe boycotted.
Owens, who is African American, shared the views of Dykes. She has also been criticized for statement like this one:
“The fact that he has been held up as a martyr sickens me. George Floyd was not a good person, I don’t care who wants to spin that. I don’t care how CNN wants to make you think he changed his life around, He was just after his sixth or fifth stint in prison.”
On Sunday, Owens disclosed that her campaign to support Dykes’ cafe was suspended by GoFundMe after the company found her fundraiser “to be in support of hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind.”
Candace Owens
✔@RealCandaceO
After raising $205,000 in a few hours @gofundme decided to halt my campaign for the Parkside Cafe in Alabama. At their discretion, they deemed that funds raised for a conservative business constitutes “intolerance”
They WILL however give the funds raised thus far to the cafe…
Owens ironically wrote on Twitter:
“Guess my message to little kids would be for them not to idolize men that: Get high on fentanyl, get high on meth, use counterfeit bills, shove guns into the stomaches of pregnant women while robbing them, go to prison 5 times. What a truly horrible message I carry.”
Candace Owens
✔@RealCandaceO
Guess my message to little kids would be for them not to idolize men that:
Get high on fentanyl
Get high on meth
Use counterfeit bills
Shove guns into the stomaches of pregnant women while robbing them
Go to prison 5 timesWhat a truly horrible message I carry. https://twitter.com/comediantmoney/status/1269664318833885185 …
Tarrell Wright
✔@ComedianTmoney
Replying to @RealCandaceOFuck 2016 what are you teaching little kids who have to listen to you bring up a dead man’s past. Are you teaching them to not care about people who have less them they do? Fuck 2016 fix your slip its showing. You should flip flop again because you look really bad.
Deaths in America. The nation is turn apart by the number of virus deaths: 105,000 +
The nation doesn’t give a rats arse about the 850,000 deaths by smoking.
Where da dumb schmucks at?
Liberty, its about 144k now and smoking is not contagious and spreading, nor is anyone ignoring and accepting it.
Sorry, 114k
If you’re going to commit suicide: Guns. Are quicker.
Floyd was a mess and, yes, episodically thuggish. And, yes, the protestors are idiots. If you’re offended by the truth, that’s your problem.
Outfits like GoFundMe who wish, quite gratuitously, to take sides, may discover that others take sides against them.
I would fully expect them to understand that.
GoFundMe is a business that provides a means for people to donate to certain causes or to help businesses or individuals who need financial assistance, without worrying whether donated funds will be misappropriated. It has rules, one of which is that it does not promote hate speech or hateful causes. The contract to use GoFundMe contains this proviso. GoFundMe is not a governmental agency or a public forum. Rather, it is a private business providing a fund-raising platform. It has every right to set rules.
A café in Alabama lost business because the owner called George Floyd a “thug” and those protesting his violent death by strangulation under the knee of former police officer Derek Chauvin, “idiots”. Along comes Canned-Ass to the rescue, chiming in with the comment that George Floyd “was not a good person”. This was before he was even buried and while those the café owner called “idiots” were still marching in protest against police brutality. This man also had a 6 year-old daughter. So, I guess that, according to Canned-Ass, the police can summarily execute people she believes are not good people. She also accuses him of passing a counterfeit $20 bill. Was that ever proven, and if it was counterfeit, where is the proof he knew that? Even if he did, did he deserve to die a painful and violent death with a racist cop slowly asphyxiating him while he begged for his life and called out to his dead mother? She seems to say so, and if this isn’t speech that promotes “hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance” then what would qualify? Why should any private business be forced to promote hate and violence in the name of free speech?
Turley calls her vile comments and those of the café owner “controversial”, “conservative” and implies that this is typical right-wing sentiment. Turley is dead-wrong. There is a huge difference between conservative opinion and controversial opinion and hate speech. Conservatives do not insult murder victims before they’ve even been buried and they favor protecting the right to peaceful protest without calling protesters “idiots”. And, BTW, no one is stopping Canned-Ass from arranging financial assistance by some other means.
This is just a private business enforcing its contract with a customer, not an issue of freedom of speech or censorship. In fact, if GoFundMe had allowed its platform to continue being used to promote this hate speech, it would likely lose business or even go out of business if there were enough boycotts. Canned-Ass can still go on all the rants she wants to and raise money some other way. She just can’t use GoFundMe.
GoFundMe is also a publisher of content that relies on the DMCA for legal protection.
They are constrained by the same first amendment restrictions on censorship so long as they accept government protection from defamation suits.
If they wish to have editorial control over the projects they post, they should eschew that protection.
First amendment proscriptions on speech do not apply to truly private entitites – like your employer, who can fire you for your policitical views.
But First amendment constraints apply to government agents and any who seek specail protections from the government.
Candace Owen’s Video is readily available
The only way it is “hate speech” is if you think that truth is hate.
Even the texts of the Cafe owner while insensitive were not hate speech.
GoFundMe is free to bar Owne’s regardless – so long as the rest of us are free to sue them based on the expressions of those they allow on their board.
As an example GoFundMe has accounts providing bail to those caught looting or arrested for arson. Without Government protections GoFundMe could be sued by those whose buildings were looted or burned.
If you want special protections from Government – it comes at a price – conform to the Same Neutral Public Platfrom requirements that apply to Government.
You can not have it both ways.
Floyd was arrested approximately 9 times in the 21st century, He spent possibly half his life in Jail. Some of The crimes he was convicted of are serious and violent.
There are indications that for a few years he had turned his life arround – prior to losing he job as a bouncer at a bar do to the lockdowns.
But he appears to have returned to crime and drugs when he lost his job.
You are not personally required to assess him as a thug, but the Cafe Owner may have been insensitive, but he was not inaccurate in doing so.
I do not think most of those protesting Floyd are idiots, but calling them idiots is not hate speech.
Look at the posts here – home many do not call someone an idiot ?
No one has claimed that the police are only barred from executing “good people”.
No one claims we can not morn or protest the bad conduct of police because that conduct was directed at a deeply flawed person.
The actions of Chauvin were criminally wrong – even if Floyd had just committed a murder.
The police were called because Floyd passed a counterfeit 20.
Was that proved ? No and it is not likely ever to be as he will not be prosecuted,
But there was sufficient proof to arrest him.
And if you are desparate, the shop owner provided the police with the 20.
I would note that the Shop owner tested the 20 and determined it was counterfiet.
They asked Floyd to take it back and return his purchases, he refused and left the store.
That is when the police were called.
It appears he went to his car immediately outside the story and got high on Fentanyl before the police arrived.
Nearly the whole planet agrees that Floyd did nothing that justified murdering him.
Candace Owens agrees with that, the Cafe owner agrees with that Barr agrees with that Trump agrees with that I agree with that. Every poster here I beleive agrees with that.
But Floyd is not a martyr, he is not a saint, and people are free to be critical of him.
Just as Floyd did not deserve to die, despite his mistakes,
The people you are attacking do not deserve to have their lives destroyed – even if they were wrong. But especially because they are not.
Candace Owen’s and the Cafe Owner can both be sued for defamation if their statements about Floyd are false and damaging.
GoFundMe can not.
There is in fact and law no such thing as “hate speech”.
There is defamation – false and damaging speech about another.
There is no legal protection for that.
Child pornography is not protected speech.
Incitement to violence – where the danger is clear and present is not protected.
Whatever your concept of “hate speech” if it is not one of those it is constitutionally protected, and the option available to you is to speak yourself.
So go watch Candace Owen’s video, and provide us with a list of the factual errors.
Tell us what is it that the Cafe Owner said that is objectively wrong ?
We can chastise both for insensitivity, but not error.
I will further note – you are playing with fire.
You are clueless at how fragile businesses are.
So far those on the right have tolerated significant amounts of censorship from Clueless millenians that run the social media giants.
You said Candace can go elsewhere. that is hard, but eventually that is what is going to happen if this keeps up.
FaceBooks stock price took a huge hit last year when they announced a growth rate that was below expectations. The price of the stock is the value of the company, it effects its ability to borrow to raise capital and the interest it must pay on loans.
An actual 1% loss of subscribers to facebook would probably drive its share price into the toilet. Why do you think Zuckerberg is playing games and speaking out of both sides of his mouth.
There is a reason that most big business try to run as far as they can from politics.
Why when they donate, they tend to donate to both parties.
Why they respond rapidly to protests – whether left or right.
Because no business – especially big business can afford to piss people – left or right off.
If you keep this nonsense up – it will not be Trump and the FTC that will force the issue,
it will be exactly what you recomend. It will be people sick and tired of this “going someplace else”.
The giants of Social Media have been incredibly left friendly.
But I will warn you they will spin on a dime if there is a real threat of lost market share.
Investors do not care about politics, they care about rising share value.
Businesses that are not growing their customer base are hurting their value.
You would only need a small portion of conservatives to shift elsewhere to force social media to “bend a knee”
Look at the issue of Players taking a knee at football games.
The NFL and owners caved when ticket sales dropped 15%.
Now they are proclaiming they were wrong.
Pretend what ever you wish – the NFL is not going to lose money to respect players desire to protest. Further I never understood that battle ground.
While players are disproportionately black. Fans are disproportionately conservative and patriotic.
The headline should have read “BLACK conservative commentator.” Granted, you reveal way down in the column that she is black. If I’m not mistaken, the café owner is also black. By the way, George Floyd WAS a thug! He was arrested no less than nine times and served time here in Texas for a home invasion in which he brutalized a mother in the presence of her child and shoved a pistol into her stomach and demanded drugs and money, then ransacked the house. The official autopsy report reveals that he was high on drugs when cops arrested him in Minneapolis. Al Sharpton and the usual suspects claimed the incident was racial. Floyd’s funeral yesterday was an attempt to deify him. I guarantee you the woman he brutalized has not been asked for her opinion of him.
AND YOU WONDER WHY PEOPLE FEAR YOUNG BLACK MALES
The single most relevant fact for understanding America right now is the one you are least supposed to mention: Blacks are vastly more homicidal than any other racial or ethnic group.
Nobody seems to know this when thinking about the reality behind our ongoing Largely Peaceful Riots, although, oddly, the same folks seem to know it when thinking about where to buy real estate or listening to rap.
While it may seem as if America’s Establishment has suddenly gone insane, elites are just following out the inevitable logic of dogmas mandated decades ago.
As I’ve been pointing out for approaching thirty years now, the rationale of mainstream left-of-centrism eventually leads to some extraordinarily radical and impractical conclusions. The current craziness is rooted in ideas that seemed rather moderate when they first became mandatory. But, as Lenin liked to point out, “He who says ‘A’ must say ‘B.’” The bill for starting from dishonest premises is now coming due.
For decades, we’ve been shielded from the full brunt of this worldview by the sensible hypocrisy of most of its subscribers. But call-out culture is reducing that societal safety margin.
For example, in the latter decades of the 20th century it became increasingly verboten to publicly acknowledge the lower average intelligence and higher average homicide rate of African-Americans.
This was not because the scientists who painstakingly documented these massively important facts about American society were proven wrong. Instead, they won the extensive arguments in the academic literature.
No, it was precisely because the evidence for the validity of these behavioral disparities was so overwhelming that it was driven out of public discussion. It was felt that mentioning the social science would be bad for the self-esteem of blacks. (By the way, another little-known social-science finding is that blacks don’t actually have a deficiency of self-esteem. Of course, you might have already surmised that from listening to hip-hop…just as you might also have guessed from the same musical genre that they do have a problem with shooting each other too much.)
“The bill for starting from dishonest premises is now coming due.”
Over the years, this artificial ignorance caused much incompetence and waste in public policy (for instance, the Bush-Kennedy No Child Left Behind act of 2002, which, hilariously, legally mandated that by 2014 all public school students must test above average).
On the other hand, people were seldom persecuted for acting in their private lives as if they were less than true believers. White parents bought homes in “safe” neighborhoods with “good” schools without feeling too much pressure to agonize over what exactly they meant by these euphemisms.
But what goes unsaid eventually becomes unthinkable.
As the years go by, there are fewer and fewer people in the press who can actually remember how the implementation of anti-racist theories about law enforcement in the 1960s and 1970s destroyed America’s cities, turning even Manhattan from the setting for Breakfast at Tiffany’s in 1961 to the backdrop for Taxi Driver in 1976.
But with Emmett Till and redlining filling up the textbooks and headlines these days, who besides the old knows anything anymore about the most recent sixty years? History has been rewritten so that liberalism didn’t fail, it was never even tried. Therefore, we are being lectured to adopt the same policies today that managed to double the murder rate over the course of the 1960s and 1970s.
And the media have been on a massive diversity binge, hiring not particularly bright young people of the now-privileged racial groups. These newcomers are naturally bigoted in favor of their own race, and thus are unlikely to question the politically correct pablum they’ve been taught.
Moreover the emergence of social media has empowered the Madame Defarges of the world to seek vengeance for every petty slight they can remember, climb the corporate ladder by getting higher-ups fired, and demand ludicrous governmental policies like abolishing the police.
For example, something that has become clear over the past two weeks is that virtually nobody in the public sphere is much aware anymore, in one sense, of the fundamental statistical reality of American society, which explains (along with much else) more than anything else about why blacks get in trouble with the law so often: Blacks are far more homicidal than any other group.
It’s not exactly that pundits don’t know this fact, more or less, it’s more that pointing it out is not a move allowed by the rules of their game. So, they forget; or practice, as Orwell called it, “protective stupidity.” Hence, very few can even recall how bad the racial ratios for homicide are, far worse than what can be explained by socioeconomic status or bias or whatever other excuses are fashionable.
Granted, I don’t really understand how so many people can both know and not know a simple statistic at the same time. I’m kind of a single-brained guy, so I’m always saying terribly gauche things like: Well, of course, home prices are lower in black neighborhoods, that’s due to all the shootings.
But most other white urban sophisticates somehow understand all the real estate price implications of race without ever articulating exactly why they instinctively know what is or isn’t a “safe” neighborhood with “good” schools. It’s a wonderful skill to sense what will make you money without ever admitting the reality to yourself. I just don’t have that knack, so I’m constantly articulating what everybody else intuits without having to spell it out.
One reason for the mounting ignorance, though, is that the Obama administration stopped reporting the standard breakouts on homicides by race once the Ferguson brouhaha got going, and then the feckless Trump administration failed to pick up the ball.
Still, the 2011 report by the Obama administration’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980–2008, is enlightening:
Blacks were disproportionately represented as both homicide victims and offenders…. The offending rate for blacks (34.4 per 100,000) was almost 8 times higher than the rate for whites (4.5 per 100,000).
From 1980 to 2008, blacks were 7.6 times as likely to be homicide offenders as whites, which, remarkably, is almost as large a ratio as males to females (8.9 times). Comprising only about 13 percent of the U.S. population, African-Americans accounted for 52.5 percent of homicide offenders.
These are shocking statistics, some of the most extraordinary gaps in all the social sciences.
And they might even be understating the true black-white ratio because the federal statistics lump most Hispanics in with whites. Moreover, murderers are tracked down less often in black cities than in white suburbs because, as they say, snitches get stitches: For example, about a dozen witnesses were murdered per year in South Central Los Angeles in the early 2000s.
A 2011 Penn State study estimated the true black-to-white homicide ratio to be 11.7 to 1.
Yet virtually nobody has mentioned this reality in the mainstream media in weeks or perhaps years.
Society’s most treasured faith has become that blacks must be as intelligent and law-abiding as everybody else is on average. So, the only explanation allowed for why they don’t act that way is because White People Are Bad.
The logic of this centrist creed implies that, therefore, steps must be taken to Abolish Whiteness.
Granted, these steps should be Largely Peaceful, of course. But if the victims of your 401 years of racism get a little worked up while taking their just desserts, who can blame them?
Not the prestige press, that’s for sure…
Thanks for the racist screed antonio. It’s so helpful for all of us to stereotype members of the races and be sure to count any transgressions by a member against all members of that race. Of course as white people, we’ve been only helpful and concerned pussycats and the rest of the world loves us for that.
GFY
BTB sorry, but facts are not racist.
The rates of criminality and violence of whites are more than double that of asians.
It that racist ? If so who is the oppressed class ?
There are myriads of possible explanations or maybe none at all.
Those are questions for social scientists who have been terrified aware from exploring them.
I have no problem with The police relying on stereotypes that are true.
I do not expect that police officers are pondering why they are true – that is for others.
Ans should those stereotypes fail to be true in the future – I would expect police to alter policing in reflection of that.
Facts do not care about your feelings.
They do not care about your race.
All of us would be ecstatic if you found the underlying causes so that we could reduce criminal conduct among blacks, whites even asians.
But that has not happened.
John, the constant repeating of selected facts – if indeed they are – aimed at a specific race, with the intent of increasing pre-judgement of and even hostility toward members is racist. Whatever race we may be members of very likely has some history or current characteristics less than positive in the judgement of others. That does not mean that we as members carry a burden or should be prejudged on that basis.
PS Antonio is a one trick pony of animus towards blacks.
@btb
You probably won’t believe this (and I don’t give a rats a@@) but i have generally gotten along well with blacks in professional situations, including the US military. Under no illusions, am careful what I say and no, not going to claim some of my best friends are black. I am just tired of the constant worship, the double standards, the constant excusal of bad behavior, the deceit, denial and delusion RE black conduct.
Despite what you think many other people fear the out of control, disproportionate black criminality also. And that includes you, sir. And if you say no, you are either a fool or a liar.
Individually I try to treat everyone with respect and kindness. Have few problems in my daily life.
Mist left wing nuts have little or no actual experience with real minorities,
and they presume that everyone outside the far left has less than they do.
I do not know BTB, but would guess there are more LGBTQ+, black, etc. in my circle probably by a significant number than his.
I am libertarain, but I find more tolerance from the right than left.
Myriads of lefties who have teken the red pill learn how hatefull their freinds were and how tolerant the right half of the world is.
John Say – did you see that de Blasio wants Amy Cooper charged with a hate crime for filing a false 911 report against an African-American. He wants it made a felony.
Wonderful – lets make a non-crime into a hate crime.
I hope this is just DeBlassio trying to appeal to the mob.
Hopefully the NYAG does not take this seriously.
We do not need some protracted court case to force NY to accept that this is not a good idea,
Or worse still, have a win that will make people less safe for decades.
Paul C……..I was just thinking today how Christian Cooper is probably the most depressed guy in America because he was riding so high for 24 hours, on his way to certan stardom, and boom! George Floyd knocked him right off the front page!! He will never regain that momentum….I know he hates to waste a perfectly good faux racist story.
Paul C– you’re not black but pretend that you play one on TV. Do you recognize de Blasio as pandering in the hopes that you are dumb enough to fall for it?
honestlawyer – although the competition is fierce, DeBlasio is either the worst or next to the worst mayor in the US.
@John Say
“Most left wing nuts have little or no actual experience with real minorities, and they presume that everyone outside the far left has less than they do.”
Good point and they love them from afar while living in an exclusive neighborhood and pontificating to us lesser mortals.
antonio
“John, the constant repeating of selected facts – if indeed they are – aimed at a specific race, with the intent of increasing pre-judgement of and even hostility toward members is racist”.
Just to be clear – you are saying that you can not repeat the truth if the truth is in your opinion racist. ?
I am with J.S. Mill
“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”
And should you bother to read it
https://heterodoxacademy.org/library/all-minus-one/
You might learn that you can not create a well functioning society otherwise.
I have and will continue to support the free speech rights of actual racists,
and certainly those who speak inconvenient truths.
In this specific instance – we know certain racially inconvenient things to be true.
If that is truth that can not be spoken – how will we ever find and correct the underlying causes.
I do not beleive that blacks are genetically more predisposed to violence than whites or whites than asians. But the data shows incontrovertably that race and violence correlate.
Why ? Is it Genes ? I doubt that, but whether yes or no, we should find out.
If not, then what is the cause ?
In the meantime. It is reasonable for a police officer – whatever their race might be to be more apprehensive when dealing with groups with a much higher propensity for violence.
Should the police pretend drug dealers are not violent ? That cartels are not violent, that the russian mob is not violent ?
“Whatever race we may be members of very likely has some history or current characteristics less than positive in the judgement of others. That does not mean that we as members carry a burden or should be prejudged on that basis.”
I am told by the left and BLM that I am the beneficiary of white priviledge,
Growing up bullied because I was a nerd with kinky hair did not feel vary privildged.
O am told that i owe reparations to blacks because of the harm my ancestors inflected on them with slavery., but my ancestors are from Ireland and scotland, they came here to fight against slavery in the Civil war and they were treated like shit by Wasps – am I owed reparations too ? I grew up catholic and was told by many protestants that if I did not convert I was going to hell for being catholic. Some did not think that was enough.
There are infinite forms of discrimination. We are all more comfortable those more like us and not with those more different. I choose to associate with my own kind – nerds and geeks, and libertarians. My daughter is chinese, my son Korean, so most of the families mine is close to are mixed. Minorities of all kinds treat me much better when I encounter them in public, while a tiny portion of whites glare and even say nasty things.
When I told people I was adopting from china, and employee confronted me and told me I should get a white baby and she could get me one.
The world is full of assorted predjudices and isms.
You do not fix that with laws. You do not fix that with more discrimination.
John, I find your response to be fatuous and blind. The issue is neither free speech not your opinion on reparations. Fortunately the solution is occurring naturally and with speed among the young.
“Fortunately the solution is occurring naturally and with speed among the young.”
That would be those forming the “free city of seattle” or whatever they are calling themselves ?
Honestly i am not particularly worried about the young.
They can get things right or they can grow up suffering through the consequences of what they left wing nut teachers who were clueless about reality afflicted on them.
Progressivism is self punishing.
Unfortunately it tends to be pretty bad for those who are not too.
Fortunately my enclave is likely safe for the rest of my life.
You I hope do not have the misfortune of having to live to see what you beleive become reality.
No John, the young across the nation and the world are less racist than older humans. You may remember the quick death of opposition to gay rights and marriage, not so long ago a political asset for the GOP, and now an albatross they are trying to shed . You may note the mixed crowds of protesters across the nation, not just Seattle – nice try!
Aaginst your and Kurtz’s wishes, progress is possible if not guaranteed, and so far so good.
bythebook– I am surprised you would say the young are less racist than older humans because it so wrong. The young today, if gauged by the events of the last several weeks, consider any white person to be bad, or even evil, if they do not agree with the young people’s ideology, if you can call it that. Young black people hate white people as evidenced by the protests and what was chanted and done. Us older humans who may have been raised racists, came to grips with our racism years ago, got over it and moved on. The only ones who did not, speaking in generalities, are liberal democrats who truly believe blacks are inferior (witness affirmative action) but pretend they think of them as equal.
Honest, your selective hearing and viewing is faulty and you seem blind to the obvious.How many black friends did you have in high school? Probably didn’t go to school with any in the south. How many do your grandkids have? You yourself wrote about black couples in your small town now. How many were there in the 60s and 70s?
For better or worse – and if it ends primitive tribalism and racism, mostly for the better – race will cease to exist in the near future – not our life times – because of intermarriage. It remains to be seen if nationalism will continue, but it has an approaching expiration date as far as it’s utility is concerned. The world is changing fast, and as it regards race, to the better.
Oh, no! the I have more black friends than you trope!
Humans are tribal. It is an inherent part of who we are.
Self, family, clan, tribe, city, county, state, nation.
Our connections to others diminish with distance.
That is actually necescary
And entirely absent in leftist ideology.
I noted before my daughter is adopted from china.
I can not see a “save the children” commercial without crying. My family donates to charities that provide things for orphans in poor parts of the world.
When you demand I pay for M4A or border crossers, or free college or the US poor,
You are stealing what i can give to orphans elsewhere in the world.
My daughter changed my “tribe” it is different from yours.
If as you say Race somehow magically disappears it will not alter the fact that humans are inherently tribal. It is not “primitive” it is wired into our DNA.
Homi Sapiens has been arround 150,000 years, atleast 7,000 of that organized in units much larger than tribes and it has not gone away.
The world is changing fast and nations are an archaic concept ?
This is not the first period of globalization in world history.
We had unprecedented globalization prior to WWI.
Even as it appeared conflict was inevitable, no one beleived it would happen
Just as you are saying, and others do today, purportedly our trade and other ties were strong enough to overcome our national identities.
And yet War came and tens of millions died.
Even today – the likelyhood of the EU surviving the decade is less than 50:50.
An assortment of stresses will likely rip China apart.
Even the US seems increasingly like two countries.
I am quite optomistic about the future – but not based on any of your premises.
The world – and particularly the least of the world are an order of magnitude better off than they have ever been, and that is the consequences of freedom.
If the egalitarian impulses of today vilely educated youth do not destroy us the future is bright.
I would further note that Young white progressives are actually significantly more deluded than young blacks.
There is a good possibility that the future of young blacks is especially bright as they have not been as badly damaged by a ideologically corrupt education system.
Though they migh have some problems with math.
John, I didn’t say that. Your stock is taking a nose dive.
BTB: John, I didn’t say that. Your stock is taking a nose dive.
BTB: No John, the young across the nation and the world are less racist than older humans.
“No John, the young across the nation and the world are less racist than older humans.”
From what i can see the young today are the most intolerant generation ever.
Further they are deeply steeped in ideology and corrupt philosophy that we know how it ends.
Why do you expect better outcomes than the french revolution, the Russian, the Cuban, Mao, Venezuella ? or any other egalitarian revolution ever ?
There is a reason that egalitarianism corresponds to bloody revolutions.
It is because the very purportedly un racist approach of the modern youth are not actually less racist.
Regardless, I need not argue with you.
If they gain real power – we get to see the results. Fortunately it is unlikely to effect me.
“You may remember the quick death of opposition to gay rights and marriage,”
No I remember that fight taking 50 years. BTW that was the prior generation.
And I would note that opostions to gay rights was bipartisan.
The real shift on Gay rights came because evangelicals dropped oppostion.
Their power in the GOP diminished, and there were potentially pollitical benefits for them to reducing the government power in marraige.
I would note that the right and the nation remains staunchly divided over abortion.
I would also note that you claim that Gay rights flipped over night.
Which means you admit it has flipped.
Yet you somehow think that the same people who are prepared to happily accept gays.
and still vigorously racist ?
Logic eludes you.
I have said this before “we live in the least racist moment in all of history (except tomorow) and the least racist country in the world”
You are trying to solve a problem that is inconsequential.
The racism of the 60’s when I grew up was small compared to that when my parents grew up. Yet, things were 100 times worse in the 60’s than today.
There is no consequential racial predjudice and little consequential prejudice against blacks.
I would further note Floyd’s family is trying to get murder 1 charges against Chauvin.
Why ? They knew each other and had conflict before. They both worked security for the same club, and Chauvin was a thug then and Floyd had to rain him in.
This never was about race.
“not so long ago a political asset for the GOP, and now an albatross they are trying to shed”
So somehow or other you think this is an albatross arround the GOP’s neck ?
Like republicans were the party of slave owners ? The KKK ? Jim Crow ? That fought the CRA and VRA ? of Lynching ? The last democrat senator KKK member only retired recently. Yet you think this is a republican problem ?
“You may note the mixed crowds of protesters across the nation, not just Seattle”
And LA, and Mineapolis, and Chicago, and Atlanta, and NYC, and Boston.
Please name a single place where there are consequential protests and a republican anywhere in site ? Mayors ? ALL democrats, City Counsel’s ? All democrats. Governor’s ? Democrats.
If there is institutional racism – it is in institutions run by democrats.
– nice try!
“Against your and Kurtz’s wishes, progress is possible if not guaranteed, and so far so good.”
Please do not compare me to Kurtz. He is almost as irrational as you.
Progress is possible. Just about every clear concrete proposal I am hearing, I support.
Qualified immuntiy – libertarians have fought that for decades.
Militarization of the police – again
Diminished power of unions – infact just eliminate Government workers unions as FDR beleived.
separate traffice law enforcement from criminal law enforcement and have completely independent public safety officers with no guns and no arrest powers
End policing for profit.
End Asset Forfeiture
Teach strategies for descalating conflict.
All of the above and several more – not only do I support, but i have fought against for decades.
As have pretty much all libertarians.
WHERE WAS THE LEFT ?
BLM got to a point where people where suddenly listening, and they discovered they had nothing to say. And when they googled “fix policing” – they found all the libertarian work of decades.
While I would like to see every single one of those go through,
You have ZERO support for “defund the police”.
You have zero support for demonize the police
Further I am very familiar with the facts.
are some small portion of police racist ? Sure.
Is there systemic racism anywhere in this country ? Nope.
It there statisitical evidence of racism in policing ? Nope.
Do not try to sell me bs.
If you have not figured it out – your feelings do not change facts.
Finally, I am libertarian – not An-Cap.
Anarchists today are almost exclusively on the left.
Law enforcement is one of the few legitimate justifiable powers of government.
And we can all watch how well things go in Seattle.
They have already had their food stolen, picked a King, beaten one of their own up, and built a wall.
It is like their are channeling their own carciture of Trump.
John Say,
I edited the above comment so that it would post. It originally had a prohibited word that is concatenated as “BS”. You seem to have invested some time in writing this so I made the change to that word. The automatic deletion can be avoided next time by not using such wording.
Thank you.
I apologize.
I am unclear on “the rules”.
BS is ok ? But the full version is not ?
I am not trying to be factitious.
I am really looking to understand.
I have my own rules – that admittedly I sometimes violate when things get heated.
My rule is that it is acceptable to criticize arguments. But not people.
Does JT.org have official rules ?
I am not trying to challenge “the rules” merely learn what they are.
John Say,
No worries at all. I knew it was simply an oversight on what words were permissible. Most are rather self-evident but the BS one gets the most mistaken for being ok to use.
The website has a Civility Rule, a link can be found at the top of the first page. https://jonathanturley.org/civility-rule/ . It is general by nature but sufficient I would say to convey an understanding in the minds of reasonable individuals what is expected. The system is configured essentially to knock out prohibited words, mostly profanity and also it sends into moderation comments having more than two hyperlinks. This happens immediately. But when comments are found by moderators to be in contravention of the civility rule they are subject to summary deletion. Ordinary, decent comments do not have the latter enforcement happen. The former, automatic deletions tend to happen to individuals who might unknowningly write an improper word or too many links. The wordpress system, the software backend for this website, has an anti-spam feature that uses rules and procedures that identify and shunt suspected spam into a trap that the site moderators can review occasionally and see if the automatic system was overly positive on indentifying a legitimate comment as spam. About five years ago regular comments were showing up in spam frequently, but we found a few bugs that hair triggered a positive result so I removed these. For the most part it worked and wordpress has gotten better over the years at differentiating between comments and soliticitations for wire transfers from Nigerian Princes to gullible individuals abound on the Internet.
So you’re good to go.
John Say – it is a learning curve. If you think a word will be problematic, type it thusly. S$$t. We are all learned enough to fill in the blanks. 🙂
From what I am gathering – though there is a civility code, the real rule is do not trigger the WordPress filter.
I have Zero problems with JT having whatever rules he wants.
But I am not a big fan of automated filtering for anything beyond spam filtering.
My children are in their 20’s and fortunately received a decent education and understanding of the world from their parents.
They are capable of managing on their own, running their own life.
They know how to file their taxes, go to a job interview, deal with a teacher/professor that is ideologically nuts, and still get good grades, deal with ecounters with authority and law enforcement.
In short they are adults and far ahead of their peers.
Are the rest of youth today evil ? No, but they have been enfeebled by paranoid parents, and an eductation system that has fallen off the left edge. that makes students less able to survive and thrive than they started.
Everyone today should be given a tent, and a backpack of supplies and sent out into a giant federal park for a week, with no cell phone, no internet.
They have all been deprived of the tools and understanding needed to survive in life.
And they are under the delusion that they are owed something.
I expect that if they actually manage to get their way – the world will teach them a brutal lesson.
John, good for you, but there are literally millions of “kids” in America doing just fine and who are smart, capable, and accomplished. Even a liberal like me who made them smoke weed, carry the little red book, and sing the Internationale everyday has 2 making their way in the world – older than yours and thus more accomplished – who any parent would be proud to claim.
Neither of us deserves a medal,nor are they a confirmation of our every thought and habit.
“John, good for you, but there are literally millions of “kids” in America doing just fine and who are smart, capable, and accomplished.”
That is likely correct, but they are a small portion of young adults.
Regardless. there is lots of data on this.
Anxiety and depression among young adults are 3-4 times what they were as little as a decade ago. Young adults today have the double whammy of a shitty education, and hellicopter parenting, Again there is lots of studies on this.
“Even a liberal like me who made them smoke weed, carry the little red book, and sing the Internationale everyday has 2 making their way in the world”
If you place any credance in “the little red book” or “the internationale” you are not liberal.
Jefferson was liberal, Locke was liberal, Mill was liberal. Smith was liberal.
Robspierre was not liberal. Marx, was not liberal. Mao was not liberal, Lenin was not liberal.
Further if you “made” anyone do anything – you are definitely not liberal.
“– older than yours and thus more accomplished”
non-sequitur
“– who any parent would be proud to claim.”
non-sequitur and irrelevant.
“Neither of us deserves a medal,nor are they a confirmation of our every thought and habit.”
Not looking for a medal. Ultimately everyone is responsible for their own lives.
If you were raped – you have my empathy, but ultimately you must get over it.
If you were victim of some other crime
If you were discriminated against because of your race, gender, orientation, ….
If you were discriminated against because you are smart or talented.
If you were discriminated against because you are not smart or have no talent.
If you had crappy parents.
If you had a crappy education.
It is your life and no one can fix it but you.
Some of these can not be fixed at all.
Tomorow you could be struck by lightning.
This is not fair. Life is not fair.
The modern world – the result of ACTUAL liberals, to an enormous extent mitigates the odds of SOME of the bad things that might happen to you.
Aside from ACTUAL liberalism, nothing else does so for most people.
A small few elites maybe, but that is all.
Further none of this is new. It is all well known.
The positive benefits when society values liberty are obvious to anyone who bothers to look. They should be obvious to anyone with an education. But the progressive heirs to past egalitarianism have taken over the academy and hide history – that of actual liberalism as well as the inevitable blood of egalitarianism.
I completely disagree that young adults are well prepared. They have been served abysmally, by their parents and their teachers.
And I have no problems blaming them – you.
But blame will not fix it. Just as jailing a rapist does not get your life back.
You must do that yourself.
And young adults today are starting at significant disadvantage.
I honestly hope that CHAZ is left alone. I hope that we see similar enclaves spring up elsewhere. I hope that young adults get to test the crap you claim to have taught them.
I have complete confidence based on history, that what has never worked before will not work in Seattle or anywhere.
Those who can not learn from the mistakes of others – history, must learn from their own mistakes.
John – and Kurtz – we disagree on the state of our youth. You must know your complaint is SOP for the old going back at least hundreds if not thousands of years.
I did not really make my kids carry Mao’s book or sing the internationale or smoke pot. I tried to teach them to be respectful and decent in their relations with others and to maintain an open and inquiring mind. They exhibit these traits, which I suppose I can try to claim some credit for, but who knows.
I meant liberal in the contemporary sense, though I am a rationalist who believes the Enlightenment was the step off point for science and progress in government and civilization we now enjoy. Most of the recent historical calamities we suffered in the last century were due to the primitive tribalism and archaic governmental systems from the past. It is true it was made worse by technological advancements due to science, and that our most serious threats in the future are from technological changes. I believe our most powerful antidotes will also be technological.
I recommend to you this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Enlightenment-Now/dp/0525559027/ref=pd_lpo_14_img_0/143-1971073-1068457?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0525559027&pd_rd_r=b758d938-e17d-4af9-9c91-d782af2b2337&pd_rd_w=BD9zP&pd_rd_wg=8VRxy&pf_rd_p=7b36d496-f366-4631-94d3-61b87b52511b&pf_rd_r=W12BRMMNDNCM726JG9SW&psc=1&refRID=W12BRMMNDNCM726JG9SW
“we disagree on the state of our youth.”
If I read your comments correctly – your culpable for breaking them.
“You must know your complaint is SOP for the old going back at least hundreds if not thousands of years.”
Nope, I am NOT claiming – “kids these days, whats gotten into them”, nor is the data.
WE Broke them.
“I did not really make my kids carry Mao’s book or sing the internationale or smoke pot.”
All I can tell about you is write you write in your comments. If my reply is in error, because your comment was innaccurate – that is on you.
“I tried to teach them to be respectful and decent in their relations with others and to maintain an open and inquiring mind. They exhibit these traits, which I suppose I can try to claim some credit for, but who knows.”
Hopefully, that is true and you succeeded.
I would ask though – what are the odds that – through you or their teachers, they learned real history ? Are the aware of the history of ideas – those that failed, and those that succeeded ? Or have they just been exposed to a harrangue about the flaws of the very western civilization that has lead to the value of tolerance, and diversity ?
We can pull statutes of Columbus, or Churchill or Jefferson, or Lincoln down.
But ranting about the bad conduct of our forefathers obscures the fact that those they displaced were worse. Slavery was comonplace with “Native Americans” before columbus. Slavery ended with western nations before anywhere else in the world. Arguably it is still practiced in some parts of the world. It was still legal in many less developed non-white countries to the late 20th century.
“I meant liberal in the contemporary sense”
Througout history outside the machinations of the polictical left, the meaning of words rarely changed dramatically over time – pronunciation changed, and wirds fell out of or came into use.
But the policital inversion of words is something Orwell noticed as a trait of the left.
To my knowledge this started with “progressive” – which was the old and now new word for the authoritarian socialist left. It was commonlace in the early 20th century, but left ideology became so repugnant it turned into a term of derision, and “progressives” forceably took over the word “liberal” – until having converted “liberal” into a curse word – as evidence by the way many conservaitves use it they reverted back to “progressive” – having given the word a century to lose its stench.
Regardless, the modern left is not liberal. In the 60’s liberal students occupied berkeley and other colleges demanding free speech. Today’s students do so to demand the opposition be silenced. Todays left is “illiberal”.
You talk about victories in gay rights and other forms of discrimination.
I was persuaded ti fight for gay rights as a teen in the 70’s because a gay writer described his love exactly as my own for my girlfriend (now wife). Because all he wanted was to be treated the same. Today the left looks to elevate the minorities as Hero’s, and punish everyone else as villan’s. Everyone who is not trans or gay or black is evil because of their silence. Well i was not silent decades ago – and I am not silent now, as those who rights I spoke for become the oppressors.
You are not championing tolerance if you are ranting about and seeking to punish others because of their priviledge. Further you are selling an ideology that is even more doomed to fail by eating its own than marxism. Post moderism pits “the oppressed” against each other. It makes the class distinctions of marxism look clean.
Regardless, today’s left is not liberal.
YOU are not liberal.
I am liberal.
You do not get to own the word.
Equally importantly you do not get to own the meaning of ANY words.
You do not get to foreclose debate by co-opting the meaning of words as Orwell and Huxley foresaw.
“though I am a rationalist who believes the Enlightenment was the step off point for science and progress in government and civilization we now enjoy.”
It is the elevation of individual liberty that resulted in all the other progress,
The key concept – free will dates back to genesis. though it took a long time to develop.
“Most of the recent historical calamities we suffered in the last century were due to the primitive tribalism and archaic governmental systems from the past. It is true it was made worse by technological advancements due to science, and that our most serious threats in the future are from technological changes. I believe our most powerful antidotes will also be technological”
This is utter nonsense
I have not read Pinker, But I have listened to many of his lectures, and your are pretty much antithecal to much of what he says.
PS John and Kurtz – When I speak of progress in civilization, consider that the behavior of ISIS was met by the revulsion by the overwhelming majority of humans across the globe. Then consider that beheadings and worse were SOP for the leaders of Europe for a millenia or more. Consider slavery. lynchings, etc in our own country.
“PS John and Kurtz – When I speak of progress in civilization, consider that the behavior of ISIS was met by the revulsion by the overwhelming majority of humans across the globe. Then consider that beheadings and worse were SOP for the leaders of Europe for a millenia or more. Consider slavery. lynchings, etc in our own country.”
Over the course of a century there were about 8000 lynchings in the US according the EJI – I have been to the lynching Mueseum. I have talked with Brian Stevenson.
There were 800,000 Tutsi machetted to death by the Hutu in Rwanda, 3 decades ago
There were 2M Cambodians killed in the Killing fields.
The lowest estimates of Mao’s murders is 20M, the highest well over 100M.
Stalin executed nearly 100M of his own people.
Human sacrifice was commonplace through all native cultures in South and central america into the US midwest.
Absolutely, a wide assortment of capital punishment occured in Europe going all the way back to Rome.
But you have to go to pre-roman europe to find human sacrifice.
In europe beheadings were not common place. They were punishments for often trumped up charges of treason and fell on the aristocracy.
The glaring exception is the french revolution – though the Germans guillotined more people that Robespierre.
ha ha, you and john say are both liberals of a different version. you are a liberal, and he is what they call a libertarian, or, a “classic liberal”
this is like version a and b. you’re the newer type and he’s the older type
you both “believe in progress”
i don’t “believe in progress”
so i cant be either a liberal or a classic liberal
all political dogmatisms are at best models for action, or at worse, simply propaganda to round up new troops and volunteers
my style of political thinking is like Bruce Lee’s version of kung fu, the style of no style.
I’m increasingly and utterly pragmatic and cynical
that is not to say ideas don’t matter. they do. facts do too.
but the intellectual superstructures that are built to frame the possibilities of beliefs and ideas, are intentionally limiting. they are to keep you inside a house of what is acceptable.
the key insight is that the house has owners. the owners will furnish you floorplan a or b. liberal or classic liberal. Dem or Republican. or you can go live in the shed if you are a racist or an anarchist. and the racists and anarchists like living in the shed, trust me. just like you like living in a or b.
but the owners decide your spate of choices.
now this is marxist sounding talk, and it does draw on class conflict as a historical theme, but I could have got that from hegel without marx. but let’s not get dragged down in philosophy, heaven forbid.
just because i use a marxist sounding analysis, does not mean I will be lead by marxists where i am told. I am not a Democrat, not a civil rigthts advocate, not a protester, not an antifa, not a communist, not a wobbly, not a fan or conspirator with BLM nor the CCP.
I’m just a regular person trying to understand the world so i can plan my life out the next week, month, and year.
I’ll let you guys tell everybody else what to think. Im done with that vain errand.
The only thinking I am doing today is how to plan to survive and thrive over the coming chaos.
The year of the rat is diseased with plaguelike hazards for our well-being all all these empty words, and phony debates about trifles, fritter important time away, time needed to plan action
now i first wanted to share a clip from george carlin, but this one’s even better
No, BTB is not a “liberal”. Actual liberals are scarce as hens teeth.
Words have meaning. Liberal either means one who prizes liberty, or up means down.
Left and liberal are not the same.
Nearly all the left side of the political spectrum today is illiberal.
Regardless, the least we could do is use words correctly.
One of the key tactics of the modern left is word mangling. The destruction of the meaning of words is actually a part of postmodernism.
It makes communications impossible.
Read Orwell or Huxley or any of the other dystopians – the destruction of the meaning of words is critical. Words can change meaning at whim.
In the real world we see that in the USSR and PRC. Everyone, even the elite must keep on their toes. Tomorow they could have to disavow what was dogma yesterday.
And we see that with modern progressives today.
Armed but peacefull protests are violent and dangerous, but violent rioting and arson are peaceful protest.
anyone who does not use words the same way from instance to instance it a hypocrit, a liar and not to be trusted about anything.
How about a Bill Mahr “new rule”
You have to make two actual arguments for each insult.
You owe 4 arguments.
You and I are at odds over a foundational principle – not just of this country, but of western civilization.
Whatever a problem you think Racism is, censorship is worse.
I do not beleive in private censorship, but I do beleive that in an actual free market it self eradicates.
You are fixated on racism – I do not profess to be the penultimate expert.
But I experiences lots of discrimination growing up, and I have had to deal with lots of racial discrimination – besides black/white with two asian kids.
I am not ignorant of racism. But ultimately the fix is free speech. It is also the fix for all other discrimination, and all other values conflicts.
I am not going to trade possibly the single most valuable attribute of western culture for what you are selling, which ultimate will not work.
“You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.”
The only choice is freedom – including the freedom to say bad things.
@btb
GFY? Please….impossible to do and besides I am not homosexual. and BTW name calling is not a reply or argument. Inconvenient facts but facts nonetheless. I call them “hate facts” because they go against the egalitarian narrative of the world you wish were true.
So are you going to say, blacks in the aggregate do not engage in a disproportionate amount of criminal activity? You can’t because they do. Way more. I would recommend you read “The Color of Crime” which can be down loaded for free in pdf format. Of course you won’t, might be too upsetting. And I bet despite your incessant virtue signaling you live in a very nice suburban or rural area. I never place much value in what leftists SAY but in what they DO. And I’ve found in mating and migratory habits they tend to be no different than the very people them condemn for being “racist”. Being a good leftist doesn’t require one to get their hands dirty, does it?
And BTW – I cannot be racist, since I’m Hispanic, name and all. And if I were a liberal, bit@h and moan one, you would be ki@@ing my a@@ in an attempt to suck up. Tell you what, someday soon I am going to post as a leftist, amnesty supporting Hispanic, then you can ki@@ my a@@.
antonio
antonio, I am going to say your almost exclusively racist posting – which included a weird and macabre gloating over the murder of a couple by the teenage friend of a black child they had adapted – is a sickness for which you should seek help.
GFY again, and don’t forget to clean up.
Not sick, am sane and very much so. And I know what bothers you. You can’t do a da@n thing to me RE my views. I am successful at what I do and make a comfortable living. That’s the great thing about being self employed with a bit of money put away and having no debt.
As I said at the time, the murder of the WI couple was a sad event. It is sad that too many whites get on the egalitarian merry go round hoping to atone for their ancestors offenses (real or imagined). It cost this couple their lives. Black talk show host Tommy Sotomayor had a good video about the misplaced altruism of this couple. Dare you to watch it, or course you won’t, but am sure many here will.
Have a lot of respect for decent blacks like him, Jesse Lee Peterson and Candice Owens and empathy for what they have to endure.
https://youtu.be/djv3P9CqcyY
antonio, you did not express sadness over that couples murder. You gloated along with most of the regulars here, including mespo, and as you do now, that they got what they deserved. In your distorted and warped world a couple who invests their life, love, and financial resources in adapting a child are just nursing their guilt and got taught a deserved lesson. What would that be? Don’t adapt unless it’s white? And you’re “pro-life” too I bet. Pro-life my a..
You’re a racist who posts nothing but anti-black screeds over and over.
Get lost
@btb
The emperor has no clothes and no, I won’t get lost. And you can’t do a d@@n thing about it, personally or professionally (provided I do not advocate violence, which I DO NOT PERIOD). Have the right to be here as much as anyone.
I will take you more seriously when you provide an actual REPLY as to why I am wrong regarding the facts presented. Give me FACTS regarding black criminality and show me why I am wrong. Not afraid of the FACTS, are you? Calling someone a name means you have no argument.
I have spent a good amount of time in the inner city in various capacities and feel empathy for the decent people who are held hostage by their disproportionate criminal element. Have you or do you only pontificate from afar?
Don’t expect a logical or sensible reply, am writing for the benefit of others. Would recommend to anyone interested Colin Flaherty’s podcasts. He is also author of “Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry”.
ALL LIVES MATTER!
antonio
antonio:
Why do you argue with this trifling troll?
@mespo
I am not arguing but mocking this trifling troll. Trying to show others the inconsistency and total bankruptcy of modern leftism. In short, the emperor has no clothes.
THANKS!!
antonio
“I am not arguing but mocking this trifling troll. Trying to show others the inconsistency and total bankruptcy of modern leftism. In short, the emperor has no clothes.
THANKS!!”
*******************
I think I speak for the regulars here when I say: “we know, boy do we know.” He’s as buck naked as a sophomore in the backseat of the family Oldsmobile on prom night.
Mespo🤣
Mespo’s right, let them Babble.
Actually, Floyd WAS a thug, and the protesters ARE idiots. He still shouldn’t have died that way, and that cop should have been fired long before this (IIRC 18 disciplinary complaints filed over the span of his career (!)). But I did not know that GoFMe has such delicate sensibilities.
The Floyd story is complex. You are correct he WAS a thug – years go.
He had a very long rap sheet. But from 2014 until the lockdown, he was getting his life in order. After losing his job to Covid19 he appears to have passed a fake $20 and been shooting Fentanyl.
Floyd is responsible for his bad choices – even under bad conditions.
So are those who locked the country down and created the dry tinder this is the fuel for this fire.
@John Say
I appreciate your comments but the most holy “Blessed Martyr Floyd” was a walking chem lab. How many people use a combination of fentanyl, meth and marijuana while trying to get their life together? Probably the only guy with corona virus who ended up dying but cause of death was determined to be something else.
antonio
Based on the autopsy and videos of the incident (that the media avoids), Floyd died of a heart attack. Granted, the officers should have realized something was wrong but he had been giving them so much resistance that they felt the need to restrain him until an ambulance got there.
From the moment the police detained him they took responsibility for him.
The only possible defense for Ofc. Chauvin and company is that there was no possibility that expeditious care would have saved him.
Heart attacks are not fatal with rapid care they are not even especially harmful.
Regardless, it is beyond dispute that the Officers were callous and indifferent to Floyd’s life.
Floyd’s “heart attack” was due to pressure on the carotid sinuses in his neck, due to Derek Chauvin’s knee pressing against them. According to Wikipedia the carotid sinus: “Is a sensitive site of the body because stimulation can drive large-scale reflex effects throughout the body. This can be used therapeutically in treatment of resistant hypertension[2] by baroreflex activation. Physical assault at this point, producing massive baroreflex activation can cause dramatic falls in blood pressure and cerebral ischemia.” Floyd was murdered. Yes, his heart stopped, but he didn’t die of heart disease. It is misleading to say he died of a “heart attack”. His heart stopped because of pressure on his carotid sinuses and carotid arteries, blocking blood flow to his brain, and because his airway was being compromised. These things cause the heart to stop beating, but they aren’t a “heart attack.” Saying so is a lie. The heart stops no matter how you die.
And, he wasn’t resisting. I’ve seen the videos. He was handcuffed and pinned to the ground, with Chauvin’s knee to his neck, and another officer holding his legs. Anyone being asphyxiated will try to remove the source of asphyxiation as they struggle to survive, which is a normal reaction, so stop repeating the facts pro Trumpster “news” organizations are trying to re-write. Floyd was murdered.
As to their feeling that they “need(ed) to restrain him until an ambulance got there” because “he had been giving them so much resistance”…this is nothing but a lie–another attempt at Kellyanne “alternative facts” to justify the racist murder committed by these police. He had been dead for over 2 minutes when the ambulance arrived. He couldn’t have been resisting after they had murdered him. Pressure on his carotid sinuses and carotid arteries caused him to have low blood pressure and eventually, to lose consciousness, so he couldn’t have been consciously struggling, either, which the video backs up.
The fact that Trumpsters would even write lies like this in an effort to excuse a murder by police is disgusting.
Floyd’s heart attack was classic Prinzemetal Angina
You needed to be willfully ignorant if you did not anticipate this with the pernicious passage of the “hate speech” legislation. All that miscreant legislation did was sanctify censorship and we may never regain or 1st amendment rights until that section of our society are silenced and/or remove since they do not understand nor support the underlying principles upon which this nation was founded.
There is always a problem with a privately owned yet public internet platform. Moderation. Shall we allow explicit porn? Shall we allow artistic nudity? Links to same? Judging truth of claims? Protect our advertisers? Shall we do public service with the best link, in our political opinion, on the topics like Climate Change and Covid19 and Trump?
When they censor speech, they are preventing me from hearing what others are thinking. Silencing them is an attack on me.
I wonder if this is the first time GoFundMe has censored a fundraiser. Perhaps which might be why so many GoFundMe-type websites have sprung up.
https://doublethedonation.com/tips/gofundme-alternatives/
There is a crowdfunding company that is growing in China called Dragon Victory. it is chicom controlled. I rate it a “buy” and it trades on nasdaq
they are very clever and when the Democratic party succeeds in its long term goal to sell out America to them, one will have been lucky if one didn’t pull all the eggs in the inept and naive “silicon valley” basket. they are fools., if America is to be lead by the Democratic party then in twenty years Chicoms will own America.
There is only one way to stop this trend, and it is open economic conflict with china. That is what Donald has brought to the table. every other socalled issue pales in comparison to this.
Verbally and in my heart I want America to win.
But unlike Kyle bass, I doubt we will.
Especially after the past 2 weeks of subversive activity and deliberate fanning of destabilization by American mass media elites, i am utterly disgusted with American plutocracy and understand they are nation wrecking sociopaths.
This is the drama that defines all other things now. Either you see it or you dont. Clearly the weak white people “bending the knee” and apologizing and “defunding police” want to destroy our country and leave us easy pickings for the CCP.
I dont blame the baggy pants rioters much, they’re naughty children and not much more. Not even the petty antifa anarchist troublemakers, that much.
I really blame the media bosses most of all. They are a false leadership and the deadly enemies of the law abiding American people.
Cuckoo
Cuckoo
white social climbers are all busy now aping the opinions of their masters, as dictated by wapoo and nyt. they must think people like me are crazy, because if they did not, then all their decades of sucking up to richer and more important white folks would have been a waste of effort.
the big lie is that any of this rioting and so forth is helping black people. now, that’s not my issue anyways, I do not truck in pity.
the ongoing destabilization campaign is 100% for the purpose of unseating Trump
when Democrats win, they declare victory of racism and tell black folks to go home
Some black folks noticed this dynamic about Obama. well, npr and the likes of that let them complain a little, and they aimed the anger away from white financial elites backing the Democratic leadership, and back on to the poor white crackers, like they always do. Same stunt now with Trump the supposed racist and all his redneck deplorable supporters. The aim is to always distract from the strongest richest hands, the anger, on to the lesser weaker hands.
Ironically, since i stopped denying that tribalism is fundamental force in human events, i get a lot of things now that the malcolm x types used to say, that I denied.
I do agree there are forms of systemic racism and white privilege. I totally understand that. I just don’t want it to go away and then be left to the packs of wolves who would tear us to pieces. I saw what happened in Zimbabwe. I get the message. Yes there are structural impediments and they actually help keep order. I value order more than lofty notions of “justice” any day of the week.
I am honest that way. You never get a rich white person to admit this. They hide and lie. Because they think, any form of explicit white racial thinking, will operate to endanger the systems which keep their advantages in place.
you see, the big mistake of conservatives for decades now is thinking that pandering to black activist organizations is “socialism.” oh it is most certainly not. it is capitalism, it is the financial elites pandering to the black leadership, which operates to pacify the black lumpenproletariat.
and they are arrogant and think they can temporarily unleash them to scare whitey and now to get the win and get rid of Trump
because Trump endangers their rackets selling America out to the CCP.
See how easy that is? Makes great sense if you understand marxist class analysis, if you understand imperialist competition and globalism as a late stage of capitalism, if you understand that newspapers serve the interests of the richest like Jeff Bezos and are his tools; and without the tools of marxist class criticism, it’s almost impossible to understand.
America as a multi-racial nation can continue to exist and thrive, but it faces a strong rival and adversary in the PRC. yes, life forces tough choices on us. The choice at some level, is between endless pandering to the lumpenprole rioters, which will only increase instability, or actually to restore law and order, aim for more social harmony instead endlessly bullying the “deplorables,” and to unite in preserving our national sovereignty against a long and clever campaign of global conquest by the CCP.
Is it really so dramatic? Sure it is. Not because they are Chinese, who as a people are a wonderful and civilized folk; who historically are an internally focused people, but because the current CCP government is very smart and understand that there are imperialist forces which seek to remove them from power and economically colonize China, and if they want to stay in charge there, then they are going to have to carry the attack overseas. And oh how well they have done the past 6 months, things are looking good for them.
the erosion of the westphalian system of national sovereignty that has proceeded apace the entire past century, is what makes global rivalry so toxic. greed always drives the desire of conquest, and conquest brings forth necessity. in a way the crushing American victory in World War II is precisely what drove forward the rise of the Soviets and now the rise of the CCP. America was never content just to “defeat fascism.” It is in the logic of America that it will either become the global empire, or someone else will. this is how they see it.
perhaps they see it wisely. I do not have a crystal ball to know how it will all turn out. But I know that American imperialism drives our adversaries just as much as their own faults do. yes, the greed of our own system drives both our success and also our potential coming failure. nonetheless, i am an American, so I know what side I am on, even if I don’t believe all the nonsense they call American exceptionalism., I dont love my country because it is moral. I only love it because it is mine.
Whatever the systems or laws we have, essential human nature does not change, and history ever repeats itself in cycles.
progress is an illusion
Spoken like a true Buddhist, but BS.
The strongest part of human nature and what distinguishes us from all other species save a few insects, is our social cooperation. This is the dominant factor in our success and expansion to now inhabit virtually every type of environment in the world. Those we cooperate with has been growing from the tribe (those we would meet and know personally) to confederations (we would no longer physically know all members), to nations, and now continental allegiances and world trading partners.
That is not cyclical. That is progress. So is science and technological advancement and the accumulated world knowledge, the key to much of which we all carry around in our pocket. Progress is also increased personal wealth, even in 3rd world countries, longevity , and now the lowest odds ever that you and I will be attached and killed by another human.
Kurtz can belittle all this, but fortunately I don;t think the young will, nor should they. We live in the world, not a state or country, and we will exceed or fail;based on our successful business and political involvement in that world. If Kurtz wants to go live in a cave, let him. The world is leaving him behind.
“There is no aging and death, and no ending of aging and death”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7t0rDiWzow
as a Westerner, I am not going to become a monk.
Since I was younger, I have tempered my vain desires for social improvement both through the religious insights of Buddhism yes but also traditional forms of Christianity such as Orthodoxy and Catholicism, that at least in their older iterations, also were skeptical of the Protestant notion of progress, which some people believe is derived theologically from more recent forms of Judaism (tikkun olam).
Certainly the technological improvements which come with the capitalist era are impressive. They have changed our existence and made it physically easier. I am not sure that physically easier is always better.
America is a Protestant nation, it believes deeply in progress. I am perhaps un-American in my skepticism of this way of thinking. I observe that Christian Orthodoxy and old fashioned Catholicism, had a certain continuity with aspects of Hellenic polytheism. There is no doubt that the ancient Greeks were also believers in cyclical notions of history, Hesiod’s Golden age, iron age, all that. Hinduism too adhered to a cyclical metaphysics. think of the famous statute of Siva. (nataraja) Frederich Nietzsche called it “eternal recurrence.” yes, that is how i see things.
I think it is fair to say that “conservatives” over the past century are often skeptical of progress but “liberals” are believers in it. Fukuyama’s end of history and all that.
There is no question that Silicon Valley is fundamentally liberal, with its “futurists” such as Ray Kurzweil who thinks humanity will eventually be able to copy and upload itself onto computers, quite literally!– a nut, in my viewpoint, but a smart one. So, it’s no surprise that the richest man in the world, who made his money using the tools of the internet to destroy tens of thousands of brick and mortar businesses in the name of profit, would project a liberal viewpoint in his newspaper.
It’s perfectly natural that liberal folks would think that liberalization is not only an economic process but a cultural one, and that eventually, other nations would succumb or convert to a similar way of thinking. Again, Fukuyama and his “end of history.,” I do not agree.
I also accept that I am unable to convince other people who see it that way. As part of my own worldview, I am willing to accept fate.
but there is something very Faustian in the liberal mentality that believes all things can be improved, including human nature. Faustian in a good way. i often admire it. But I just don’t have that mentality. My mentality is more that of Schopenhauer or Spengler. Yes we are in a civilizational decline and we can only live out our days with honor like the centurion who remained on duty as Vesuvius erupted. There’s basically only a choice between facing fate together and meeting it with calm and honor, or running from it with the vain hope of escaping the inevitable.
Kurtz, a survey of religions and philosophy is interesting but let’s face it – we in the modern world have a more scientifically accurate picture of the real world and the progress i laid out above, not just in science and technology, but in the span of inter-connectedness we experience in real time. They lived in a world so big they could only see their corner. We have no choice now – other than extinction, or some 1/2 way step there – but to improve those connections..
Why do you think we are facing some extinction related choice ?
And what choice is it that brings us near extinction ?
I am hard pressed to think of any instance in human history where an actual extinction threat arose from human action.
Plagues have struck, Volcanoes have blotted out the sun, or incinerated societies.
When have humans threatened themselves with extinction ?
I am all for compassion for other beings. however, as we know from sociobiology aka evolutionary psychology, all living beings including us, are in a state of competition for resources. whether that is grass to eat, or prey, or money, or control and power. so there is a dynamic relationship between compassion, and competition
as for science, physics now tells us that most of what we believe is a “solid” is almost as much empty space as liquids and gasses, and what differentiates these forms of matter are the electrical charges holding the scanty bits of matter together across the hugely empty spaces inside the atoms and molecules.
in other words, everything for the most part is empty space, with tiny bits of matter, held together in the apparent structures by patterns of energy.
which at the level of an electron, are not even particles themselves, but waves, with uncertain location, which can be affected from afar merely by observation!
so “science” in the form of its most profound discipline, physics, actually tells us something like what buddhism said: yes there are aggregates, forms which “exist” in the apparent world we see, and there is causation, but both our perception of these aggregates and the actual causal laws, are rather quite different than they seem. ie, apparent reality is actually illusory. the cosmos is, but not as it seems
as a humble person, it’s above me to figure that all out., i mostly am responsible for doing good with those i come into contact with. but if I am a farmer i have to lay in my crops or I will starve. I will die anyhow one day but this is my lot in life so i must do it well.
it was part of my lot in life to talk about these things, to find turley’s page and talk. i suspect the time for talking soon draws to a close
Competition is one facet of freedom. We have to be careful – many on the right(and left) think it is the only element.
Competition and other traits of individual liberty constrained only from using violence and fraud as means, convert scarcity to abundance. Nothing in creation has ever do so near so effectively.
The purpose of the Power you so fixate on is to maximize freedom, because anarchy is suboptimal.
Actually maximizing freedom maximizes standard of living for all.
The only thing that distinguishes humans is free will. PERIOD.
As you note “social cooperation” exists in many species of insects.
Though I would note that social cooperation in insects is instinctual and has zero resemblance to that of humans.
Humans cooperate with other humans because as unique individuals we decide it is in our self interest.
Unlike bees we do not sort into workers and drones and queens based on genetics or what we are fed while gestating. We choose how we fit into a society more complex than anything else in nature.
This dynamic ever shifting complexity – the free market can only exist because of free will. Nothing like it exists in nature.
The key to all that advancement you talk about – is freedom – not science.
The rate of increase of standard of living correlates strongly to only two things – one of which is a proxy for the other. The first is an inverse correlation to the size of government – for every 10% of GDP that government consumes the rate of increase in standard of living declines by 1%, The other is freedom, For every point decline in the freedom index the rate of growth of stadnard of living declines 1%.
These are not the results of one outlier study, but of pretty much every study ever done on the subject. The results are robust for the 21st and 20th century where our data is excellent even solid for the 19th century. They are robust accross every country in the world with sufficient data to study.
Prosperity directly correlates to freedom.
The advance of science and technology directly correlates to freedom.
Such as in the People’s Republic of China.
😕
Yes, from the death of Mao to Xi’s ascent, The rise in standard of living in China has been phenomenal. From the bottom of the 3rd world to the bottom of the 1st world in 40 years.
What caused that ?
According to one of the 4 most respected economists of the past 100 years Nobel prize winner Ronald Coase it happened entirely because of increases in freedom at the margins in one of the most repressive countries in the world.
https://www.amazon.com/How-China-Became-Capitalist-Coase/dp/1137351438/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=how+china+became+capitalist&qid=1591828291&s=books&sr=1-1
China’s ability to increase its standard of living has been declining since Xi, because China failed to respond the Coase.
We live in states, countries and communities – we are tied to the world as never before and the consequences of that are a win-win for all.
There is a problem with the politics of globalism, because globalism means different things to different people. Global trade and myriads of forms of interaction – everything that preserves and respects freedom is good for all of us.
While the effort to globalize government comes at the expense of individual liberty and our standard of living. These both go by the same name they have been occuring somewhat concurrently but one is good and the other evil.
But ultimately we live in communities, our ties are to communities our success comes from communities.
And universally the greater the freedom we have and the closer the instutions protecting that freedom are to us the better off we are.
Prosperity is not uniform throughout the world. And the advance of prosperity throughout the world is caused by one thing – the greater adoption of the western values of individual liberty that we are watching the left burn to the ground right now.
If you want to impoverish your future continue on the path you are on.
I very much agree. I have been asking for years, certainly during the pre-Trump era, why no one was looking at China. They snuck in the back gate, to be sure. At this point, between certain members of our government, media, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley (PARTICULARLY Silicon Valley. when Google began to experience a backlash here in the states the hopped over to China with no compunctions about the CCP’s policies that stood in contrast as full polar opposites of their declared ideals, and when VC funding was still falling like mana from heaven, so did a great many startups. No pesky regulations! Think about it: these are the wealthiest people *on earth*. Does anyone really believe they are neutral observers? If San Fran isn’t an object lesson, I don’t know what is) the entire wall has been torn asunder. The time to address this was easily ten+ years ago.
I also concede that Trump is the first with seemingly any willingness to poke the bear, and the bear needed to be poked. So much of this is theater gone insane implemented by hooligans being played for rubes. Useful idiots, indeed.
Interesting observation. So many of our uber woke Social media companies are completely complicit in the most repressive evils in the world.
I would further ask is Google actually different in China ?
Its repression is being driven by the government – not woke milenials.
But the consequences is the same – only a single viewpoint is tolerated.
There are near infinite comparisons between the modern progressive left and the cultural revolution or the french revolution.
The repression is the same.
There was a woman in our neighborhood in Ferguson called Fox. She made money in various ways and invented the phrase Go Fund Me. It was often followed by the sentence:. If ya can’t fund me then don’t find me.
Go fund me.
Go fund her!
Bee eye Vicki eye bye o bee
Vicki eye good bye Fund Thee
Disgusting far-left activists in this country won’t be happy until they push the country into another civil war!
When they do, they REALLY WON’T BE happy because they’ll die by the thousands!
GoFundMe has a right to stop their site from being used to fund causes that they find repulsive. JT (and others) has a right to criticize them for it.
That was my thought too when the twitter issue came up. But as people like Mespo have pointed out, then they need to loose their special protections provided by the govt. since they are not unbiased anymore.
Section 230 dose not require them to be unbiased, nor do they need to represent the county as a whole. It was there to allow online platforms to prosper. Section 230 is just fine the way it is.
There is a great debate about was S230 even means.
The courts have chosen that it means nothing. Which is odd as statutory interpretation requires assuming that the words of a law have meaning.
But the fundimental problem is not the words.
It is that the DMCA as applied violates the first amendment.
If the consequence of the DMCA is state sanctioned viewpoint discrimination,
then regardless of the words, the DMCA is unconstitutional.
” has a right to stop their site from being used to fund”
“(2) Civil liability No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—”
Molly, when you take your position then understand that since the site is not representing the country as a whole and is choosing what they wish to publish then there is no reason to continue with a law that prevents them from suit for things that are published beyond their control. That law was passed to protct the companies and permit them to grow benefitting the entire nation. Now that they are benefitting only part of the nation they have to be made liable for what they do just like you and I are liable.
There are also monopoly and other considerations that have to be considered just like considerations taken into account when people discuss utilities.
You are happy because these companies support your views even though the other half of the country is being hurt. If one’s mind is dull they support such tactics to the harm of the nation. AT that point the laws have to conrom to the laws governing other industries. Perhaps you would understand it better if someone said in the 50’s that the gas stations have a right to stop black people from buying gas at their stations? Alternatively consider what you would say if all the gas stations available to you made you pray in a certain way prior to getting gas. This is not a complex issue until one becomes so wrapped up in their ideology that they lose track of what it is to live in a free country.
Allan,
I mostly agree with you, but in your example, shouldn’t a gas station be allowed to only serve who they want as long as they are truly a private operation? Freedom does not exist without the right to discriminate.
Indeed that gas station in the 50’s might well have been allowed to deny services from a federal standpoint. The same station–post CRA–no longer has that option.
You’re looking for the phrase “public accommodation.” Perhaps the gas station could become a “Gas Buying Club” that required private membership in order to engage their services instead of being a publicly-accessible business. They might be on steadier ground to refuse service: Although their “membership qualifications” might well run afoul of the Civil Rights Act. See also: Cake decorators refusing to offer personalized cakes versus gladly selling commodity ones.Both issues touch on equal protection. Notably, however, cake decoration involved a different aspect of the 1st amendment.
I’m still thinking my way through an affirmative “right” to discriminate. If it does indeed exist, the CRA certainly curtailed it–or , at a minimum, placed time- and place-style limitations on it.
Public Accomodations in the CRA does not forbid discriminating on the basis of behavior. You can’t get into a restaurant or hotel if you have no pants on, no matter how black you are. While I am ambivalent on this GFM controversy, it is not based on race or religion , but behavior.
Book — I was expanding on Allen’s point concerning 1950’s gas stations refusing service to blacks, not on GFM’s actions. You are correct that the GFM issue does not involve race or religion (well, on its face anyway. Wouldn’t that open up a whole other can of worms?).
There must be very strange days in the kingdom, indeed: You and I agree! maybe there is still a great and future hope for the United States after all!?!?!
I wholeheartedly agree with that!
You are correct and yet, businesses are very careful about myriads of forms of discrimination.
My daughter works at target and she is obligated to smile and be nice to customers who are obviously stealing.
Businesses tend to discriminate about behavior that drives the majority of customers away. Wise businesses run from all other forms of discrimination.
We do not need laws to regulate discriminiation of any kind.
Discrimination that does not rest is sound economics is unsustainable and the problem gets worse as the business grows and prospers.
While I think that content providers on the internet should not have special legal protections with respect to the content they publish if they also excercise editorial control over that content.
Ultimately neither trump nor the law needs address this problem. The free market will
I already avoid google products as much as possible, I will leave twitter and youtube either when a viable alternative emerges or when the sources I care about leave.
The more the giants of the internet engage in content descrimination – the sooner that day will come.
And shareholders already massacre the media giants over small fluctuations in forecasts of growth, what do you think they will do faced with even small declines ?
The portions of the CRA that constrained Government were of great importance, Those that constrained private actors were and remain idiocy.
Regardless, we live in the least racist country in the least racist moment of human history (except tomorow). We did not get there because of the CRA.
WE got there because division makes us poorer and prosperity improves out values.
We should have learned from Jim Crow.
The south was unable to get significant racial discrimination through social presures.
Jim Crow was a system of laws. Because without the force of law, people eventually learn that discrimination is not in their self interest.
“That law was passed to protect the companies and permit them to grow benefiting the entire nation.” This is wrong. It is the implementation of free discourse on the internet that benefits the entire nation. Each site is still able to have their own values. If someone does not like values of one site, they are quite free to start another site that has different values, and we see this all the time, thus Section 230 is working just fine. Sites should not be punished for what they decline to post.
” It is the implementation of free discourse on the internet that benefits the entire nation.”
How does viewpoint discrimination foster free discourse ?
“Each site is still able to have their own values.”
They would be it they were subject to the same laws as everyone else.
But they are protected from responsibility for content they post, specifically because they are not editorial in their choices”
“If someone does not like values of one site, they are quite free to start another site that has different values, and we see this all the time, thus Section 230 is working just fine.”
“Sites should not be punished for what they decline to post.”
You have things inverted. The law does not punish sites for what they decline to publish.
It holds them accountable for what they do publish when they make viewpoint based editorial decisions.
This is simple – conform to the same constraints that government would be obligated to regarding viewpoint discrimination and in return you are free from liability for what you publish.
Or publish whatever you want, and you have the same liability of every other publisher for the content you publish.
There is no provision for viewpoint discrimination without liability for editorial choices.
Further even if the DMCA intended exactly that, if must do it for ALL publishers or it violates the first amendment.
As concerning as it is for JT. He often seems to forget that twitter, GoFundMe, the nyt, etc. are private entities that have no constitutional obligation to abide by the first amendment guarantees which only apply to government.
Just as Fox News is not constitutionally obligated to be truthful with their reporting.
“Just as Fox News is not constitutionally obligated to be truthful with their reporting.”
****************
And yet they are more balanced that their competitors and folks like GoFMe which of coruse sips at the same toxic leftist spring as Svelaz.
Mespo, they are certainly not more balanced. In fact they made it a point in court that they are not obligated to be truthful. The court agreed. Claiming to be “fair and balanced” turned out not to be true. That’s why they stopped using the slogan. It became obvious it wasn’t true. But that didn’t mean they were obligated to be.
Svelaz:
They provide differing points of view from Juan Williams on up through their contributors. That’s the defintion of balanced. I don’t know what court case you’re referring to but would be interested to know.
Mespo,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_v._Franken
The contention you made that Fox “made it a point in court that they are not obligated to be truthful'” is nowhere to be found in your source. In fact, the word “truth” never occurs in the article. Color me unsurprised as the Left survives on lies.
That is correct, but the DMCA protects them from the liability that publishers and editiors have for the content they publish in return for conforming to the same standard the government must conform to for censorship – being a “neutral public platform”.
GoFundMe should be free to make the editorial choices it wishes.
And then liable like all other publishers for the content they post.
That is how free market private censorship actually works.
When govenrment provides them with liability protection, they become a government agent and are subject to the same standards for censorship as government.
Government can not give to private entities the powers and protections of government without their assuming the limits of government.
Fox is not obligated to be truthful – none in the media are – but they are all subject to defamation claims for the content they post.
Social Media is exempt from that protection, that exemption is worth billions a year in legal fees alone. In return for that exemption they are required to be “neutral public platforms” – the same standard for censorship that applies to the govenrment.
John say, the problem is platforms such as twitter and Facebook shouldn’t be held liable for content posted by third parties. Technically neither twitter or Facebook actually post the comments or pictures that cause the controversies. They just provide the means to do so. Being private entities who are providing AND own the space to post comments and pictures, videos, etc. they are perfectly within their rights to censor or choose what not to allow.
Every single person who has an account with them. Agreed to it when they clicked on the terms and conditions attesting they understood the rules. That’s the relevant point everyone seems to miss.
The immunity they get may have already been on that terms and conditions contract everyone signs.
Outside social media every published in the world is held responsible for the content it publishes
Regardless this is trivial – if you excersise editorial control over content then you are responsible for what is published.
That should not be hard to understand.
I do not want to fixate on the DMCA – it was my understanding that was the bargain in S230, but even if it was not. It is the REAL bargain.
Frankly I think the court should have arrived their on their own.
Government can not unequally treat SM with respect to other publishers that would violate equal protection and it would make the DMCA violate the first amendment as applied.
If Social Media is granted special government protection and then engages in viewpoint discrimination then the government is responsible for the discrimination.
We essentially have a law that as aplied has resulted in viewpoint discrimination – it is therefore unconstitutional.
Look, I think the resolution of this problem will ultimately come from the market place and it will be brutal and swift when it comes.
SM companies will be punished by their investors if there is the threat of a 1% loss of subscribers.
oh gosh more naivete ‘
John did you miss the clip from Citizen Kane i have posted like 20 times?
These outfits can take huge financial hits from loss of subscribers and advertising or even social media users. They could really care less.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9OUZNicTGU
corporate mass media serves the ownership. they often lose money and nobody cares. they are there mostly to engage in propaganda, not make a more narrow profit that is smaller peanuts than the propaganda issues they push
like twitter scolding trump or the newspapers destabilizing our country to get rid of him, so they can please their Chicom patrons
Your selling a book of fiction to make an economic argument ?
Mt. Kurtz, as I noted before, FB announced about this time last year that their growth was 15% under forecasts.
That was GROWTH, not an actual loss of subscribers.
They were still growing like gangbusters.
The share price dropped 50% within hours.
As I noted before stock prices are not meaningless. they directly impact everything a business can do. Its ability to raise capital to fund operations what it must pay to borrow,
If stock prices did not matter at all – Kodak would still be in business.
FB can have a total monopoly. Investors will still leave – even if they have no competitor, if they can not continue to guarantee an every increasing number of eyeballs to advertisors.
Contra your claims the vast majority of businesses especially big businesses operate on tight margins. Walmart averages 1.5% profit per sale, They manage a 9% profit per year by turning goods every 60 days.
But that thin margin makes them incredibly fragile should anything go wrong.
Supply chain delays, or customers loosing interest.
If your claims were correct – there would have been no worries during the financial crisis.
The wheels were not about to come off the entire market place.
Businesses were not going to be unable to meet payroll
The fact is pretty much the opposite. Businesses are fragile. Big businesses even more so.
The half life of a fortune 500 company is 15 years.
There is only one company in the top 10 in the fortune 500 that existed in 1965.
The odds of a new company lasting 2 years are 1;7.
Most entrepeneurs fail several times before they succeed.
Free markets are about DESTRUCTION more than anything else.
We rant about high CEO pay. I am sure that Kodak Shareholders would have paid their CEO 10 times as much if he had manage to save the business.
The top CEO’s in the world are paid exportant amounts because they have a long track record of always being right, and there is a tiny hope that will continue.
Are they better than their peers on the next level ? Maybe a small amount.
For GE that small amount is worth billions.
You TOS argument only has merit in a free market.
SM is not a free market – they have gained special protections from government.
I have no problems with your TOS argument in a free market.
If SM was liable for the content they published – they would be free to discriminate.
If no publisher was liable for the content they published – they would be free to discriminate.
But the special protection makes them a government agent or actor, Wittingly or not.
Or it makes government a a censor once removed which would make the DMCA unconstitutional.
The issue Mr. Turley addressed was not constitutional obligations, per se. Rather, he was discussing the liability protections afforded to Twitter and GFM.
Interestingly, you included the NYT. Of the private entities you listed, the Times is the only one subject to defamation claims, whereas the other two are not. It is that particular distinction Turley was speaking to: That GFM and Twitter (and Facebook as well) should no longer be exempt if they, in fact, are no longer neutral platforms. If they wish to demonstrate bias, that is certainly their prerogative as private entities. However, the price for doing so should rightly be their loss of immunity. If they wish to retain their immunity, they should step away from assuming the roles of editors and arbiters.
kydave40601, I disagree. GFM, Twitter, and Facebook should not be held liable for the content posted on their platforms or because they choose to ban or put disclaimers pointing out false claims, harmful rhetoric etc.
I see it this way. Twitter, Facebook, and other similar platforms are like bulletin boards put up at a public park which is owned by the government. (Internet)
The owners of said bulletin boards can dictate the terms and conditions for posting on them. If something violates them they can be removed or censored. All the government does is provides the means to setup the platform. To sue the owners of the bulletin boards for enforcement of their own policies that those who post on them agreed to willfully doesn’t make sense.
One way around this is to do exactly what many companies already do. Put warnings to all who choose to use the platforms that their content may be subject to censorship or outright ban should they violate the terms of the agreement.
If the government says that Bulletin board operators on the left side of the park can discrimate as they please, and those on the right can be sued for defamation.
That is a government violation of the first amendment.
If the DMCA is read to provide SM with protection for discrimination suits, then they are obligated to the same first amendment constraints as the federal government – otherwise the law is unconstitutional as applied.
Svelaz — I disagree with your disagreement! 🙂
“GFM, Twitter, and Facebook should not be held liable for the content posted on their platforms […]” That is, in fact, the issue: They are currently *not* being held liable. This is predicated on these “bulletin board” maintainers performing two services:
1. Remove flyers that are, or support, activities that are illegal (i.e.: drug deals, porn, murder-death-kill, sex trafficking, incitement of rioting, etc.)
2. Provide staples and/or thumb tacks for folks wishing to post flyers that do not stray from these boundaries
For performing these services–and only these services–they receive general immunity from defamation actions (and similar). It is the government’s role to “dictate the terms and conditions for posting on” the bulletin boards, aside from technical conditions like breaching server security, DoS attacks, etc. Should the platform provider wish to inflict additional conditions beyond #1 above, they certainly have that prerogative. However, the defamation immunities should be withdrawn.
“Warnings […] censoring […] banning” etc. done to enforce the platform’s ToA in, and of themselves, violate the ToA between the government and the platform. In view of such violation, there is no reason to continue to protect the platform from liability. A neutral platform does not have the prerogative to write on the flyers with a Sharpie, nor to remove flyers that are within the boundaries in #1 above. A biased platform does, but it is also therefore liable.
It really is that simple.
If you excercise editorial control of your content, you are legally responsible for that content.
If you do not, if you conform to the same neutral public platform requirements the government meets, they you are not responsible for the content of others that you publish.
That would be relatively simple to grasp.
I would note that GFM may have a more serious problem. There are accounts setup to bail out looters and arsonists. Should bailing them out result in further harm, further looting and arson, they and those funds are arguably legally responsible.
Agreed. Free speech is free speech, like it or not.
Free speech is an illusion. What is happening now is what has always been the situation, a struggle for resources and power.
If free speech is an illusion, what of the abstraction you present?
the proposition which is freedom of speech, the notion that the US is restricted in forming laws that censor private speech, of course that exists. as sounds in the air.
but the larger context is that nothing which is not precisely the same, is not equal.
not all speech is the same so it can never be equal.
for example. speech is heard, or not. what is heard, is greater than what is not.
what is heard more, is greater, what is heard less, is lesser. thus it is not “EQUAL”
if it is uttered in solitary it is inconsequential. if it is amplified by a private media megaphone it is very consequential.
what i suggest is similar to the notion that justice in criminal defense may be “equal before the law” in a formalistic and sterile sense that rarely exists and what the larger experience is, that big money can buy a strong defense. that is the practical reality of “equality” which is to say, the power of money makes what is theoretically equal, practically unequal.
moreover we have obvious examples that state governers can censor speech quite a bit and never face opposition in court. they censored tons of speech when they told people to stay inside for COVID. and you can see that the protesters just gave them the finger and got away with it
which means that neither are the applications of the emergency laws “equal.” for a bunch of law abiding people, they are perceived to be docile, so the laws are enforced on them firmly.
but the protesters and rioters are clearly not docile and so they are feared and thus the application of the laws is lax. hence they are more powerful than people like me who follow the health measures and we are not equal. they are deemed more powerful than me so I have to follow the rules and they do not
I could go on and on about this. actually most liberals “get it” what i say along these lines, its the conservatives who are still operating under liberterian delusions that need to appreciate that constitutional niceties, while they should be respected, as an ideal, and perhaps enforced in court, in real practical reality, are disregarded by government left and right to advantage and disadvantage those who are as orwell said, “MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS”
what to make of this? well for starters, appreciate that power will act and you may be following a lot of rules that your adversary is not. and at some point it will be too late to fight back and your adversary will simply change the rules. and then you will have just been a SUCKER for following every little rule and jot and tittle in the first place.
now this is what some liberterians would call “unprincipled” but it is actually how things work
PS men alike are not “created equal” that is just an inspirational quote. men are all different. even twins that have the same DNA do not occupy the same space and move at different times. hence even they are not equal although similar. this was just Mass Jeff piping out his slogans to encourage people to sign up for the war against the Crown.
Why? So Tom could be an American aristocrat in reality masquerading as a “citizen” with all his riches concealed under a legalistic quote of “equality”
all society ends up hierarchical. anybody selling you “equality” is probably picking your pocket.
I am going for broke on this theme. republicans and conservatives have been stuck with self-limiting propositions like following all the rules when nobody else does
another self delusion is that money comes from law and order. actually it does not. it comes from debt and social chaos in the form or wars and revolutions has always been a huge factor in ginning up more debt and hence more interest and money created from debt and interest.
there is absolutely nothing about large investment banks for example that necessarily aligns them with Republicans or conservatives or American deplorables out here in flyover. Nothing. In fact they gave overwhelmingly to Hillary over Trump and but for a handful like Mnuchin many of them have resisted him along the way., And now financial interests, mass media, and other important social institutions like universities have united to denounce police, demonize “Trump enablers,” and to apologize for the worst rioting and looting and arson nationwide since 1968 if not even worse.
They WANT destabilization so they can get rid of Trump and get back to business with China and the still-viable racket of selling out American industries, jobs, workers and technology to the CCP hand over fist.
A couple of small fry caught red handed scheming with the CCP — in Wuhan of all places– it’s good if they are prosecuted by the big fish who have been selling America down the river, they run free and wild now.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/09/harvard-professor-indicted-for-false-statements-about-work-in-wuhan.html
the destabilization has little to do with george floyd or policing or justice. perhaps in the minds of the people on the street it does, but not those who have organized these things from above. for the likes of Geo Soros who has seeded BLM and other NGOs that help organize these, for him. it has everyting to do with getting rid of Trump.
Trump himself is a buffoon and a boor and a fibber and a narcisisst. sure he is., he is also grandiose enough to think he can stop the elites from selling out to China’s CCP leadership. This is why I have backed him from day one. We have been waiting for a Trump a long time. He could have come from either party since both were seized by dogmatic free trade nonsense since the time of bill clinton, but he came as a Republican. So I am behind him.
The thing to understand my fellow deplorables, is that the power of high finance is utterly aligned against you. every major bureaucracy like the FBI is rife with saboteurs, foot draggers, and sellouts. This is a last gasp of American sovereignty and the last gasp of the Westphalian system as such. If America can’t act in its own economic interests than what country really can?
other than the PRC of course, because it’s obvious that’s what they are all about.
as corrupt as the CCP supposedly is, does anybody ask,
how corrupt are the American elites? I do. they are standing back and letting it burn, because they do not care about us, they do not care about any short term profits either., they are focused on the long term goal of making huge bank selling this country down the road to China just like they’ve been doing for decades.
So yeah screw tax cuts. We don’t need a few crumbs at this point. And niether do the rich bastards who stab us in the back anyhow. Forget about that. Trjump, dont worry about that.
Law and order
sovereignty over globalism
the wall & protecting native workers against mass migration downward pressure on wages
military strength but not aggression.
and fair trade over free trade.
Peaceful fair trade with China, not war, but not selling our industries down the road either.
These are the themes that can win the election.
Money is just a tool it is a means of storing and exchanging wealth.
Wealth is the value we produce.
GoFundMe has shut down accounts and sent the money back to the donators, so I guess this is a partial win. GoFundMe also refuses money if they do not like the name you use on the donation.
I absolutely agree with your article. The actions of censorship I’ve seen come out of ‘democratic’ countries like Canada, United States, UK, etc is absolutely chilling.
Looks like time for another “goFundme” type organization to be created that doesn’t discriminate against blacks like Candace Owen. And the left wants us to believe they are tolerant. Who are they kidding?
Bob — so I’m not the only one who saw the ironic and complete lack of self-awareness as GFM citing that are closing the account because they will not tolerate Ms. Owens’ intolerance? You can’t make this stuff up!
At this rate, leftists are going to run the Babylon Bee out of business. 🙂
There is an incredible amount of straight news today that one has to ask – is that BB or the Onion.
I mean “Defund the Police” – really ?